What is the controversy surrounding #takeaknee

[LadyForCamus]

Do your own homework. I am not your baby sitter.

I have. I even gave a link to make it easy for people to do their own. It was a rhetorical question, designed to show that you don't really know what the statistics show.

In 2017, in cases where race is given, blacks are 27% of those killed by cops, while making up 13% of the general population. So, yes, blacks are disproportionately killed by police.

As noted previously, 95% of those killed are men. No one's arguing that cops are unduly biased against men. Most people conclude from this statistic that men are more dangerous than women and so killed at a higher rate.

Blacks, at 13% of the population, commit about half of all murders. You can draw your own conclusions.

---

I am concerned about anyone being killed.

Were there threads here outraged at the NFL's decision on the Dallas stickers?

I can be concerned about both cops and the victims of police brutality and abuse simultaneously. And I can also respect the wishes of a team to decide how to respond to specific instances, be that to allow a form of display/support or not. This isn't a zero-sum game with respect to my empathetic abilities. 

I agree...but I'm painted as an extreme racist for disagreeing with the methodology of this protest.

Do you not care about the lives of those being taken by police (and that they are overwhelmingly dark skinned)?

I'll do it for him if he'll actually read it:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...story.html

http://www.snopes.com/do-police-kill-mor...ck-people/

I linked to the database some time ago. Blacks are killed disproportionately. I don't find it overwhelming. I find the percentage of males to be overwhelming - but understandable.

And most white murders are committed by white men.  Something like 90%.  What conclusion do you draw from that you racist asshole?

[TheBeardedDude]

Do your own homework. I am not your baby sitter.

I have. I even gave a link to make it easy for people to do their own. It was a rhetorical question, designed to show that you don't really know what the statistics show.

In 2017, in cases where race is given, blacks are 27% of those killed by cops, while making up 13% of the general population. So, yes, blacks are disproportionately killed by police.

As noted previously, 95% of those killed are men. No one's arguing that cops are unduly biased against men. Most people conclude from this statistic that men are more dangerous than women and so killed at a higher rate.

Blacks, at 13% of the population, commit about half of all murders. You can draw your own conclusions.

---

I am concerned about anyone being killed.

Were there threads here outraged at the NFL's decision on the Dallas stickers?

I can be concerned about both cops and the victims of police brutality and abuse simultaneously. And I can also respect the wishes of a team to decide how to respond to specific instances, be that to allow a form of display/support or not. This isn't a zero-sum game with respect to my empathetic abilities. 

I agree...but I'm painted as an extreme racist for disagreeing with the methodology of this protest.

Do you not care about the lives of those being taken by police (and that they are overwhelmingly dark skinned)?

I'll do it for him if he'll actually read it:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...story.html

http://www.snopes.com/do-police-kill-mor...ck-people/

I linked to the database some time ago. Blacks are killed disproportionately. I don't find it overwhelming. I find the percentage of males to be overwhelming - but understandable.

"Were there threads here outraged at the NFL's decision on the Dallas stickers?"

Don't know, don't care. The NFL has a variety of policies regarding uniform and attire. The attire of the players on the field (including the presence or absence of stickers) is by a wide margin the least important thing in this discussion.

"I agree...but I'm painted as an extreme racist for disagreeing with the methodology of this protest."

Because no one gives a shit that you don't like the protest. That isn't the point. The point is the meaning behind the protest. You can cry foul all you like, but you have to accept that the consequences of your whining is judgement.

"I linked to the database some time ago. Blacks are killed disproportionately. I don't find it overwhelming. I find the percentage of males to be overwhelming - but understandable."

Many of us would look at the rate of black men being killed (2.5x as likely based on the number of black people killed relative to the total population of black people in the US), and agree that it is overwhelming. What would be an "overwhelming" rate to you? How high does that need to be for you to care?

[Brian37]

Do your own homework. I am not your baby sitter.

I have. I even gave a link to make it easy for people to do their own. It was a rhetorical question, designed to show that you don't really know what the statistics show.

In 2017, in cases where race is given, blacks are 27% of those killed by cops, while making up 13% of the general population. So, yes, blacks are disproportionately killed by police.

As noted previously, 95% of those killed are men. No one's arguing that cops are unduly biased against men. Most people conclude from this statistic that men are more dangerous than women and so killed at a higher rate.

Blacks, at 13% of the population, commit about half of all murders. You can draw your own conclusions.

Your quote, "So yes, BLACKS ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY KILLED POLICE"

Yea, and gun or no gun. And they are also, when they don't end up dead, charged more severely and convicted with harsher penalties too.

THAT IS WHY THEY ARE PROTESTING FUCKFACE!

I could give a shit less about blacks being 13% while you claim they commit half of all murders. This is still you basically saying, "blacks are the problem".

No fuckface. ECONOMIC conditions. Your bullshit "they only have themselves to blame" is racist judgmental BULLSHIT.

Crime happens a higher rate the more poverty exists. If you don't want it to be about race, then don't ignore and blame. Again you asshole, if you think blacks love poverty and murder you are a fucking moron. Our history of racism goes back hundreds of years. Unless you face the fact that economics affect blacks more negatively you are not going to solve shit. 

Go fuck yourself with "blacks are the problem". NO asshole, idiots like you ignoring economics are why it is still even in 2017 still about race.

[John V]

Don't know, don't care. The NFL has a variety of policies regarding uniform and attire. The attire of the players on the field (including the presence or absence of stickers) is by a wide margin the least important thing in this discussion.

I disagree. Statements on the field regarding police IS the topic of discussion. A statement supporting police was banned. A statement against police is allowed.

Because no one gives a shit that you don't like the protest.

Actually you all seem to care quite a bit.

Many of us would look at the rate of black men being killed (2.5x as likely based on the number of black people killed relative to the total population of black people in the US), and agree that it is overwhelming. What would be an "overwhelming" rate to you? How high does that need to be for you to care?

It's certainly not as overwhelming as the 95% rate for men. Why isn't that being protested? We both know the answer. Men are more dangerous to society then women, so it's understandable that men are shot by police at a higher rate. Similarly, statistics clearly show that blacks are more dangerous than whites. But, it's somehow unacceptable to make the exact same conclusion with black v. white as we do with men v. women.

[TheBeardedDude]

Don't know, don't care. The NFL has a variety of policies regarding uniform and attire. The attire of the players on the field (including the presence or absence of stickers) is by a wide margin the least important thing in this discussion.

I disagree. Statements on the field regarding police IS the topic of discussion. A statement supporting police was banned. A statement against police is allowed.

Because no one gives a shit that you don't like the protest.

Actually you all seem to care quite a bit.

Many of us would look at the rate of black men being killed (2.5x as likely based on the number of black people killed relative to the total population of black people in the US), and agree that it is overwhelming. What would be an "overwhelming" rate to you? How high does that need to be for you to care?

It's certainly not as overwhelming as the 95% rate for men. Why isn't that being protested? We both know the answer. Men are more dangerous to society then women, so it's understandable that men are shot by police at a higher rate. Similarly, statistics clearly show that blacks are more dangerous than whites. But, it's somehow racist to make the exact same conclusion with black v. white as we do with men v. women.

"I disagree. Statements on the field regarding police IS the topic of discussion. A statement supporting police was banned. A statement against police is allowed."

It doesn't matter if you disagree, you don't define the conversation. 

"Actually you all seem to care quite a bit."

You should read less into text and assume less too

"It's certainly not as overwhelming as the 95% rate for men. Why isn't that being protested? We both know the answer. Men are more dangerous to society then women, so it's understandable that men are shot by police at a higher rate. Similarly, statistics clearly show that blacks are more dangerous than whites. But, it's somehow racist to make the exact same conclusion with black v. white as we do with men v. women."

This isn't a discussion on the gender bias in our judicial system. Once again, this isn't a zero sum game with respect to caring about issues. We can discuss multiple issues in society at large. Right now, we are discussing racial prejudice in policing coupled with police brutality. Try to keep up.

[John V]

Many of us would look at the rate of black men being killed (2.5x as likely based on the number of black people killed relative to the total population of black people in the US), and agree that it is overwhelming.

Do you therefore agree that minority membership in gangs is much more overwhelming compared to whites?

https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Surve...mographics

Is it reasonable to think that groups with disproportionate gang membership are disproportionately likely to be shot by police?

[Brian37]

I disagree. Statements on the field regarding police IS the topic of discussion. A statement supporting police was banned. A statement against police is allowed.


Actually you all seem to care quite a bit.


It's certainly not as overwhelming as the 95% rate for men. Why isn't that being protested? We both know the answer. Men are more dangerous to society then women, so it's understandable that men are shot by police at a higher rate. Similarly, statistics clearly show that blacks are more dangerous than whites. But, it's somehow racist to make the exact same conclusion with black v. white as we do with men v. women.

"I disagree. Statements on the field regarding police IS the topic of discussion. A statement supporting police was banned. A statement against police is allowed."

It doesn't matter if you disagree, you don't define the conversation. 

"Actually you all seem to care quite a bit."

You should read less into text and assume less too

"It's certainly not as overwhelming as the 95% rate for men. Why isn't that being protested? We both know the answer. Men are more dangerous to society then women, so it's understandable that men are shot by police at a higher rate. Similarly, statistics clearly show that blacks are more dangerous than whites. But, it's somehow racist to make the exact same conclusion with black v. white as we do with men v. women."

This isn't a discussion on the gender bias in our judicial system. Once again, this isn't a zero sum game with respect to caring about issues. We can discuss multiple issues in society at large. Right now, we are discussing racial prejudice in policing coupled with police brutality. Try to keep up.

The ignorant oversimplification solution for morons is, "Point and blame".

The real solution is just like understanding weather CONDITIONS. Saying that hurricanes happen does not mean you want bad weather to harm you. Saying that blacks are hurt more negatively by economics and our justice system isn't giving them an excuse. It is saying by addressing those things we all benefit. MLK constantly made that point during his Civil Rights movement. No sane person would or should accuse MLK of making excuses for blacks when everyone accepts that he was saying that America was not treating blacks equally. Unfortunately some stupidly think problems don't exist today, or that blacks don't have an excuse. Nobody is trying to make excuses. 

Blacks don't like crime and poverty anymore than whites. But we still have a system that affects blacks more negatively. That system, not blacks, is the hurricane far too many still ignore.

[TheBeardedDude]

Many of us would look at the rate of black men being killed (2.5x as likely based on the number of black people killed relative to the total population of black people in the US), and agree that it is overwhelming.

Do you therefore agree that minority membership in gangs is much more overwhelming compared to whites?

https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Surve...mographics

Is it reasonable to think that groups with disproportionate gang membership are disproportionately likely to be shot by police?

I agree that minorities (who live in overwhelmingly poor areas of the country) have elevated participation in gang violence. And, as we can see by looking at gangs outside the US too, the best predictor of gang participation is income and education level. When minorities have a legacy of being treated poorly, and when that legacy results in systemic issues and prevents minority families from accruing wealth to pass on to future generations (such as the legacies around denying housing loans to minorities and cramming them into ghettos), you have a recipe for widespread problems.

You take an extremely short-sighted and superficial view of the facts.

---

Many of us would look at the rate of black men being killed (2.5x as likely based on the number of black people killed relative to the total population of black people in the US), and agree that it is overwhelming.

Do you therefore agree that minority membership in gangs is much more overwhelming compared to whites?

https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Surve...mographics

Is it reasonable to think that groups with disproportionate gang membership are disproportionately likely to be shot by police?

A good book you clearly badly need to read is "Lies my teacher told me" by James W. Loewen: https://www.amazon.com/Lies-My-Teacher-T...0743296281

[John V]

No fuckface. ECONOMIC conditions. Your bullshit "they only have themselves to blame" is racist judgmental BULLSHIT.

Crime happens a higher rate the more poverty exists. If you don't want it to be about race, then don't ignore and blame. Again you asshole, if you think blacks love poverty and murder you are a fucking moron. Our history of racism goes back hundreds of years. Unless you face the fact that economics affect blacks more negatively you are not going to solve shit. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/41...mas-sowell

We are told that such riots are a result of black poverty and white racism. But in fact — for those who still have some respect for facts — black poverty was far worse, and white racism was far worse, prior to 1960. But violent crime within black ghettos was far less.

Murder rates among black males were going down — repeat, down — during the much-lamented 1950s, while it went up after the much celebrated 1960s, reaching levels more than double what they had been before. Most black children were raised in two-parent families prior to the 1960s. But today the great majority of black children are raised in one-parent families.

I agree that minorities (who live in overwhelmingly poor areas of the country) have elevated participation in gang violence. And, as we can see by looking at gangs outside the US too, the best predictor of gang participation is income and education level. When minorities have a legacy of being treated poorly, and when that legacy results in systemic issues and prevents minority families from accruing wealth to pass on to future generations (such as the legacies around denying housing loans to minorities and cramming them into ghettos), you have a recipe for widespread problems.

You take an extremely short-sighted and superficial view of the facts.

See above regarding facts.

Also note that this argument is of limited value to police. When a cop sees a threat to the community or himself he needs to take action. Why or how the person came to be a threat is irrelevant at that point.

[Foxaèr]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/41...mas-sowell

We are told that such riots are a result of black poverty and white racism. But in fact — for those who still have some respect for facts — black poverty was far worse, and white racism was far worse, prior to 1960. But violent crime within black ghettos was far less.

Murder rates among black males were going down — repeat, down — during the much-lamented 1950s, while it went up after the much celebrated 1960s, reaching levels more than double what they had been before. Most black children were raised in two-parent families prior to the 1960s. But today the great majority of black children are raised in one-parent families.

Is this some sort of racist way of saying black crime was less during a time when black people knew their place as opposed to when black people gained their freedom from being oppressed by the white man?