Police shoot and kill another black man in Minneapolis, Amir Locke
- Thread starter crimson5pheonix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
I've heard that the address on the warrant was the address they broke into, but the guy they killed wasn't on the warrant. I have not seen information that the address on the warrant was the address they were actually investigating.
This isn't an outcome that would be acceptable if Locke was the target of a warrant, though.
Activists gather outside interim Minneapolis chief's home to protest death of Amir Locke
Participants demanded the resignation of interim Police Chief Amelia Huffman.
www.startribune.com
Nah, that joke is totally off base. The real joke should be "Good person with gun"; displays woman. "Bad Person With Gun"; displays man.
And if they storm the place and maybe kill a cop or two, that's legitimate political discourse apparently.Activists gather outside interim Minneapolis chief's home to protest death of Amir Locke
Participants demanded the resignation of interim Police Chief Amelia Huffman.
At this point it's practically protecting and serving the public.
Just look at police shooting statistics in the US. Male victims account for the vast majority of them. And while black people do suffer from racism and are over represented, (roughly) twice as many white people get shot by the police. This idea US police officers just shoot at black people is a myth created by disproportionate reporting of their deaths since BLM. US police officers like to shoot at any men.
Last edited:
Mhm but when you account for the "with a gun" part of the equation what does that do to the numbers? Is a woman brandishing a gun less likely to be shot than a man brandishing a gun? Is the discrepancy similar to the difference between an armed black man and an armed white man?
Hard to say and the same would go with the racial issue. We'd need statistics which shows the amount of police encounters with armed suspects and the percentage that lead to a police shooting. However There are still significantly less armed women being shot than armed men.
You mean on the side of the police force? Or on the side of "suspects/criminals"?
If it's the first one, how would that be relevant?
If it's the latter, I thought that kind of argument wasn't allowed when the discussion is being held on a racial basis. Why is it ok on a gender/sex basis? The vast majority of police shootings of unarmed people are still against men, how do unarmed men cause shootings? Look, i get it "men lives matter" doesn't appeal as much but at some point you'll need to realize a lot of the black vs non-black discussions/discrimination also apply to male vs female (in this context). Law enforcement and justice is just as sexist as it is racist.
Last edited:
We could also bring up classist and ableist and any number of other things, but this might not be the most appropriate time.
What are you talking about "not allowed"? You're talking about it right now. Who's stopping you?
You can talk about the demography of crime as much as you want. But don't mistake correlation for causation. Crime is exacerbated by poverty, poor support services, hunger, poor employment prospects etc. Those factors also correlate with racial demographics in the United States, as a result of the country's history and inequitable politics. They do not correlate to anywhere near the same degree with male/female demography. They do not offer an explanation there.
I am confused by the point you're trying to make. Are we talking about the causes of actual criminal behavior or US police officers abusing their power to shoot at people who shouldn't be shot at (with little consequence)?
As for "not allowed", i remember when BLM and police shootings were discussed extensively on this forum. I also remember the few more right leaning posters sometimes pointing out that African Americans are also over represented in the "crime committing" statistics and using that as explanation for their over representation in police shooting statistics. I remember that argument not being welcomed with open arms on this forum.
We were talking about the latter. But you equated two situations which really aren't comparable, so it holds relevance to point to the differences.
That would be because that argument is deeply flawed. If you're investigating the rate at which suspects are shot by police, then that controls for sample size. So sample size is not your explanation. We know for a fact that even if the situation is the same, a police officer is more likely to shoot at a black suspect than a white suspect. Sample size cannot explain that.
Whereas the male/female discrepancy is... entirely explained by sample size, potentially. Because you were never looking at rates at all, just overall numbers.
They are comparable except the one it doesn't fit a desired narrative.
I have never seen anyone post any statistic about %'s of suspects shot on this forum. (Nor did I read that in news articles)
It's always % of population. But I guess it only matters when someone makes a non neo-progressive approved point
...and all the other factors I just laid out.
No, it matters because it blows a hole in the false equivalence you're drawing.
One has a massive difference in rate. The other simply doesn't. If you want to claim they're the same, based solely on overall numbers with no adjustment for sample size, then that just shows a pretty shoddy understanding of statistics.