Blue Lives Matter

[LWC55]

Taken into custody unharmed and given their day in court
View attachment 151814View attachment 151815View attachment 151816View attachment 151817View attachment 151818View attachment 151819

...
View attachment 151820View attachment 151821

I wouldn't exactly call #3 unharmed. But I think he may have killed and maimed a bunch of folks and also not been compliant with police orders at the time of his arrest.


Aug. 20, 2013 — -- Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev received multiple life-threatening injuries, including a gunshot to the face before his capture, doctors revealed in grisly detail in newly unsealed court documents.

"He has multiple gunshot wounds, the most severe of which appears to have entered through the left side inside of his mouth and exited the left face, lower face," Dr. Stephen Ray Odom, a trauma surgeon, told a court convened inside Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, where the 20-year-old suspect was being treated three days after his arrest.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Out of all of the above how many complied with police and how many resisted either actively or passively?

Not worth picking apart all of them but Bundy escaped from prison twice, resisted arrest multiple times. His rap sheet is long and includes multiple charges of resisting arrest and assaulting police.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I wouldn't exactly call #3 unharmed. But I think he may have killed and maimed a bunch of folks and also not been compliant with police orders at the time of his arrest.


Aug. 20, 2013 — -- Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev received multiple life-threatening injuries, including a gunshot to the face before his capture, doctors revealed in grisly detail in newly unsealed court documents.

"He has multiple gunshot wounds, the most severe of which appears to have entered through the left side inside of his mouth and exited the left face, lower face," Dr. Stephen Ray Odom, a trauma surgeon, told a court convened inside Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, where the 20-year-old suspect was being treated three days after his arrest.

Yeah fair... not a good example.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I don't even know who any of the guys are in the top row.

All of the information I listed is actually included in the legal analysis when it comes to determining if use of force was lawful or not. It's called the totality of the circumstances and is used to evaluate whether the force used was both reasonable and necessary.
Pictures are cute, but rather irrelevant here.

James Holmes
Timothy Mcveigh
Edmund Kemper
Ted Bundy
Richard Speck

Circumstance = Being Black

 

[El Jason]

Circumstance = Being Black

I have no idea what point you are trying to make in reference to the original post of mine you quoted. I stated a fact that the courts recognize and fully take into account prior criminal history and law enforcement interaction as a legal consideration. If you want to debate that, let's do so but leave out the cutesy shit.

 

[DouglasR]

Taken into custody unharmed and given their day in court
View attachment 151814View attachment 151815View attachment 151817View attachment 151818View attachment 151819

...
View attachment 151820View attachment 151821

You cherry picked this list.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to post pictures of the 370 white people shot to death last year by the police next to photos of the 235 black people?

 

[longbow51]

You cherry picked this list.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to post pictures of the 370 white people shot to death last year by the police next to photos of the 235 black people?

Don't try to use those fancy facts on us.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

You cherry picked this list.
Wouldn’t it make more sense to post pictures of the 370 white people shot to death last year by the police next to photos of the 235 black people?

Absolutely. It's so easy to argue or discount any specific incident. You have to look at the aggregate data.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make in reference to the original post of mine you quoted. I stated a fact that the courts recognize and fully take into account prior criminal history and law enforcement interaction as a legal consideration. If you want to debate that, let's do so but leave out the cutesy shit.

Fair enough.

I agree "courts recognize and fully take into account prior criminal history and law enforcement interaction".
Police when apprehending suspects. That's different. Skin color, socioeconomic class, etc. seem to have a massive effect on how an arrest will play out.

Several times I've watched drunk college kids, take swings at cops, spit on them, etc. Its disgusting. Of the one's I've witnessed, all were white, none were arrested.

On the other hand I've never seen any LEO lose there temper or act unprofessionally. We lived in a low income neighborhood, and I watched a number of people get arrested, black, white... all of them went down the way I would expect.

It would be easy for me to say from my personal experience that it doesn't happen.
I know that the action of other officers, departments, however you want to frame it is putting the lives of other officers in danger by perpetuating negative relationships.

As to solutions... I don't know.

Did listen to an NPR story a while back that more or less said some big city police departments have found that cops with military combat experience statistically had the least number of problems. The hypothesis was that those individuals had dealt with really stressful situations and were far more likely to remain calm and collected.

Would love to hear more middle ground discussions that acknowledge the problems and don't demonize or victimize either group.

 

[El Jason]

Police when apprehending suspects. That's different. Skin color, socioeconomic class, etc. seem to have a massive effect on how an arrest will play out.

And I don’t disagree with this, but that’s a different piece to the puzzle than known factors like criminal history and so on. Read up on Graham Factors and you will gain a better understanding of why this is both important and admissible.

To your point, I found it interesting the study linked earlier in the thread showed a distinct disparity in uses of force based on race when the force was non lethal. I would also anecdotally guess Black people are far more likely to be detained for shaky reasons than a white guy.

 

[DouglasR]

Several times I've watched drunk college kids, take swings at cops, spit on them, etc. Its disgusting. Of the one's I've witnessed, all were white, none were arrested.

Lord knows I have no business arguing racial equality with your Bill McKiben arguing with ass, but I’m calling BS on this one.
Was this at a protest?
Maybe you can get away with stuff like that in the western states or Vermont, but if you do any one of those things on any college campus in Illinois you’re ass is going down regardless of who you are.

 

[LWC55]

And I don’t disagree with this, but that’s a different piece to the puzzle than known factors like criminal history and so on. Read up on Graham Factors and you will gain a better understanding of why this is both important and admissible.

To your point, I found it interesting the study linked earlier in the thread showed a distinct disparity in uses of force based on race when the force was non lethal. I would also anecdotally guess Black people are far more likely to be detained for shaky reasons than a white guy.

In my opinion this is where the conversation should be. Statistics show there are real issues with us of force and I've also seen studies on disparities in length of sentence based on race. But the narrative that cops kill minorities at a much higher rate is not born out by facts and statistics. Yet this is being pushed by nearly all the media and half the politicians. Makes it hard to have honest, constructive conversations. Guessing that is the point though.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

And I don’t disagree with this, but that’s a different piece to the puzzle than known factors like criminal history and so on. Read up on Graham Factors and you will gain a better understanding of why this is both important and admissible.

To your point, I found it interesting the study linked earlier in the thread showed a distinct disparity in uses of force based on race when the force was non lethal. I would also anecdotally guess Black people are far more likely to be detained for reason than a white guy.

Read the quick summary of Graham factors on wiki... makes sense.

Per that Race isn't a graham factor, and there are white suspects with much "higher" graham factors having much better outcomes than black suspects with much lower.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Lord knows I have no business arguing racial equality with your Bill McKiben arguing with ass, but I’m calling BS on this one.
Was this at a protest?
Maybe you can get away with stuff like that in the western states or Vermont, but if you do any one of those things on any college campus in Illinois you’re ass is going down regardless of who you are.

Vermont, Vail, Montana, and Dewey beach DE

 

[El Jason]

In my opinion this is where the conversation should be. Statistics show there are real issues with us of force and I've also seen studies on disparities in length of sentence based on race. But the narrative that cops kill minorities at a much higher rate is not born out by facts and statistics. Yet this is being pushed by nearly all the media and half the politicians. Makes it hard to have honest, constructive conversations. Guessing that is the point though.

I agree in that the conversation should start where statistics show the issue is. That said, it's pretty hard to ignore stuff and not have biases created when you have instances like Breonna Taylor and George Floyd.

As an aside, I think you also have to factor into the equation black people are much more likely to have an LE encounter than a white person. It's been shown with statistical data in both Washington and Colorado that black people are more likely to be stopped by troopers during daylight hours than at night. That is a telling statistic and can't be left out of the discussion. They are more likely to be stopped and more likely to be subjected to a use of force. I'd be outraged too if I were black.

 

[El Jason]

Per that Race isn't a graham factor, and there are white suspects with much "higher" graham factors having much better outcomes than black suspects with much lower.

No disagreement on race.

However, it's important to remember that just because an officer didn't utilize legally justifiable lethal force in one encounter doesn't then parlay into raising the legal bar for doing so in the first place. I understand there appear to be discrepancies, although the data in the afore mentioned study doesn't support a racial bias. Granted, one study does not mean it is definitive, and it's also three years old. Newer data might be different.

 

[Carnage2011]

Vermont, Vail, Montana, and Dewey beach DE

Damn! Not to derail the thread, but if you've witnessed those actions in four different place you must run with a rough crowd! I've lived in Cali, Texas, Nevada, Kansas, and Montana and have yet to see anyone take a swing at a cop.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Damn! Not to derail the thread, but if you've witnessed those actions in four different place you must run with a rough crowd! I've lived in Cali, Texas, Nevada, Kansas, and Montana and have yet to see anyone take a swing at a cop.

Drunk people , the one's in VT were women. All deserved at least a night in a cell if you ask me.

 

[Nameless Range]

I've resisted commenting on this thread. I guess I would admit that I hold Law Enforcement with some sort of reverence. I certainly have never felt attacked or unfairly treated by them, and I am aware that that isn't the case for many. I have also seen them sort scenes out that I could barely look at. Having a police scanner changed my perspective in a big way, and I think it would for others too. You'd get a better picture of the workload and value police provide, as well as the existence of darkness most folks live their lives unaware of.

I read an essay where this study was referenced regarding racial bias in police shootings, and so I went and read the study. It is very interesting.

Officer characteristics and racial disparities in fatal officer-involved shootings

There is widespread concern about racial disparities in fatal officer-involved shootings and that these disparities reflect discrimination by White officers. Existing databases of fatal shootings lack information about officers, and past analytic approaches have made it difficult to assess the...

www.pnas.org

If you don't here is the conclusion:

What Is the Evidence for Racial Disparity?

When considering all FOIS in 2015, we did not find anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparity. How do we explain these results? Our data are consistent with three possible explanations.

One police-centered explanation is that these disparities reflect depolicing (33, 34). Depolicing occurs when police officers’ concerns about becoming targets in civil litigation and the media spotlight impede officers from enforcing the law. Such concerns have been heightened due to recent high-profile shootings of Black men (35). The disparities in our data are consistent with selective depolicing, where officers are less likely to fatally shoot Black civilians for fear of public and legal reprisals. All else equal, this would increase the likelihood that a person fatally shot was White vs. Black. However, depolicing might be limited to areas with high-profile shootings (36). This explanation also does not explain the disparity observed when comparing White and Hispanic civilians. Future research could test for depolicing more rigorously by using a quasiexperimental time-lagged study investigating police use of force in cities before and after high-profile shootings where racial issues are prominent.

On the other hand, a civilian-centered explanation for these disparities is that White civilians may react differently toward police than racial minorities in crime-related situations. If White civilians present more threat toward police, this could explain why a person fatally shot was more likely to be White than Black or Hispanic. Among those fatally shot by police, Whites are more likely (relative to racial minorities) to be armed and pose a threat (26). We attempted to control for civilian threat level by measuring whether they were armed and attacking, but found these variables unrelated to the race of a person fatally shot. These issues illustrate a broader challenge in inferring civilian characteristics during fatal shootings. The newspaper databases we analyzed contained at least some errors (e.g., in whether civilians are coded as armed; ref. 37). There are likely more false positives and negatives in these databases, such as when separating individuals committing suicide who are not experiencing a mental health crisis from those who are experiencing a mental health crisis. Another challenge is that dichotomous variable codes may not capture the complexity of these interactions (e.g., a person is coded as attacking, but they had stopped struggling before they were fatally shot). One solution is to code civilian threat level in a more continuous way (e.g., ref. 10). But this will only be realistic if better records of FOIS are kept at the federal level. For this reason, we urge caution when interpreting the impact of civilian characteristics on racial disparities in fatal shootings.

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). However, this does not mean that researchers should continue to use benchmarking approaches, even if using violent crime over population size. Rather, researchers can take one or both predictors into account with our approach. Moreover, unlike the benchmark approach, our conclusions regarding racial disparity do not depend on which predictors are used (SI Appendix).

IMO, folks' focus and energy on the issue of systemic racism is largely misguided when directed at police. There are certainly things to be looked at very closely (qualified immunity, insufficient training, poor candidates, etc), but energy should really be focused on things at a higher level. I can't find it right now but I read another essay that highlighted that when you control for poverty, things can seem even less racially motivated, and those that do, seem to occur in clusters as you would expect due to the demographics of geography, the geography of discrepancy in law, etc.

It is far messier and more complicated than incantations would have you believe, and it is also true that a handful of horrific anecdotes recorded on camera will trump tens of millions of statistical points to the contrary in the minds of masses who perhaps rightfully, see the deck stacked against them and they are sick of it.

 

[LWC55]

I agree in that the conversation should start where statistics show the issue is. That said, it's pretty hard to ignore stuff and not have biases created when you have instances like Breonna Taylor and George Floyd.

As an aside, I think you also have to factor into the equation black people are much more likely to have an LE encounter than a white person. It's been shown with statistical data in both Washington and Colorado that black people are more likely to be stopped by troopers during daylight hours than at night. That is a telling statistic and can't be left out of the discussion. They are more likely to be stopped and more likely to be subjected to a use of force. I'd be outraged too if I were black.

Also more likely to commit violent crimes and in turn have more encounters that can turn violent. Obviously there are deeper socioeconomic/nuclear family issues that nobody seems to want to even start to address. If these "movements" really cared about black folks they would drop the whole ACAB bullsht and have a real conversation about solutions we can all agree and come together on. But they are doing the opposite.

The analysis
It’s true that around 13 per cent of Americans are black, according to the latest estimates from the US Census Bureau.

And yes, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, black offenders committed 52 per cent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008.

FactCheck: do black Americans commit more crime?

Anti-police protests continue across America after the Michael Brown killing. But does the black community have tough questions to answer too?

www.channel4.com

 

[Deleted member 28227]

No disagreement on race.

However, it's important to remember that just because an officer didn't utilize legally justifiable lethal force in one encounter doesn't then parlay into raising the legal bar for doing so in the first place. I understand there appear to be discrepancies, although the data in the afore mentioned study doesn't support a racial bias. Granted, one study does not mean it is definitive, and it's also three years old. Newer data might be different.

I'm not going to dismiss the Fryer study out of hand, but it's certainly not definitive, and there are other academic studies with conflicting findings.

"We find that, across several circumstances of police killings and their objective reasonableness, Black suspects are more than twice as likely to be killed by police than are persons of other racial or ethnic groups; even when there are no other obvious circumstances during the encounter that would make the use of deadly force reasonable. Police killings of Latinx civilians are higher compared to whites and other racial or ethnic groups in some but not all circumstances."

https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3660&context=faculty_scholarship