(06-09-2020 06:56 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Politifact does a good job dissecting the 9 number that Tanq keeps parroting (and misrepresenting as total black deaths, and not the more narrowly defined unarmed black people shot and killed by police) from the WSJ op-Ed.
I have noted several times it is unarmed black deaths. I suggest please stop misrepresenting what I say. For once. Good fing grief. I think that number has been noted that way by me at least on a number of occasions.
Quote:Worth a read as to why this number is rather misleading and misses a lot of police-on-civilian violence. Most importantly, the absolute number doesn’t account for the over-representation of blacks (based on total population),
'on total population' -- again I think we have already discussed what a crock of **** that is in this case. First, the sheer small number blows away any statistical 'overweight'.
Second, the far better measure is not 'population makeup'. Put your thinking cap on lad. Issues with police are better measured by 'per encounter with police'. And yes, the sheer fing number of homicides *by* blacks, violent crimes *by* blacks, major drug convictions *of* blacks.
Hmmm, one gets a pretty good fing idea *why* black areas have more cops --- far more major crime occurs in those areas. What does more patrols, more cops in an area mean (i.e. the concpet of actually focusing on crime, that is focusing on areas that have the prevalence of crime). Funny how an actual logic process flows, as opposed to simply doing stuff 'well per capita says'.
I agree that *if* the black crime problem were equal, then an observation might have a grounding in reality -- but even then not at the very small number that we are talking about. But, the black crime problem *isnt* equal in scope -- not by a fing long shot.
Illini already noted that, but I guess in your 'glee' to escape that low number, you kind of fing forgot that in the interim. Much like you have most of the points that you 'discover' in this missive have already been noted or addressed.
Quote:it doesn’t account for off-duty officer related deaths, and it doesn’t account for non-firearm related deaths (as in, it would not count George Floyd as a death).
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/20...ootings-p/
Oh I *sure* that changes the issue -- lets dive down. "28 unarmed blacks and 51 unarmed whites who died at the hands of police in 2019."
Wow, amazing. That got the number just *slightly* above the number of people en toto who were killed by dogs.
Uhhh..... how the **** does that change the narrative in any way, shape, or form? By god lad, I think you have the 'distinction without a difference' down like a black belt kung fu ju jitsu stealth ninja master. Yeah, they *really* should pull out those head slap emojis...