USA Politics (redux)

[coffee]

     I think it has to do with encounters with the police in inherently stressful situations, not crime in general. I would have to look deeper at the kind of situations where police are likely to shoot, justified or not. Based only on media reports alone, I surmise that "shot while holding a sandwich" is rarer for whites. I don't think racism explains all of it, but the history of policing suggest that officers have an ingrained fear of black suspects that is prevalent among officers of all races. This has to do with the neighborhoods where the possibility of violent confrontations is rationally deemed to be higher than average.

     The question might be better resolved by asking why so few white suspects invoke a fear response in police officers. If you only normalize for neighborhood crime rates I still think there's a disparity in, say, "shot while running away". But I do think we need a finer grained breakdown of the circumstances of cases.

I have heard that in training-style simulations the general population of [white?] Americans shoot black suspects even more disproportionately than the police do. I don't mean that the police don't have a problem -- they do, if only because a police force needs to be perceived as legitimate by the population they're policing -- but I do suspect that the problem is much deeper and broader than policing, it's just that policing is where the rub hurts the most.

[fbjim]

Well fear seems to be the watchword for police generally. You saw that in Uvalde, but more generally the liberal use of deadly force speaks to a mindset that one's life is in danger at all times.


I understand that policing is an inherently dangerous job (though not excessively so) but the culture seems to be a fear-based "shoot first" one, to the extent that Stephen Mader, a police officer in West Virginia talked a suicide-by-cop down, and was rewarded by being branded a "coward" by his fellow officers (despite not using lethal force seemingly being the more courageous option) and being fired.


Contrast that with Uvalde where a police department who were facing a situation where they had no control and no option to pre-emptively shoot first suddenly froze up.

[Todd]

I understand that policing is an inherently dangerous job (though not excessively so)

What does "not excessively so" mean, and is your definition objective?  I believe BLS data shows a fatality rate about four times higher than the average worker, though more dangerous professions like logger and commercial fisherman are much higher. 

[DizzyD]

     ...Based only on media reports alone, I surmise that "shot while holding a sandwich" is rarer for whites. ...

Except as usefulness for politically divisive rhetoric, I would say that's fairly rare for all groups. If that does happen to a white it's probably not going to get quite the same media coverage either.

The question might be better resolved by asking why so few white suspects invoke a fear response in police officers. ...

Unless you're a police officer and work closely with them I don't know how you can say that they don't. Suspects are probably somewhat scary regardless.

...
Contrast that with Uvalde where a police department who were facing a situation where they had no control and no option to pre-emptively shoot first suddenly froze up.

That's b.s. This is similar to those deputies hiding in the bushes during the Parkland shooting.

Police responding to so-called active shooters have been trained for at least two decades to confront the assailants as soon as practical rather than wait for reinforcements, a practice that was developed amid countless mass killings across the US over the past two decades.

But instead of ordering officers to go in, Arredondo – who was on site at the school – reportedly had them wait while he called the city police force for reinforcements.

"We don't have enough firepower right now," Arredondo said, in part, according to a committee transcript of that call.

Arredondo also purportedly worried that the door to the classroom where the intruder was cornered had potentially been locked, and he couldn't immediately track down its key. But the door was in fact not locked – and even if it was, officers had a "hooligan" tool that could pry locked doors open, according to the committee's evidence.

Officers stormed the classroom 77 minutes into the attack and killed the gunman. But by then he had already murdered 21 and wounded 17 others.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/02/pete-arredondo-uvalde-school-district-police-chief-resign

By the way Mader was awarded a $175k settlement. And one of the Parkland dudes was reinstated with back pay.

[Karl Henning]

Jennifer Rubin: And the insane lies coming from Republicans are not only about Trump. The active purveyors of the "big lie," the vaccine deniers, the replacement theory provocateurs and the crowd that spun conspiracy theories about Ukraine when Trump was caught extorting its president are all either delusional or willing to pretend so. They are either hopelessly gullible or infinitely cynical.

[greg]

Nor probably did the media care enough to cover it thoroughly. Not enough potential for group vs group conflict.

Bingo.
Back a year or so ago, I shared a video of a cop outright murdering a white man when responding to a domestic disturbance call (IIRC he was yelling at a game, it might have been Crash Bandicoot) (full body cam). He thought the guy had a gun, but he didn't, so shot and killed him.
The story got local coverage (in Phoenix) but never got the extensive national coverage of George Floyd.
Because the USA is mostly anti-racist, people get more triggered when it's white cop vs. innocent black person. Which is reasonable to feel that way.
But the media purely capitalizes on this, airing the ragebait to get as much attention as possible. They could still show the George Floyd story but also show stories like that, evenly, but what exactly gives the media more attention?

Just look at the real numbers. Police brutality affects minorities much more.

Never said it didn't.

I, as a very white man with a top education could sweet talk myself out of bank robbery. A black Harvard professor famously got arrested for entering his own home.

Lol! I'd like to see you try.

All Lives Matter was invented to void BLM, it is a typical right wing snark, and you're lapping it up because it suits you. The whole 'concepts' thing is BS.

Any proof of that, outside of lefty sources?
If it's common to understand it as something more inclusive, then it isn't just something that right-wingers use.
Does this looks right wing to you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Lives_Matter#/media/File:Defending_Portland_(34939466302)_(cropped).jpg
BLM could have avoided this problem by making their slogan "Black Lives Also Matter." BLAM.
But people don't know how to make good slogans.

Then you're wasting our time with a fear that is merely in your uninformed head.

Um, have you never heard of affirmative action? This has been discussed for many years now. Many people out there who want this.

I think you simply see a woman or black person doing a job and make assumptions about quotas without evidence.

Very typical unfounded leftist accusation that I've heard several times before. Yawn.

[drogulus]

Except as usefulness for politically divisive rhetoric, I would say that's fairly rare for all groups. If that does happen to a white it's probably not going to get quite the same media coverage either.

Unless you're a police officer and work closely with them I don't know how you can say that they don't. Suspects are probably somewhat scary regardless.

     I think holding a sandwich or cellphone while shot gets coverage.

     I don't start a discussion of disparity by assuming there isn't one. It could be that whites don't get confronted by police in danger zones, or because they are less feared on average, or some of both.

[DizzyD]

     I think holding a sandwich or cellphone while shot gets coverage.

I haven't heard of very many incidents like that either way. It would be wrong regardless of the victim's color.

I don't start a discussion of disparity by assuming there isn't one. It could be that whites don't get confronted by police in danger zones, or because they are less feared on average, or some of both.

The point is there's also a disparity concerning who might be in "danger zones". A commenter above mentioned the police shooting of a white guy in Phoenix. I looked it up, and it did happen. The guy's name was Ryan Whitaker. He did have a gun in his hand when he went to the door late at night after the cops knocked, but he put the gun down as soon as he realized they were cops. He was shot in the back and killed anyway. Incidentally that body cam footage is nightmare fuel.

I never heard about it until now. I'm sorry, but the media love to exacerbate racial ill-will. They just do. And those interracial instances are the ones that they will emphasize.

[geralmar]

Reading these posts recalls to mind when I was a kid in the 1950s learning to read by studying the Sunday Detroit newspaper.  One story I read so many times one Sunday after another that  I asked my father about it was the fleeing "negro" man killed when the policeman's "warning shot" hit the suspect in the back or back of the head.  (I asked why the police marksmanship was so bad it invariably resulted in the death of the fugitive. Also, why would a warning shot be fired AT someone?)  Of course newspapers no longer automatically identify suspects by race and police have abandoned  the "warning shot" so I  guess society is so much better now. 

[drogulus]

I haven't heard of very many incidents like that either way. It would be wrong regardless of the victim's color.

The point is there's also a disparity concerning who might be in "danger zones". A commenter above mentioned the police shooting of a white guy in Phoenix. I looked it up, and it did happen. The guy's name was Ryan Whitaker. He did have a gun in his hand when he went to the door late at night after the cops knocked, but he put the gun down as soon as he realized they were cops. He was shot in the back and killed anyway.

I never heard about it until now. I'm sorry, but the media love to exacerbate racial ill-will. They just do. And those interracial instances are the ones that they will emphasize.

     If I wanted to exacerbate racial ill-will I could tell lies about how many black citizens are shot in questionable circumstances (holding something, running away etc.), or if I was really devious and ill-willed I could tell the truth about these incidents. I think the latter is safer and more effective. It might also be the case that media reports are usually cases of covering the crime and police beat, which everyone expects the media to do. I want to know if something disturbing like a shooting happens in my neighborhood, and I'm almost like a completely normal person.

[DizzyD]

     If I wanted to exacerbate racial ill-will I could tell lies about how many black citizens are shot in questionable circumstances (holding something, running away etc.), or if I was really devious and ill-willed I could tell the truth about these incidents. I think the latter is safer and more effective. It might also be the case that media reports are usually cases of covering the crime and police beat, which everyone expects the media to do. I want to know if something disturbing like a shooting happens in my neighborhood, and I'm almost like a completely normal person.

You wouldn't have to tell lies. You can concentrate almost exclusively on white-on-black instances which obscures the fact the cops kill alot of white people, too. It's everybody's problem.

[drogulus]

You wouldn't have to tell lies. You can concentrate almost exclusively on white-on-black instances which obscures the fact the cops kill alot of white people, too. It's everybody's problem.

     No, you would have to suppress the truth and that's lying. It does happen to whites, and it is more of a problem for others, and that is both what statistics show and what the media reports. Do they also sensationalize? That depends on how you view their tendency to cover the worst cases and the ones where police violence is most questionable.

     If I'm an editor I wouldn't think it was my job to run compensatory stories about police brutality against whites. I wouldn't fiddle with the proportions to make or refute a point. If that's sensational so be it.

[DizzyD]

     No, you would have to suppress the truth and that's lying. It does happen to whites, and it is more of a problem for others, and that is both what statistics show and what the media reports. Do they also sensationalize? That depends on how you view their tendency to cover the worst cases and the ones where police violence is most questionable.

     If I'm an editor I wouldn't think it was my job to run compensatory stories about police brutality against whites. I wouldn't fiddle with the proportions to make or refute a point. If that's sensational so be it.

It wouldn't be compensatory; it would be perspective. If your concern is the truth rather than shaping opinion or serving an agenda, you'll provide it.

[Madiel]

Don't be a goof.

I wasn't being one. It's a serious issue precisely because in the past people did basically say that black people were inherently more likely to be criminal.

[Madiel]

What I really get out of this graph is that anyone trying to make any type of conclusion one way or the other based on their "research" is talking out of their butts since we have that gigantic "unknown" bar that could skew things either way.

Why does the "unknown" bar grow so abruptly? That's curious. Does it really take that length of time to find out the answer?

[fbjim]

Reading these posts recalls to mind when I was a kid in the 1950s learning to read by studying the Sunday Detroit newspaper.  One story I read so many times one Sunday after another that  I asked my father about it was the fleeing "negro" man killed when the policeman's "warning shot" hit the suspect in the back or back of the head.  (I asked why the police marksmanship was so bad it invariably resulted in the death of the fugitive. Also, why would a warning shot be fired AT someone?)  Of course newspapers no longer automatically identify suspects by race and police have abandoned  the "warning shot" so I  guess society is so much better now.

They're called "officer-involved shootings" now.

[milk]

I wasn't being one. It's a serious issue precisely because in the past people did basically say that black people were inherently more likely to be criminal.

Um, ya think? Why don't you reply to someone who's making those arguments? Not that I've noticed anyone around here in particular. I will offer you this advice: go watch Glenn Loury, noted black Professor of economics at Brown university, and John McWhorter, famous linguist at Columbia (and also black), discuss these issues in a short video (see below). They will articulate the opinions I've offered up but much more clearly and pointedly. I guess this will shock you. Then, comment on their videos. Accuse them of not knowing about racism (and maybe accuse them of being racist) and see what kind of reaction you get over there. I just want to see it. Please let us know afterwards and link us to it so we can see how the conversation went. I'm sure it'll be popcorn worthy.
Try this one (11:55):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg

[Fëanor]

It is more complex than that and I have neither the time nor the inclination to thrash it out here.

There's a tone in some of your posts of suggesting that the higher rate of black deaths is THEIR fault, and maybe that it doesn't need to be fixed. Well in my view it does. Even IF it arises from higher crime rates (rather than just higher rates of police interactions) it still needs to be fixed.

The American attachment to the death penalty is a whole other issue, but even in America the legal view is that people are supposed to be put on trial for their crimes and punished after that. And the death penalty is not available for selling illegal cigarettes. It's certainly not available for a kid playing with a toy gun.

It's not only police but entire community attitudes. A black man in your neighbourhood? Call the police. A black man driving a fancy car? Call the police. It's a self perpetuating cycle of not just crimes being committed but of BELIEVING they're being committed. It also works the other way of characterising white misdemeanours as trivial and not meriting punishment.

Righto. I have work to do.

Yes, it's very complex, and involves "vicious circle" of cause & effect over time.

• Blacks were enslaved in America from early in the 17th century 'till past the middle of the 19th.
  The vaunted US DofI and Constitution failed to recognize slaves as "created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".
• Vis-à-vis slaves, the US saw them first as property and only secondarily as human.  Rich southerners cultivated the notion of Blacks being inferior to justify their enslavement;  at the same time southern poor folks felt that, no matter how low their own circumstances, Blacks, at least, were lower.
• The attitudes of slavery was inculcated in the minds of Whites and Blacks too, giving rise to "Jim Crow" and all subsequent discrimination.
• Voting rights were effectively denied especially in southern state and Blacks, accordingly, were denied good education or access to various opportunities.  This state of affairs pretty much continued even for the many Blacks who migrated to northern cities.
• Poor public education and lack of fair opportunities on the one hand, and discriminatory distain for Blacks on the other, resulted in the large majority of Blacks being forced to live in mainly Black areas.  Poverty perpetuates which was and is the case in these Black communities.
• Poverty in Black communities, as in all communities, tends to crime and hence suspicion of crime by outsiders.
• Black community members' crime and thus being suspected of crime  gives rise to relatively more interaction with police.  Blacks, of course, incur greater suspicion simply because of their obvious physical appearance.
• Police, including Black police officers, are thus predisposed to suspect and fear Black individuals;  interactions are thus more frequent and prejudicial on the part of police.
• Thus Blacks are more likely to unfairly treated or killed in interactions with police on account of there being more of them and police having a greater prejudicial attitude when they occur.

[milk]

Yes, it's very complex, and involves "vicious circle" of cause & effect over time.

• Blacks were enslaved in America from early in the 17th century 'till past the middle of the 19th.
  The vaunted US DofI and Constitution failed to recognize slaves as "created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".
• Vis-à-vis slaves, the US saw them first as property and only secondarily as human.  Rich southerners cultivated the notion of Blacks being inferior to justify their enslavement;  at the same time southern poor folks felt that, no matter how low their own circumstances, Blacks, at least, were lower.
• The attitudes of slavery was inculcated in the minds of Whites and Blacks too, giving rise to "Jim Crow" and all subsequent discrimination.
• Voting rights were effectively denied especially in southern state and Blacks, accordingly, were denied good education or access to various opportunities.  This state of affairs pretty much continued even for the many Blacks who migrated to northern cities.
• Poor public education and lack of fair opportunities on the one hand, and discriminatory distain for Blacks on the other, resulted in the large majority of Blacks being forced to live in mainly Black areas.  Poverty perpetuates which was and is the case in these Black communities.
• Poverty in Black communities, as in all communities, tends to crime and hence suspicion of crime by outsiders.
• Black community members' crime and thus being suspected of crime  gives rise to relatively more interaction with police.  Blacks, of course, incur greater suspicion simply because of their obvious physical appearance.
• Police, including Black police officers, are thus predisposed to suspect and fear Black individuals;  interactions are thus more frequent and prejudicial on the part of police.
• Thus Blacks are more likely to unfairly treated or killed in interactions with police on account of there being more of them and police having a greater prejudicial attitude when they occur.

And none of this engages with Fryer, Loury, McWhorter, etc. there's also this vicious circle of liberals telling each other the same narratives and never engaging outside their bubbles. This is not to say that some of what you list isn't obviously, painfully obviously, true. Just that you don't take up points out of your comfort zone. Glenn Loury is going to say that you deny black people agency and responsibility. He's also going to say that you're also going to get a different view on this if you visit a church basement in an inner city, if you talk to family of children killed by the bullet of a gangbanger (since you seem to imply that black victims of crime are part of some sort of mirage) I don't give an answer. I just feel more and more inclined to admit a wider circle of views. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg

[DizzyD]

Um, ya think? Why don't you reply to someone who's making those arguments? Not that I've noticed anyone around here in particular. I will offer you this advice: go watch Glenn Loury, noted black Professor of economics at Brown university, and John McWhorter, famous linguist at Columbia (and also black), discuss these issues in a short video (see below). They will articulate the opinions I've offered up but much more clearly and pointedly. I guess this will shock you. Then, comment on their videos. Accuse them of not knowing about racism (and maybe accuse them of being racist) and see what kind of reaction you get over there. I just want to see it. Please let us know afterwards and link us to it so we can see how the conversation went. I'm sure it'll be popcorn worthy.
Try this one (11:55):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFXT2dIQXJg

Very interesting video. Speaking of McWhorter, I also like his takedown of "hip hop culture" from nearly 20 years ago.

"At 2 AM on the New York subway not long ago, I saw another scene—more dispiriting than my KFC encounter with the rowdy rapping teens—that captures the essence of rap's destructiveness. A young black man entered the car and began to rap loudly—profanely, arrogantly—with the usual wild gestures. This went on for five irritating minutes. When no one paid attention, he moved on to another car, all the while spouting his doggerel. This was what this young black man presented as his message to the world—his oratory, if you will.

Anyone who sees such behavior as a path to a better future—anyone, like Professor Dyson, who insists that hip-hop is an urgent "critique of a society that produces the need for the thug persona"—should step back and ask himself just where, exactly, the civil rights–era blacks might have gone wrong in lacking a hip-hop revolution. They created the world of equality, striving, and success I live and thrive in.

Hip-hop creates nothing."

https://www.city-journal.org/html/how-hip-hop-holds-blacks-back-12442.html

If you want to get to root causes of disparities, you might also look into the cultural milieu that more or less glorifies that attitude and lifestyle. It's a little more complex than "because racism, duh".