posted by FatHobbitGetting caught and going to jail is not the same as committing a crime.
The numbers are pretty overwhelming though. If they were close, I could see the "well maybe it's because cops take it easy on white people and not blacks" argument. The numbers aren't even close, and it would have to be a mass scale of cops around the entire country going out of their way to make all blacks miserable vs taking care of whites with kid's gloves.
posted by jmogRead again what I have typed. When you adjust for the fact that blacks commit more crimes and therefore are arrested more, white men are more likely or just as likely to get shot.
I was very clear.
Not when u account for the over policing in poor neighborhoods. There are just as many drugs in affluent neighborhoods
posted by jmogIt’s not that hard to google FBI crime rates. They do commit more crimes. This is not really debatable.
Now, the reason why they do can be discussed in different thread I guess. I did read once (can’t remember where) that in the same socioeconomic stratifications blacks commit crimes at the same rate as whites, but I maybe dreaming that. So it could be due to socioeconomic reasons and not anything inherent. But the fact that blacks commit more crime is not really a debatable statistic, it’s factual information that is easily found anywhere.
Again also over policing in poor ne
posted by geeblockNot when u account for the over policing in poor neighborhoods. There are just as many drugs in affluent neighborhoods
Is there a demonstration of this?
It probably wouldn't completely surprise me. The money is there to account for the lower population density, but if we're all going to agree to it as fact, we should have evidence to that end.
I'm not sure it would be an easy thing to analyze, though, since illegal drug use is, as the description would suggest, the kind of thing that stays pretty quiet.
It's also worth noting that there are poorer neighborhoods where soft drugs are blatantly ignored by police, as well. I don't know how frequently it happens, as I only have anecdotes, but my neighbors have been toking up on their front porches for years, and any police in the area never hassle them for it (even when the police stop in front of or near the house).
posted by geeblockNot when u account for the over policing in poor neighborhoods. There are just as many drugs in affluent neighborhoods
What data do you have to support this (note: I am not asking for an op-ed, which seems to be your go to)? In the poorer sections of inner cities there tends to be crime associated with drugs (shootings, stabbings, assaults, etc). This isn't happening in affluent neighborhoods. What do you think is going to attract cops more?
Side note: This is why I say we should legalize all drugs. It would reduce crime, save money, allocate resources properly, and there would be no reason to bitch about disproportionate arrests.
posted by like_thatWhat data do you have to support this (note: I am not asking for an op-ed, which seems to be your go to)? In the poorer sections of inner cities there tends to be crime associated with drugs (shootings, stabbings, assaults, etc). This isn't happening in affluent neighborhoods. What do you think is going to attract cops more?
Side note: This is why I say we should legalize all drugs. It would reduce crime, save money, allocate resources properly, and there would be no reason to bitch about disproportionate arrests.
It also doesn't explain violent crime, which is also not that close as a % of population.
posted by FatHobbitGetting caught and going to jail is not the same as committing a crime.
Oh good lord, please tell me you aren’t serious here. That has to be a troll reply right?
posted by geeblockNot when u account for the over policing in poor neighborhoods. There are just as many drugs in affluent neighborhoods
That’s how you feel (anecdotal) it is not backed up by actual statistics (facts).
posted by geeblockNot when u account for the over policing in poor neighborhoods. There are just as many drugs in affluent neighborhoods
I'd have to do more research. I don't think the crime rates are significantly different, although one study I saw showed a per capita difference of 20% a few decades ago vs. about 10% today with respect to violent crimes (which excludes simple drug possession). Another stat I saw was more blacks were killed than whites when proportionality it should be about 1/5.
But as to "over policiing", isn't that what the community often wants? The crime rates - reported crimes, not arrests - are clearly higher in some poor, urban neighborhoods. So you're going to have more police arrests there, more police interactions....in neighborhoods that are disproportionately minority. I'm not sure what is racist about sending police into areas where there is a problem with violent crime. Seems to me it would be racist not to.
posted by like_thatWhat data do you have to support this (note: I am not asking for an op-ed, which seems to be your go to)? In the poorer sections of inner cities there tends to be crime associated with drugs (shootings, stabbings, assaults, etc). This isn't happening in affluent neighborhoods. What do you think is going to attract cops more?
Side note: This is why I say we should legalize all drugs. It would reduce crime, save money, allocate resources properly, and there would be no reason to bitch about disproportionate arrests.
You said crime. Not violent crime. Is there more violent crime in inner cities sure. But are most arrests in inner cities for violent crimes?
posted by geeblockYou said crime. Not violent crime. Is there more violent crime in inner cities sure. But are most arrests in inner cities for violent crimes?
Of course there are. More arrests of all types of crimes.
The question is, if decriminalization would make a big difference, then why aren't these Democrat run cities doing that? One of the most effective things you can do in response to this is decriminalize simple possession. So why aren't these liberal states and cities doing that for anything more than marijuana? Why isn't BLM doing something about that?
posted by geeblockYou said crime. Not violent crime. Is there more violent crime in inner cities sure. But are most arrests in inner cities for violent crimes?
We were talking statistically that African american commit more crimes per capita. Even if you want to focus on the non violent crimes, it's not black and white (no pun intended). Violent crime is related, because it attracts more law enforcement, thus leads to what you believe is "over policing." I don't know the answer to your question, but I am sure there is data for it (violent vs non violent crime). more violent crime = more police activity. More violent crime + more police activity = more enforcing drug laws. The affluent neighborhoods are missing part of that equation. You would have to be pretty naive not to understand that.
I'd like to see what would happen if all drugs were legalized. I bet we would see all of these numbers drop across the board.
posted by gutOf course there are. More arrests of all types of crimes.
The question is, if decriminalization would make a big difference, then why aren't these Democrat run cities doing that? One of the most effective things you can do in response to this is decriminalize simple possession. So why aren't these liberal states and cities doing that for anything more than marijuana? Why isn't BLM doing something about that?
Well, BLM doesn't actually have any teeth, does it? I've always understood organizations like that to be like a microcosm of the UN, where the power is almost exclusively dependent on one's desire to stay in the organization's good graces.
Of course, I argue that the reason Democrat-run cities aren't doing this is about the same as the reason hard-red cities and states still raise taxes. Because while each side talks a good game with its platform, they functionally end up doing basically the same shit.
posted by gutOf course there are. More arrests of all types of crimes.
The question is, if decriminalization would make a big difference, then why aren't these Democrat run cities doing that? One of the most effective things you can do in response to this is decriminalize simple possession. So why aren't these liberal states and cities doing that for anything more than marijuana? Why isn't BLM doing something about that?
Cincinnati City Council just decriminalized possession of up to 100 grams (~3.5 ounces) of cannabis and our police chief has stated he will follow city council's recommendations.
posted by justincredibleCincinnati City Council just decriminalized possession of up to 100 grams (~3.5 ounces) of cannabis and our police chief has stated he will follow city council's recommendations.
Weed is a big one, but it's not the only drug.
I'm telling you, it's the same thing as immigration. Remember Reagan getting burned on immigration? We're talking two issues here that are critical to Dems winning elections. They have no intention of fixing the problem so long as blaming Repubs for it keeps getting them votes. Granted, the Repubs are too stupid to do anything about it, either. Unless the calculus is "Dems don't want to enforce laws or hold people accountable", I don't understand what Repubs gain by sitting on their thumbs.
I would expect most of the country recognizes mass deportation is not a problem. They just want to secure the border and figure out what to do with the people who are already here (it's not tough - amnesty without citizenship).
I also don't think most of the country opposes decriminalization. I think most people recognize the waste and problems created from jailing people for simple possession.
I guess when 80% of the country votes mindlessly you get politicians who are only interested in re-election rather than fixing problems.
posted by gutI guess when 80% of the country votes mindlessly you get politicians who are only interested in re-election rather than fixing problems.
Reminds me of a Moreland quote:
"[...] authority (the right to be believed and obeyed) gives way to power (the ability to force compliance), reason gives way to rhetoric, the speech writer is replaced by the makeup man, and spirited but civil debate in the culture wars is replaced by politically correct special-interest groups who have nothing left but political coercion to enforce their views on others."
posted by O-TrapReminds me of a Moreland quote....
To hear many of them speak honestly and plainly when their political career is over, you realize just how little they think of the voters. Not that our opinion is any higher.
posted by gutTo hear many of them speak honestly and plainly when their political career is over, you realize just how little they think of the voters. Not that our opinion is any higher.
Right. It's hard to admire a politician's honesty when it comes after they no longer have any skin in the game, but it does indeed give us a window into how easy it is to become a politician as long as you're willing to bullshit.
posted by O-TrapRight. It's hard to admire a politician's honesty when it comes after they no longer have any skin in the game, but it does indeed give us a window into how easy it is to become a politician as long as you're willing to bullshit.
The inflammatory hyperbolic rhetoric is what irritates me. Concentration camps?!? That's a long-running bipartisan problem. She needs dick slapped for that comment.
https://twitter.com/wesyang/status/1143837892214743040
This whole twitter thread is a statement on the current stage of progressivism, critical race theory, "kind of reparations" and artwork that is considered harmful.
I'm really starting to think that the whole "remove this from my eyesight because I'm traumatized by it" mentality that is taught to our young people is causing huge fissures in the ability to be mentally and emotionally stable.
