Police shoot and kill another black man in Minneapolis, Amir Locke

[Generals]

...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.

Does it though? Again, I have seen no one provide this rate and it was always brought back to the % of population belonging to group X. I have never seen you bat an eye. Funny how exposure to a police intervention is suddenly a necessary filter.
I have tried to look for the data but unfortunately people only seem to care about race (and even than, like 95% of the results are articles which always discuss the proportion of deaths by population, not by police intervention). But I did come across this study (no gender disparity was analysed unfortunately): https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877
"Finally, the lack of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparity and the impact of race-specific crime are consistent with an exposure argument, whereby per capita racial disparity in fatal shootings is explained by non-Whites’ greater exposure to the police through crime. This explanation is consistent with studies that have used violent crime as a benchmark for testing disparity (20, 23⇓–25)"

So... is it that clear?

 

[Silvanus]

Does it though? Again, I have seen no one provide this rate and it was always about the % of population belonging to group X. I have never seen you bat an eye. Funny how suddenly it's a necessary filter.

For goodness' says, you've spent 3 posts now complaining about hypocrisy. Yet people have actually frequently brought up rates when these demographic arguments crop up. If you've not paid attention, that ain't on us.

Nobody's talked about rates vis-a-vis male/female suspect demographics... because you're the only one I can remember trying to make this weak equivalence argument.

 

[Generals]

For goodness' says, you've spent 3 posts now complaining about hypocrisy. Yet people have actually frequently brought up rates when these demographic arguments crop up. If you've not paid attention, that ain't on us.

Nope, I remember reading them all right, I remember the posts mentioning crime prevalence explaining the discrepancy and I remember these being dismissed for all kinds of reasons but NOT this suddenly required shooting prevalence during a law enforcement encounter statistic.

Nobody's talked about rates vis-a-vis male/female suspect demographics... because you're the only one I can remember trying to make this weak equivalence argument.

I don't care what people talk about here, that wasn't my point. However there seems to be barely any research at all on this subject (unless I'd have to go to page 100 of google search?) so there is no way to know for sure one way or another. I mean you didn't provide any evidence of your claim at all either. Apparently roughly 90-95% of police shootings being against men is ok to accept as totally normal.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Interesting side discussion and all, but cops and their supporters framed Breonna Taylor as a Bad Person and she didn't even have a gun

 

[Agema]

Interesting side discussion and all, but cops and their supporters framed Breonna Taylor as a Bad Person and she didn't even have a gun

This is one of the problems with the police.

The police have a strong organisational motivation for self-protection that unfortunately sometimes outweighs their honesty and accuracy. They know the basic premise that getting the first word in holds weight, because it establishes the baseline assumption in many people's minds for what has happened, which then has to be overturned in public perception.

Therefore, get their (potentially untrue) version in quickly, and then apologise later.

 

[Generals]

Interesting side discussion and all, but cops and their supporters framed Breonna Taylor as a Bad Person and she didn't even have a gun

Off course, just like police officers and pro police people would also frame a white men who got unjustly shot as a fair target for whatever stupid reason they can come up with. Police officers got each other's back and a lot of people seem to (almost) always side with the police because the police stands for law and order. As I said, I do not question the racial issue but the gender issue seems to be quite prevalent as well. (and you'll always have "exceptions")

 

[Silvanus]

Nope, I remember reading them all right, I remember the posts mentioning crime prevalence explaining the discrepancy and I remember these being dismissed for all kinds of reasons but NOT this suddenly required shooting prevalence during a law enforcement encounter statistic.

Cool, then you somehow missed it. It was definitely brought up more than once.

I don't care what people talk about here, that wasn't my point (although it is yet evidence of how little neo progressives care about actual equality). However there seems to be barely any research at all on this subject (unless I'd have to go to page 100 of google search?) so there is no way to know for sure one way or another. I mean you didn't provide any evidence of your claim at all either. Apparently roughly 90-95% of police shootings being against men is ok to accept as totally normal.

"How little neo progressives care about equality"... because we won't accept an equivalence you've thrown out with zero statistical support?

If discrimination played no part, then 90-95% of police shootings being against men would be completely expected if 90-95% of suspects were men. You've provided a completely meaningless stat for the point you're trying to make.

 

[bluegate]

This is one of the problems with the police.

The police have a strong organisational motivation for self-protection that unfortunately sometimes outweighs their honesty and accuracy. They know the basic premise that getting the first word in holds weight, because it establishes the baseline assumption in many people's minds for what has happened, which then has to be overturned in public perception.

Therefore, get their (potentially untrue) version in quickly, and then apologise later.

Bill Barr's also a great fan of this technique.

 

[Generals]

Cool, then you somehow missed it. It was definitely brought up more than once.

"How little neo progressives care about equality"... because we won't accept an equivalence you've thrown out with zero statistical support?

If discrimination played no part, then 90-95% of police shootings being against men would be completely expected if 90-95% of suspects were men. You've provided a completely meaningless stat for the point you're trying to make.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877

So based on this research you would have no issue with saying it is completely expected, without racial prejudice being involved, that black people are more likely to be shot (based on % of population)?

And again, what data do you base your assertion on? I can't remember seeing anyone (except on the other side of the political spectrum) question there may be racism involved based solely on statistics about "shot by police per million". While doing some research I even came across a study of the ACLU which also based itself solely on over representation based on total population.

But ok, let's try to compile data ourselves since despite all my efforts I can't find any study which dug into this (feel free to complement);

People shot to death by U.S. police by gender 2024| Statista

In the United States, more men than women are shot to death by the police.

www.statista.com

2019; 4.28% of victims were women

Arrests by offense, age, and gender

2019; 27.45% of the persons arrested were women

Sounds like quite an over representation. I didn't filter by crime because I don't know what you will consider admissible and there isn't a "violent crime" category. (And since I do not want to waste too much time i didn't bother making a sum of several categories just to meet a "but you also need to take that and that into account)

 

[Silvanus]

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877

So based on this research you would have no issue with saying it is completely expected, without racial prejudice being involved, that black people are more likely to be shot (based on % of population)?

It would be statistically expected, yes. But the fact is that in reality the rate is significantly higher still than the rate which would be expected. Indicating that discrimination does play a role.

And again, what data do you base your assertion on? I can't remember seeing anyone (except on the other side of the political spectrum) question there may be racism involved based solely on statistics about "shot by police per million". While doing some research I even came across a study of the ACLU which also based itself solely on over representation based on total population.

But ok, let's try to compile data ourselves since despite all my efforts I can't find any study which dug into this (feel free to complement);

People shot to death by U.S. police by gender 2024| Statista

In the United States, more men than women are shot to death by the police.

www.statista.com

2019; 4.28% of victims were women

Arrests by offense, age, and gender

2019; 27.45% of the persons arrested were women

Sounds like quite an over representation. I didn't filter by crime because I don't know what you will consider admissible and there isn't a "violent crime" category. (And since I do not want to waste too much time i didn't bother making a sum of several categories just to meet a "but you also need to take that and that into account)

Arrests isn't a great indicator, because that will include things like embezzlement etc, where the situation in which a shooting may occur simply won't crop up.

With violent/ firearm related crime, men make up between 80 and 90% of arrests/suspects, depending on the exact perameter.

Men make up about 94% of police shooting victims in 2021. So... Men are slightly overrepresented, but to a degree that is not terribly statistically significant.

Still, we shouldn't read to deeply into these stats, because they're not direct comparisons of like-for-like scenarios.

 

[Generals]

It would be statistically expected, yes. But the fact is that in reality the rate is significantly higher still than the rate which would be expected. Indicating that discrimination does play a role.

Arrests isn't a great indicator, because that will include things like embezzlement etc, where the situation in which a shooting may occur simply won't crop up.

With violent/ firearm related crime, men make up between 80 and 90% of arrests/suspects, depending on the exact perameter.

Men make up about 94% of police shooting victims in 2021. So... Men are slightly overrepresented, but to a degree that is not terribly statistically significant.

Still, we shouldn't read to deeply into these stats, because they're not direct comparisons of like-for-like scenarios.

It is indeed difficult to draw conclusions based on such raw data as a lot can come into play but I would suggest the preliminary data does point toward a bias.
Combined with other better documented biases like courts being tougher on men (http://publications.ut-capitole.fr/22892/1/Philippe_22892.pdf, heh google put a French study on the first page) I think we shouldn't dismiss sexism impacting the likelihood to be shot by police officers, especially since the issue seems to be there is a lack of research on that subject.

 

[Silvanus]

It is indeed difficult to draw conclusions based on such raw data as a lot can come into play but I would suggest the preliminary data does point toward a bias.
Combined with other better documented biases like courts being tougher on men (http://publications.ut-capitole.fr/22892/1/Philippe_22892.pdf, heh google put a French study on the first page) I think we shouldn't dismiss sexism impacting the likelihood to be shot by police officers, especially since the issue seems to be there is a lack of research on that subject.

It would be worth research, yeah, I'd say. But given the small numbers we're talking about, it's quite explicable through statistical "noise", and less than 10 or so individual instances would flatten the discrepancy.

 

[Cheetodust]

Hey, maybe don't let someone sidetrack this with "actually white guys have it the worst." it's just baseline fasci propaganda that's best ignored. Notice how we're not talking about the police murdering a sleeping black man in cold blood anymore? That isn't an accident.

 

[BrawlMan]

Hey, maybe don't let someone sidetrack this with "actually white guys have it the worst." it's just baseline fasci propaganda that's best ignored. Notice how we're not talking about the police murdering a sleeping black man in cold blood anymore? That isn't an accident.

And I'll bring it back up to speed as well. I haven't seen the video, nor do I need to see it to know what happened. The fact they shot at somebody that was clearly sleeping and had no awareness, shows how cowardly those officers are. They don't have it that bad or rough; especially if they have all the time in the world to kill somebody that can't even defend/speak themselves, nor they are aware of who is barging in on their door. If anybody's defending those assholes, then you're no different and it's just as racist as they are. You don't care what happens to others, so long it's not you or somebody that has the same skin color as you. Anybody that gets upset or offended by the statement, say no more you've already outed yourself. Now let's get this train wreck back on track!

 

[Cheetodust]

And I'll bring it back up to speed as well. I haven't seen the video, nor do I need to see it to know what happened. The fact they shot at somebody that was clearly sleeping and had no awareness, shows how cowardly those officers are. They don't have it that bad or rough; especially if they have all the time in the world to kill somebody that can't even defend/speak themselves, nor they are aware of who is barging in on their door. If anybody's defending those assholes, then you're no different and it's just as racist as they are. You don't care what happens to others, so long it's not you or somebody that has the same skin color as you. Anybody that gets upset or offended by the statement, say no more you've already outed yourself. Now let's get this train wreck back on track!

I suggest you absolutely don't watch it. Your tolerance might be greater than mine seeing as I'm not American and have never actually even seen a gun in real life but I really can't describe how much that video affected me. Honestly don't know what word to use.

They also lied, over and over again at every given opportunity about every facet of the murder. They said he was wanted as part of the warrant, he wasn't. They said they loudly announced their presence before entering the property, they didn't. They said he pointed his gun at them, he didn't.

Anyone whose immediate reaction to this is "yeah but..." is just too much of a coward to admit that they either don't care or are glad that a black man was killed by the police.

 

[BrawlMan]

I suggest you absolutely don't watch it. Your tolerance might be greater than mine seeing as I'm not American and have never actually even seen a gun in real life but I really can't describe how much that video affected me. Honestly don't know what word to use.

Like I said before, I have no intentions of watching. I seen many recordings like this before, and just gets worse each time. I do thank you though.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Whenever cops murder someone:

 

[Generals]

It would be worth research, yeah, I'd say. But given the small numbers we're talking about, it's quite explicable through statistical "noise", and less than 10 or so individual instances would flatten the discrepancy.

That's a convenient assumption I would say. I am quite certain based on the typical biases men face it will be much more than just "noise".

Hey, maybe don't let someone sidetrack this with "actually white guys have it the worst." it's just baseline fasci propaganda that's best ignored. Notice how we're not talking about the police murdering a sleeping black man in cold blood anymore? That isn't an accident.

Oh look a neo progressive makes up strawmen because he can't handle the fact reality is not always about the all mighty evil (white) men and poor victimized women or colored people. Oh no, someone pointed towards a gender disparity and it didn't lead to the conclusion women are oppressed, what an evil Fascist!

Where did I say white guys have it the worst? All i said is that the population group which represents roughly 50% of the population while representing 95% of victims by police shooting is probably the one who is not considered as safe with a gun.

Edit for you: the title mentions a shooting of a "black man" why is one only allowed to focus on the "black" part and not on the "man" part? What arbitrary sexist reason are you going to spawn? I actually didn't derail anything.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Where did I say white guys have it the worst?

How bad can it be when they're allowed to lynch sleeping black people?

 

[Generals]

How bad can it be when they're allowed to lynch sleeping black people?

They (police officers) are allowed to shoot about anyone (except maybe rich and/or famous people?). I recall about this deaf and mute guy who was pulled over on a highway and was shot (unarmed). This was because he didn't comply to orders he didn't understand while he was hopelessly trying to signal the police officers he didn't understand them with his arms. That guy was white. But it doesn't matter, it isn't a contest. I do not question well documented racial issues and I am not contesting black men are probably facing the worst kind of discrimination, i just pointed out people are overlooking the fact "men" are actually quite an over represented group in that department, across all races.

But I guess we can't be interested in sexism against men? Instead it can only ever be about the race of the victim.