St Louis Rioting

[CAA Flagship]

I ordered another AK and another 1,000 rounds of ammo yesterday. Enjoying the show.

I have an extra room. Come on out. It's like shooting fish in a barrel on my front yard.
Oh, and bring night vision equipment. They only come out at night.

[Grizalltheway]

I haven't heard anyone, black or white, defending the looting aspect of it. Are you saying they shouldn't be exercising their constitutional right to assemble and protest?

People have the right to assemble and protest. However, part of the way the Black community is responding is the looting.

Also, though they have the right to do so, this thing of protesting when they don't even know what the hell happened is over the top as it usually is. The investigation will include the officer's story about what happened, witnesses stories as to what happened, and forensic evidence. For Pete's sake their "side" will even have an extremely biased US Attorney General "investigating." This officer is NOT going to get a fair investigation/ trial. He's going to get nailed if he's guilty and he may very well get nailed if he's not guilty.

There is absolutely no reason for the Black community in that area to be doing what it's doing. Do you think this would be going on if a White guy had been killed under exactly the same circumstances?

Of course not. What we have is the Black community "chip on the shoulder" thing where the whole world is viewed through a "the world is out to get us' prism. It needs to stop.

It won't. But it should.

Try actually reading my post before you respond with an essay that completely misses the point. You claimed that the nation as a whole thinks looting is an acceptable response, when there's no evidence to support that notion. There really isn't.

[FCS PATRIOTS]

removed. not cool

[kalm]

fuck black people!!!

I don't remember that part of Lutheran church.

[CAA Flagship]

fuck black people!!!

Internet tourettes again? OK, I'll play.

LOOT!!!!!

GLASS BLOWING BASTARDS!!!!!!

[93henfan]

fuck black people!!!

Internet tourettes again? OK, I'll play.

LOOT!!!!!

GLASS BLOWING BASTARDS!!!!!!

JEW FLAKES!!!

[JohnStOnge]

Try actually reading my post before you respond with an essay that completely misses the point. You claimed that the nation as a whole thinks looting is an acceptable response, when there's no evidence to support that notion. There really isn't.

I did read your post and, with all due respect, if anybody was missing a point it was you. I did not even mention looting in the post to which you were responding. And I stand by my Statement that the society creates the impression that the way the Black community along with some idiotic Whites joining is generally responding in with them is acceptable. The Black community is making a way bigger deal about that incident than should be made out of it. Actually the whole country is. But the reason it's a big deal to the whole country is because the Black Community went bonkers over it.

Since you mentioned looting: The response facilitates looting. It creates circumstances whereby there is the potential for things like the incident involving the police acting in paramilitary fashion to break things up. NONE of that stuff would be happening if the Black Community hadn't gone bonkers over something it should not have gone bonkers about.

[JohnStOnge]

Try actually reading my post before you respond with an essay that completely misses the point. You claimed that the nation as a whole thinks looting is an acceptable response, when there's no evidence to support that notion. There really isn't.

I did read your post and, with all due respect, if anybody was missing a point it was you. I did not even mention looting in the post to which you were responding. And I stand by my Statement that the society creates the impression that the way the Black community along with some idiotic Whites joining in with them are generally responding is acceptable. There's an undercurrent of a "it's understandable because a cop shot an unarmed Black teenager" mentality. The Black community is making a way bigger deal about that incident than should be made out of it. Actually the whole country is. But the reason it's a big deal to the whole country is because the Black Community went bonkers over it.

Since you mentioned looting: The response facilitates looting. It creates circumstances whereby there is the potential for things like the incident involving the police acting in paramilitary fashion to break things up. NONE of that stuff would be happening if the Black Community hadn't gone bonkers over something it should not have gone bonkers about.

[Ibanez]

fuck black people!!!

Internet tourettes again? OK, I'll play.

LOOT!!!!!

GLASS BLOWING BASTARDS!!!!!!

K-K-Kellogs!

[kalm]

Try actually reading my post before you respond with an essay that completely misses the point. You claimed that the nation as a whole thinks looting is an acceptable response, when there's no evidence to support that notion. There really isn't.

I did read your post and, with all due respect, if anybody was missing a point it was you. I did not even mention looting in the post to which you were responding. And I stand by my Statement that the society creates the impression that the way the Black community along with some idiotic Whites joining is generally responding in with them is acceptable. The Black community is making a way bigger deal about that incident than should be made out of it. Actually the whole country is. But the reason it's a big deal to the whole country is because the Black Community went bonkers over it.

Since you mentioned looting: The response facilitates looting. It creates circumstances whereby there is the potential for things like the incident involving the police acting in paramilitary fashion to break things up. NONE of that stuff would be happening if the Black Community hadn't gone bonkers over something it should not have gone bonkers about.

'And we're supposed to act as though it's acceptable when the Black community reacts the way it's reacting right now in this Ferguson Missouri case. It's NOT acceptable.

'

Everyone can agree that peaceful protesting is acceptable. No one is supporting looting.

[JohnStOnge]

THAT is where you are making the mistake. Don't blame the whole "Black Community".
There were blacks locking arms to protect businesses last night.
There were blacks cleaning up debris in the looted store and in the streets this morning. All voluntary.

Yes. But how many of them are also among those making a big deal out of the situation, gathering to shout slogans, and otherwise participating the atmosphere facilitating the looting and trashing to begin with?

Sure, not every single member of the Black Community is out there doing that. Probably not even majority. But it's very reasonable to describe what's going on as a Black Community response.

[kalm]

THAT is where you are making the mistake. Don't blame the whole "Black Community".
There were blacks locking arms to protect businesses last night.
There were blacks cleaning up debris in the looted store and in the streets this morning. All voluntary.

Yes. But how many of them are also among those making a big deal out of the situation, gathering to shout slogans, and otherwise participating the atmosphere facilitating the looting and trashing to begin with?

Sure, not every single member of the Black Community is out there doing that. Probably not even majority. But it's very reasonable to describe what's going on as a Black Community response.

How dare they shout slogans!

John, "probably not even a majority"? Really? What percentage of the black community do you think is protesting? What percentage do you think is looting/being violent?

[CAA Flagship]

THAT is where you are making the mistake. Don't blame the whole "Black Community".
There were blacks locking arms to protect businesses last night.
There were blacks cleaning up debris in the looted store and in the streets this morning. All voluntary.

Yes. But how many of them are also among those making a big deal out of the situation, gathering to shout slogans, and otherwise participating the atmosphere facilitating the looting and trashing to begin with?

Sure, not every single member of the Black Community is out there doing that. Probably not even majority. But it's very reasonable to describe what's going on as a Black Community response.

JSO, it IS a big deal to unfairly lose your life, if that is what happened. And that is what the community believes happened. Regardless of what a douchebag this kid was. He should have been placed in jail, but not killed, for what he did. If he assaulted the police officer as was reported, he should have been roughly arrested, but not killed.

When people do bad things, they are either one of two types of people:
1. A good person that did a bad thing, or
2. A bad person that did a bad thing.

Brown was one of two of those things because video evidence proves it. Maybe he added to it by blocking traffic deliberately by walking down the middle of the street and assaulting an officer, but the punishment should not be death. The only way a shooting is justified is if, AT THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING, the officer felt his life was in danger. At that point, the assailant puts his life at risk. We will have to see the results from the investigation to determine if that is the case.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, since I mentioned it I went ahead and located the latest table on the perceived race of violent criminal victimization offenders (2008). Maybe you can find a later one. But if you do the basic picture isn't going to change. I've followed these things for years because it has nothing to do with the Criminal Justice system so nobody can come with allegations about how the Criminal Justice system is unfair to Blacks and that's why friggin' something over 40% of people incarcerated in the United States are Black at any given time when Blacks make up about 13% of the population. Here's a link to the table:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus ... cv0840.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't need to list numbers for you. You can look at the table and see for yourself. Another thing is that it's reasonable to think that somewhere around 80% of the crimes listed for any particular category were committed by males of any given racial group. You can kind of gather that by going to the index and clicking on the link referring to perceived gender of offender (index at http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/html/cvu ... ons462.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). And you can use Census Bureau data to figure that Black males are about 6% of the national population.

So you can do some math and ballpark figure that the victims in about 36% of the robberies (offender perceived as male 85.8% of the time), for instance, perceived their attackers as Black Males when Black Males are only 6% of the population. That can't be translated to a rate at which individual Black Males commit robberies because criminals typically victimize on multiple occasions. But just for comparison we can create a "victimization factor" by dividing 33/6 to get 5.7. Go through the same process for White Males and you end up with a "victimization factor" of about 1. In other words, the proportion of incidents in which a robbery victim perceived the attacker as a White Male is equal to the proportion of White Males in the population while the proportion of incidents in which a robbery victim perceived the attacker as a Black Male is 5.7 times the proportion of Black Males in the population.

I suppose one can try to dismiss any observation of differences associated with race as "racism." But it doesn't make the differences any less real. There is absolutely no question, none, that if someone was released from the shackles of political correctness and allowed to do a risk model along the lines of what insurance companies like to do for other things "Black Male" would stand out as associated with a high relative risk of violent crime.

Of course most people don't think in terms of risk models. But their own qualitative observations and commons sense tell them the same thing. You'd have to be a complete idiot or be intensely devoted to not believing the obvious not to recognize it. Unfortunately there are a lot of people intensely devoted to not believing the obvious.

That high relative risk, in turn, means people are going to look at Black Males differently. But you can't legitimately blame them. It's a bit much to ask people to ignore the obvious reality that if you randomly select a Black Male and know nothing else about him you're looking at much higher risk than you are looking at if you randomly select, say, a White Male and know nothing else about him. If you randomly select one White Male and one Black Male while assuming the Black Male is more dangerous you could be wrong. But if you do that a very large number of times and pretty much make it your modus operandi you will be right a WHOLE lot more often than you will be wrong. I'd say it's reasonable to think something like 80 to 90% of the time.

If you know me you know I consider police to be a necessary evil and that the job selects for people that may not be of the most pleasant type. But police do encounter a lot of potentially dangerous situations and asking them to pretend that the obvious risk distribution that is reality does not exist is a bit much. To ask them to act like seeing a White guy means the same thing as seeing a Black guy in terms of what's going to happen over a large number of encounters is asking them to ignore the truth.

[93henfan]

Attention span exceeded.

[kalm]

Attention span exceeded.

This

[CAA Flagship]

BTW, since I mentioned it I went ahead and located the latest table on the perceived race of violent criminal victimization offenders (2008). Maybe you can find a later one. But if you do the basic picture isn't going to change. I've followed these things for years because it has nothing to do with the Criminal Justice system so nobody can come with allegations about how the Criminal Justice system is unfair to Blacks and that's why friggin' something over 40% of people incarcerated in the United States are Black at any given time when Blacks make up about 13% of the population. Here's a link to the table:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus ... cv0840.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't need to list numbers for you. You can look at the table and see for yourself. Another thing is that it's reasonable to think that somewhere around 80% of the crimes listed for any particular category were committed by males of any given racial group. You can kind of gather that by going to the index and clicking on the link referring to perceived gender of offender (index at http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/html/cvu ... ons462.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). And you can use Census Bureau data to figure that Black males are about 6% of the national population.

So you can do some math and ballpark figure that the victims in about 36% of the robberies (offender perceived as male 85.8% of the time), for instance, perceived their attackers as Black Males when Black Males are only 6% of the population. That can't be translated to a rate at which individual Black Males commit robberies because criminals typically victimize on multiple occasions. But just for comparison we can create a "victimization factor" by dividing 33/6 to get 5.7. Go through the same process for White Males and you end up with a "victimization factor" of about 1. In other words, the proportion of incidents in which a robbery victim perceived the attacker as a White Male is equal to the proportion of White Males in the population while the proportion of incidents in which a robbery victim perceived the attacker as a Black Male is 5.7 times the proportion of Black Males in the population.

I suppose one can try to dismiss any observation of differences associated with race as "racism." But it doesn't make the differences any less real. There is absolutely no question, none, that if someone was released from the shackles of political correctness and allowed to do a risk model along the lines of what insurance companies like to do for other things "Black Male" would stand out as associated with a high relative risk of violent crime.

Of course most people don't think in terms of risk models. But their own qualitative observations and commons sense tell them the same thing. You'd have to be a complete idiot or be intensely devoted to not believing the obvious not to recognize it. Unfortunately there are a lot of people intensely devoted to not believing the obvious.

That high relative risk, in turn, means people are going to look at Black Males differently. But you can't legitimately blame them. It's a bit much to ask people to ignore the obvious reality that if you randomly select a Black Male and know nothing else about him you're looking at much higher risk than you are looking at if you randomly select, say, a White Male and know nothing else about him. If you randomly select one White Male and one Black Male while assuming the Black Male is more dangerous you could be wrong. But if you do that a very large number of times and pretty much make it your modus operandi you will be right a WHOLE lot more often than you will be wrong. I'd say it's reasonable to think something like 80 to 90% of the time.

If you know me you know I consider police to be a necessary evil and that the job selects for people that may not be of the most pleasant type. But police do encounter a lot of potentially dangerous situations and asking them to pretend that the obvious risk distribution that is reality does not exist is a bit much. To ask them to act like seeing a White guy means the same thing as seeing a Black guy in terms of what's going to happen over a large number of encounters is asking them to ignore the truth.

JSO, while these may be facts, maybe it isn't race that is the root cause of violent crimes. Maybe it is education level, maybe it is income, maybe it is single-parent upbringing that is causing it. You will probably get the same percentages for each of those categories.
Christ, I sound like WTAG now. I feel dirty. Time to shower and go to church.

[CAA Flagship]

So while destruction of property was held to a minimum last night, one person was shot (not by police) in the neck and is in critical condition. The protestors have his blood on their hands for this one. This is their fault. They insisted on protesting in a dangerous situation.
And he is lucky to still be alive. Because the protestors insisted on not having a military show of police, the police could not get to the victim in a reasonable amount of time so some protestors drove him to the hospital.

[JohnStOnge]

JSO, while these may be facts, maybe it isn't race that is the root cause of violent crimes. Maybe it is education level, maybe it is income, maybe it is single-parent upbringing that is causing it. You will probably get the same percentages for each of those categories.

It could be true that if you considered those other factors in a risk model race would go away as a factor. But even if you could that would not help things as a practical matter if you were looking for a risk model to use in the field because you can't immediately "see" things like income, education level. and single parent upbringing.

That said my bet would be that "race" would remain as a factor if those things were taken into account. I say that because that's the kind of thing I hear in association with other things then when I do have ready access to enough information to take those things into account (I don't have that in this area) I always find that things like socioeconomic status, education level, etc. do not entirely account for racial differences. An example of what I'm talking about is what you've seen me post on standardized test scores. People have this knee jerk response that involves saying the differences are due to poverty and other things. But then when you actually look at it, while things like poverty do account for some of the differences, they don't come anywhere close to accounting for all of them.

You've probably given me something to look into so it's your fault when everybody starts complaining about my long posts on taking environmental factors into account when looking at crime rates.

[JohnStOnge]

Attention span exceeded.

This

Ok. The short version is that data on perceived race of offenders in instances of criminal victimization supports the assertion that racial profiling is rational and that asking police not to recognize that "Black Male" represents a higher relative risk than other race/sex combinations do is asking them to ignore reality. I'd say that if you randomly select a Black Male and a White Male you can be something like 80 to 90% confident that if either of them represents a risk of violent crime while the other does not it's going to be the Black Male that represents the risk.

And if you want to read the back up on that you can go ahead and read the long one.

[BlueHen86]

This

Ok. The short version is that data on perceived race of offenders in instances of criminal victimization supports the assertion that racial profiling is rational and that asking police not to recognize that "Black Male" represents a higher relative risk than other race/sex combinations do is asking them to ignore reality. I'd say that if you randomly select a Black Male and a White Male you can be something like 80 to 90% confident that if either of them represents a risk of violent crime while the other does not it's going to be the Black Male that represents the risk.

And if you want to read the back up on that you can go ahead and read the long one.

Racial profiling isn't the issue here, the officer may have been perfectly within his rights to stop Brown. Especially if he was responding to a report of a crime and saw a man matching the description of the alleged robber.

The issue is that a trained cop (I am assuming that the officer received training) with a gun and a car, shot an unarmed pedestrian teenager. That shouldn't happen, regardless of race.

[kalm]

Ok. The short version is that data on perceived race of offenders in instances of criminal victimization supports the assertion that racial profiling is rational and that asking police not to recognize that "Black Male" represents a higher relative risk than other race/sex combinations do is asking them to ignore reality. I'd say that if you randomly select a Black Male and a White Male you can be something like 80 to 90% confident that if either of them represents a risk of violent crime while the other does not it's going to be the Black Male that represents the risk.

And if you want to read the back up on that you can go ahead and read the long one.

Racial profiling isn't the issue here, the officer may have been perfectly within his rights to stop Brown. Especially if he was responding to a report of a crime and saw a man matching the description of the alleged robber.

The issue is that a trained cop (I am assuming that the officer received training) with a gun and a car, shot an unarmed pedestrian teenager. That shouldn't happen, regardless of race.

The police already confirmed that the officer didn't stop Brown because of the shop lifting. The police also confirmed that he was shot 10 times, most of which occurred at 35 feet.

[Grizalltheway]

Try actually reading my post before you respond with an essay that completely misses the point. You claimed that the nation as a whole thinks looting is an acceptable response, when there's no evidence to support that notion. There really isn't.

I did read your post and, with all due respect, if anybody was missing a point it was you. I did not even mention looting in the post to which you were responding. And I stand by my Statement that the society creates the impression that the way the Black community along with some idiotic Whites joining in with them are generally responding is acceptable. There's an undercurrent of a "it's understandable because a cop shot an unarmed Black teenager" mentality. The Black community is making a way bigger deal about that incident than should be made out of it. Actually the whole country is. But the reason it's a big deal to the whole country is because the Black Community went bonkers over it.

Since you mentioned looting: The response facilitates looting. It creates circumstances whereby there is the potential for things like the incident involving the police acting in paramilitary fashion to break things up. NONE of that stuff would be happening if the Black Community hadn't gone bonkers over something it should not have gone bonkers about.

It's their right as Americans to make a big deal out of it. I realize you don't like it when they get all uppity and try to stand up for themselves, but it's a perfectly acceptable reaction to a seemingly unjustified shooting.

[93henfan]

I did read your post and, with all due respect, if anybody was missing a point it was you. I did not even mention looting in the post to which you were responding. And I stand by my Statement that the society creates the impression that the way the Black community along with some idiotic Whites joining in with them are generally responding is acceptable. There's an undercurrent of a "it's understandable because a cop shot an unarmed Black teenager" mentality. The Black community is making a way bigger deal about that incident than should be made out of it. Actually the whole country is. But the reason it's a big deal to the whole country is because the Black Community went bonkers over it.

Since you mentioned looting: The response facilitates looting. It creates circumstances whereby there is the potential for things like the incident involving the police acting in paramilitary fashion to break things up. NONE of that stuff would be happening if the Black Community hadn't gone bonkers over something it should not have gone bonkers about.

It's their right as Americans to make a big deal out of it. I realize you don't like it when they get all uppity and try to stand up for themselves, but it's a perfectly acceptable reaction to a seemingly unjustified shooting.

But that's a part of the problem. Whites are killed in droves by blacks and there is no rioting and the media ignores it. Nearly every negro that is killed by a white person it turns into a media event of some magnitude. The media just has a throbbing erection for this scenario.

And negroes just eat it up. Whites are never in the clear, no matter how the facts pan out. It's perfectly acceptable for negroes to be racist toward whites in this twisted environment we live in.

Hate to say it, but JSO is about 90% right on this one.

[Col Hogan]

More interesting information coming out...you be the judge...

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168698- ... -shooting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;