6
0

Can anyone find some Democrats willing to debate on patrick.net?


 share                
2022 Nov 10, 3:00pm   19,946 views  730 comments

by Patrick   ➕follow (49)   💰tip ($0.87 in tips)  

I would like to have a very polite debate with some Democrats on patrick.net.

By polite, I mean refraining from attacking the person in either direction, but sticking to points of argument instead. So no "You are a (whatever)" will not be allowed. The only appropriate use of "you" will be "Here you said..."

I just ran into an old guy in a cafe who pointed in the newspaper to the governor results in California, which added up to 110%. I said, "well, that's California" and so he accused me of being an "election denier". I asked if he'd seen "2000 Mules" and he said he hadn't "because it's been debunked". Uh, it's the same people who committed the election fraud who are claiming that "2000 Mules" was debunked.

Nor had he heard what was on Hunter's laptop, since he watches only corporate news.

I think I might have made a dent in his wall of denial, and I'd like to try with others.

« First        Comments 641 - 680 of 730       Last »

641   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 29, 6:39pm  

Onvacation says

Link to poll?


OK I'll link to some polls. First is the most important poll: No one on this site has expressed any comment which deviates from the following opinion set:

Right winger tribe members think:
1) Floyd (Jury was WRONG)
2) Rittenhouse (Jury was RIGHT)
3) Arbury (Jury was WRONG)

But for each case, nationally these cases are very controversial and there is a lot of disagreement. But not a single person on patnet has stated they diverge from this opinion set at all.

Floyd case polls: Both show majority agreement with jury, but with split along political affiliation. (75% agree 25% disagree)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chauvin-verdict-opinion-poll/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/21/chauvin-verdict-poll-majority-approve-guilty-finding/7316788002/

Rittenhouse case polls: About evenly split overall, but also split along political affiliation (43% agree, 39% disagree)
https://morningconsult.com/2021/11/22/rittenhouse-verdict-poll/
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/crime/rittenhouse_trial_most_democrats_think_kenosha_shooter_guilty_others_disagree

Arbury case poll: I cant find as much polling on this one, but here is one, majority agree with jury. (68% agree, 5% disagree)
https://morningconsult.com/2021/11/29/ahmaud-arbery-verdict-poll/

So my question is really, how can it be every single person on this forum agrees with the 25% position on case 1, the 43% position on case 2, and the 5% position on case 3? If they were uncorrelated, only 1 in 186 people would have that opinion set. Yet every single person here on patrick.net has that opinion set.

One of these cases is a self defense case. One of these cases is police use of force case. One of these cases is a question of who is responsible if death occurs during vigilante justice.... So why is there such tight agreement by pat netters on these three cases? Literally not a single person diverges from the party line here. Is there some common underlying value that explains the consensus among patnetters?

How can it be if not tribalism and conformity?
642   Onvacation   2022 Nov 29, 6:43pm  

.Onvacation says


ignorant, willfully or not, of what our little tribe (lol) knows is true

At least until you can provide reasonable evidence, with links, that we are wrong,

Who am I trying to fool, the patnet tribe couldn't even agree upon the best round for cannibal anarchy.
643   Onvacation   2022 Nov 29, 6:53pm  

DeficitHawk says

nationally these cases are very controversial

Our justice system is utterly broken. Our government, especially in democrat controlled cities, is morally bankrupt in the way they keep peace and promote welfare. All three of your "very controversial" cases would never have happened if we were not living through the downfall of American society.
644   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 29, 6:58pm  

Onvacation says


A lot of people are willfully ignorant about Hunter's laptop and the Biden family corruption

OK I took your invitation and did some research on this topic.

It definitely makes for a fun conspiracy theory. BUT, there are a couple of holes in the conspiracy theory that need to get filled with evidence before there is a credible case to be made.

Let me summarize as I understand:

Hunter Biden sat on the board of directors for Burisma for a period of time.
Joe Biden as VP twisted arms to get prosecutor general Viktor Shokin fired during the Poroshenko administration in Ukraine.

Those facts above are undisputed.

Where it gets disputed is whether these two things are related to each other and why Biden got Shokin fired. Here it diverges into 'the official story' and 'the conspiracy theory'.

"The official story": Shokin was a lousy prosecutor, likely corrupt himself, and was not aggressively pursuing anti-corruption cases. Biden had him fired because the Obama administration was pursuing an anti-corruption agenda and wanted a more aggressive, anti-corruption prosecutor general. The case related to Burisma was dormant, and not being actively pursued, and had nothing to do with Hunter or his conduct. Bidens decision to push for Shokin's removal was not at the request of Burisma or Hunter.

"The conspiracy theory": Shokin was aggressively prosecuting a case against Burisma, possibly related to Hunters conduct there. Hunter, (or Burisma through connection established by Hunter) asked Biden to get Shokin removed. Biden acted as a result of this request.

Its a good conspiracy theory. But the trouble is, where the conspiracy theory diverges from the official story, there is no data or evidence to support the conspiracy theory.

In order to build a case you would need these missing pieces of evidence:
1) Evidence that Shokin was aggressively prosecuting the case against Burisma/Hunter
2) Evidence of whatever malfeasance Hunter supposedly did at Burisma
3) Evidence that Hunter (or Burisma through Hunter) asked Biden to get the prosecutor fired.

Without these pieces of evidence, the story really just agrees with the official story, so I cant buy into the conspiracy theory.
645   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 6:58pm  

DeficitHawk says


1) Floyd (Jury was WRONG)


You can see that the jury was wrong. Again, the state with-held evidence. The full body cam video of the arrest was never presented, Floyd's previous arrest where he ALSO overdosed wasn't allowed to be presented, and the coroner's autopsy report was ignored by another autopsy report where the pathologist never even investigated the body.

Our media lies. I'd expect you'd be used to this by now - find that weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq yet?

DeficitHawk says

Floyd case polls: Both show majority agreement with jury, but with split along political affiliation. (75% agree 25% disagree)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chauvin-verdict-opinion-poll/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/21/chauvin-verdict-poll-majority-approve-guilty-finding/7316788002/

Rittenhouse case polls: About evenly split overall, but also split along political affiliation (43% agree, 39% disagree)
https://morningconsult.com/2021/11/22/rittenhouse-verdict-poll/
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/crime/rittenhouse_trial_most_democrats_think_kenosha_shooter_guilty_others_disagree


Haha - all you're doing is demonstrating the level of ignorance in this nation.

Anybody that has a party affiliation at THIS POINT, is just an idiot. Who the fuck cares about "party affiliation"? There's no left versus right, there's just right versus wrong.
646   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 7:02pm  

DeficitHawk says

Let me summarize as I understand:

Hunter Biden sat on the board of directors for Burisma for a period of time.
Joe Biden as VP twisted arms to get prosecutor general Viktor Shokin fired during the Poroshenko administration in Ukraine.

Those facts above are undisputed.

Where it gets disputed is whether these two things are related to each other and why Biden got Shokin fired. Here it diverges into 'the official story' and 'the conspiracy theory'.


You'd think it would warrant an investigation, but instead when there was evidence found through Hunter Biden's laptop, 50 intelligence officials lied, and claimed it was "Russian Propaganda".

I have no faith our intelligence agencies have any credibility at this point. Every one of those 50 intelligence officials, should be fired but they aren't - they're promoted.
647   Onvacation   2022 Nov 29, 7:06pm  

DeficitHawk says

So why is there such tight agreement by pat netters on these three cases?

Because we are rational.

And there was MUCH disagreement and debate about those three cases on this forum. We have mostly moved on to talking about corruption, our war with Russia, and the fact that it seems as though some psychopaths are trying to eliminate 90% of the population and reset the world.
648   mell   2022 Nov 29, 7:08pm  

Onvacation says


DeficitHawk says


So why is there such tight agreement by pat netters on these three cases?

Because we are rational.

And there was MUCH disagreement and debate about those three cases on this forum. We have mostly moved on to talking about corruption, our war with Russia, and the fact that it seems as though some psychopaths are trying to eliminate 90% of the population and reset the world.


That's 100% correct. I believe I said back then if everything confirms the current/immediate mainstream narrative then Chauvin should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Of course that was before the narrative of mostly innocent black man kneeled to death by white supremacist cop completely fell apart and turned into violent drug addled thug pumped chock full with fentanyl suffers cardiac arrest while being arrested
649   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 29, 7:20pm  

Onvacation says

And there was MUCH disagreement and debate about those three cases on this forum


Really? so there was vibrant debate by people who disagreed on these three cases, and over time everyone totally converged to exactly the same opinion on everything through a process of rational debate and consensus finding?

Maybe you could name a few posters who started with different opinions for each case, but eventually became convinced by the rationality and factual of the debate here and converged to the one single Truth? I'd love to discuss with them.
650   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 7:23pm  

Onvacation says


DeficitHawk says


So why is there such tight agreement by pat netters on these three cases?

Because we are rational.


^^ This.

I initially thought Floyd was just some guy that inadvertently had a fake $20 bill who was caught up with an overzealous cop who murdered him. We were told (and still are told) that Floyd didn't resist arrest at all, and although he had some run-ins with the police, he was a good guy trying to fix his life, and committed no crime, at least, purposely. I also thought the pathologist doing the autopsy LIED, initially.

ALL that was false.

Floyd demanded that the $20 bill be accepted, he resisted arrest quite violently, he had been in the same situation before and over-dosed and woke up in the hospital before, his previous criminal activity begs the question why he was even out of prison. I realized I was misinformed and people here, helped me realize I had been lied to. Much of this evidence wasn't provided to the court because the judge was corrupt. Media convicted him, and the judge was too unethical to act like a public servant, and acted like a coward.

See, I have rationality, I CAN change my mind with new information. I try not to be stubborn and to accept my own ignorance in any given situation. This way, I don't end up a dummy for life.

People can come to agreement, PROVIDED they are willing to learn and think.
652   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 29, 9:42pm  

mell says


And there was MUCH disagreement and debate about those three cases on this forum.

Onvacation, I did a bit of research on patnet to look at the history of debate on the Floyd case.

What I found was sort of interesting.

First, if you search "Floyd" you will find random posts going back to 2000... I had no idea patrick.net went back that far... I only started paying attention during the housing bust ~2008 or 2009.

Second, on the initial days after the Floyd news broke, there were several people sympathetic to Floyd, including tenpoundbass and RWSGFY for example.

However as time goes on, and the protests and riots began, peoples opinions changed. Instead of sympathy for Floyd, the prevailing commentary was opposition to BLM and the REACTION to Floyd. I did not see much in the way of debate on the incident itself changing peoples opinions, but rather the galvanization of opinion was occurring due to the chaos and controversy happening on the streets.

I have to wonder... did people really have a debate on whether Floyd death by police officer was right or wrong? or did people have a debate over whether the riots and reactions to the incident were appropriate, and then map their opinions on BLM reactions back to the event itself?

I think the riots and reactions were NOT appropriate. But I still think the death was wrong and the officer did wrong.
653   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 9:50pm  

DeficitHawk says


However as time goes on, and the protests and riots began, peoples opinions changed. Instead of sympathy for Floyd, the prevailing commentary was opposition to BLM and the REACTION to Floyd. I did not see much in the way of debate on the incident itself changing peoples opinions,


You're ignoring evidence which I've already shown you.
654   Hugh_Mongous   2022 Nov 29, 9:59pm  

DeficitHawk says


In order to build a case you would need these missing pieces of evidence:
1) Evidence that Shokin was aggressively prosecuting the case against Burisma/Hunter
2) Evidence of whatever malfeasance Hunter supposedly did at Burisma


The allegation apparently is that Ukrainian government was buying Joe Biden's favor by funneling money to Hunter via his paycheck at Burisma. And what did it get them? Some blankets and medical supplies. The first weapons that showed up were 160 Javelin launchers provided by.... Donald J. Trump. Not to mention that the Burisma owner (Zlochevsky) was a cabinet member in the government of the previous president Yanukovich a.k.a Russian puppet so the idea that he was carrying water for the new pro-independence president is shaky at best. Oh, and Zlochevsky fucking fled the country not long after Yanukovich did. Why would he do that if he was working with the new government to bribe the VP of the US? It's more likely it was Putin, not Poroshenko who was buying Biden's loyalty via employment in a pro-Russian oligarchs' company.
655   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 10:05pm  

Hugh_Mongous says


The allegation apparently is that Ukrainian government was buying Joe Biden's favor by funneling money to Hunter via his paycheck at Burisma. And what did it get them? Some blankets and medical supplies.


It got them money, that wasn't spent on blankets and medical supplies.

"Aid" is a BRIBE.

Ukraine, like the United States, and Russia, is controlled by criminal syndicates. Their "leader" is a puppet of them. The "leaders" are responsible for securing funds and if they can't do it, somebody can easily replace them.
656   Onvacation   2022 Nov 29, 10:07pm  

DeficitHawk says

over time everyone totally converged to exactly the same opinion

You're here and you have a very different opinion than many here. Will your opinion change and match the consensus on some, not all, topics discussed here?

Typically, leftists come here and try to argue against logic and evidence until the cognitive dissonance makes their head explode.
657   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 10:09pm  

Onvacation says


Will your opinion change and match the consensus on some, not all, topics discussed here?


Hopefully his opinion will NOT match the consensus, when he's right.

I am not falling for the "Putler is evil" shit, and I have 8 people very angry with me about that, but I've not been given the information to realize I'm wrong, because I don't think that information exists.

Majority opinion != truth, think we've all come to realize that through this stupid "pandemic".
658   Onvacation   2022 Nov 29, 10:18pm  

DeficitHawk says

I have to wonder... did people really have a debate on whether Floyd death by police officer was right or wrong? or did people have a debate over whether the riots and reactions to the incident were appropriate, and then map their opinions on BLM reactions back to the event itself?

Neither. When the evidence of the Floyd case slowly leaked out the narrative of the brutal police not believing BLM was proven to be propaganda.
659   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 29, 10:50pm  

Onvacation says

Neither. When the evidence of the Floyd case slowly leaked out the narrative of the brutal police not believing BLM was proven to be propaganda.

Thats not the conclusion I reached when I read the old threads, but if you have one in mind, can you point me to it?
660   richwicks   2022 Nov 29, 10:54pm  

DeficitHawk says


Thats not the conclusion I reached when I read the old threads, but if you have one in mind, can you point me to it?


They have already been pointed out to you.

https://patrick.net/comment?comment_id=1902374

Ignorance is self imposed in this day and age.
661   AmericanKulak   2022 Nov 30, 12:25am  

Onvacation says


Neither. When the evidence of the Floyd case slowly leaked out the narrative of the brutal police not believing BLM was proven to be propaganda.

The numbers before the BLM riots don't support the widely held liberal contention that the police are racially violent, either. In actuality, after adjusted for population, White Males are the most likely victim of police shootings, not Blacks. Despite Blacks being disproportionally involved in violent crime at massively disproportionate rates to other ethnic groups.

And, I looked for it recently but haven't found it, Blacks are more racist than any other Group in America, having a more negative view of every single other group: Asians, Whites, Jews, and actually non-American Africans, as well as Homosexuals and Trannies. None of this is a surprise to anybody who went to school/lived with urban Blacks for any length of time.
662   Onvacation   2022 Nov 30, 5:59am  

DeficitHawk says

Thats not the conclusion I reached when I read the old threads

What conclusion did you reach?
664   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 8:24pm  

Patrick says






Oh come on Patrick... you know this type of cherry picking is disingenuous.

You can look for pictures of BLM protests that are peaceful, and you can look for ones that are violent, and you will find both. You can look for Trump protesters at the capitol that are peaceful and you can look for ones that are violent, and you will find both.

I think you are trying to use cherry picking to support a mantra of "only the left is violent" but we both know cherry picked data is not a valid way to make a point. Shame on you for using this logical fallacy, you know better.

(I am amused by the captions though.)
665   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 8:29pm  

AmericanKulak says

The numbers before the BLM riots don't support the widely held liberal contention that the police are racially violent, either. In actuality, after adjusted for population, White Males are the most likely victim of police shootings, not Blacks. Despite Blacks being disproportionally involved in violent crime at massively disproportionate rates to other ethnic groups.


Yeah, I think what you are saying is true. If you look at FBI data for violent crimes, Id say incidents of police shootings by race run approximately in proportion to violent crimes committed by race... and a logical leap may suggest that officer involved shooting incidents are proportional to police contacts with violent individuals.

I'll look for the link i've used for this type of analysis...
666   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 8:41pm  

Here's a link, though the formatting has changed since I last looked at this site, and the various types of crimes have to be searched independently.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls

DeficitHawk says

White Males are the most likely victim of police shootings, not Blacks.


This statement is ambiguous, and can be interpreted incorrectly. It is true to say that most police shootings (absolute numbers) are white males. But any individual white male is NOT more likely to be a victim of a police shooting. Individual black males are MORE likely to be victims of police shootings than individual white males.
667   Patrick   2022 Nov 30, 9:14pm  

DeficitHawk says

Oh come on Patrick... you know this type of cherry picking is disingenuous.


Woah, I have to say I think you are no longer even remotely connected to reality @DeficitHawk

BLM is profoundly and repeatedly violent. There were some non-violent BLM protests, but that was against their ethos, which praises violence. Their symbol is a fist.

The Capitol protestors were led in by FBI agent, someone unlocked the doors to let them in, and they were cheerful and not beating up anybody, much less burning anything or murdering people. The Capitol police murdered one of them for no particular reason. Want to see the video?

I no longer believe you are arguing in good faith at all.
668   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 9:30pm  

Patrick says

they were cheerful and not beating up anybody

Sure, Patrick. They were all totally calm and orderly, following police instructions, chipper and friendly as can be.... just like you say. Your characterization is accurate, there were no exceptions. I am disconnected from reality.









669   mell   2022 Nov 30, 9:40pm  

DeficitHawk says


Patrick says


they were cheerful and not beating up anybody

Sure, Patrick. They were all totally calm and orderly, following police instructions, chipper and friendly as can be.... just like you say. Your characterization is accurate, there were no exceptions. I am disconnected from reality.








Rather than regurgitating staged (set up to look as bad as possible and even that didn't succeed as there is hardly any violence depicted in them) pictures you should ask yourself how many were seriously injured on Jan 6? 1 person, Ashli Babbit (unarmed woman) who was shamelessly murdered by a capitol police goon. There were no other deaths or serious injuries. Now compare that to blm. Math never lies, it just is. You don't have to be a "fan" of the Jan 6 protests to quickly.see this was just theater, i.e. police/fib encouraged/facilitated trespassing.
670   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 10:06pm  

mell says


staged

Staged? You think the images/videos were staged? they were broadcast live... how could it be staged?

mell says


how many were seriously injured on Jan 6?

114 officers reported injuries resulting from the incident, though I do not know the severity of each:
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104829.pdf

mell says


Ashli Babbit (unarmed woman) who was shamelessly murdered by a capitol police goon

She was trying to climb through a barricaded door onto the other side which was defended by armed officers, through a window broken by the crowds, I've seen that video. sad she died, but what the hell was she thinking? What the hell were any of them thinking?

mell says


police goon

Really? when they shoot your tribe suddenly the cop is a goon and its fine to riot?

Total hypocrisy. Everyone here is on crazy pills!!!
671   mell   2022 Nov 30, 10:20pm  

DeficitHawk says


mell says


staged

Staged? You think the images/videos were staged? they were broadcast live... how could it be staged?

mell says


how many were seriously injured on Jan 6?

114 officers reported injuries resulting from the incident, though I do not know the severity of each:
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104829.pdf

mell says


Ashli Babbit (unarmed woman) who was shamelessly murdered by a capitol police goon

She was trying to climb through a barricaded door onto the other side which was defended by armed officers, through a window broken by the crowds, I've seen that video. s...


I explained it to you. The event was staged (encouraging trespassing and other crimes through fib informants/glowies such as ray epps) to get a couple of pictures of tresspassers that look remotely like a riot, but even those fail. In fact you can hardly distinguish those from the Chinese currently protesting their oppressive government. Compare pushing against government/police barricades to blm, were private businesses, cars and buildings were looted, burned and plenty of people murdered. And comparing an unarmed protesting woman to a strong, armed, mass-criminal, repeat offending violent drug addled thug is just disingenuous. They even tried to exploit the unrelated death of an officer days after to connect to Jan 6 because there were zero moderate to severe injuries besides those that happen as part of daily policec work.
672   PeopleUnited   2022 Nov 30, 10:24pm  

DeficitHawk says

Individual black males are MORE likely to be victims of police shootings than individual white males.

Are individual white males less likely to be involved in/associates/colleagues with criminals or more
likely to be criminals than individual black males?
673   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 10:25pm  

mell says

Compare pushing against government barricades to blm

I am not making this comparison. I am not defending violent protests from either side. I am not defending vandalism, arson, or any of the other violence or property damage stuff that happened in BLM protests. I am totally opposed to it and think its wrong.

That's my point... You are criticizing violent behavior of one side but defending violent behavior of the other. Thats why you are being hypocritical.

I am NOT doing that.
674   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 10:29pm  

PeopleUnited says


Are individual white males less likely to be involved in/associates/colleagues with criminals or more
likely to be criminals than individual black males?

I dont know about associates/colleagues, but for violent crimes committed, yes, I linked the FBI crime rates by race above. My overall take is that officer involved shootings are roughly proportional to the rate of police encounters with individuals involved in violent crime.

This does NOT agree with the left's position that cops are racist and prefer to shoot black people.

Its closer to saying cops do NOT have a preference for which race they shoot, but a certain fraction of interactions with individuals involved in violent crime result in an officer involved shooting regardless of race.
675   mell   2022 Nov 30, 10:35pm  

DeficitHawk says

mell says


Compare pushing against government barricades to blm

I am not making this comparison. I am not defending violent protests from either side. I am not defending vandalism, arson, or any of the other violence or property damage stuff that happened in BLM protests. I am totally opposed to it and think its wrong.

That's my point... You are criticizing violent behavior of one side but defending violent behavior of the other. Thats why you are being hypocritical.

I am NOT doing that.

I am not defending trespassing, but nothing more happened. No justification to murder somebody who poses no threat to police. Even Floyd, who posed a threat to police and everyone else, was treated better. If Chauvin had shot Floyd point blank at the stop like the goon did to Babbit, then he would have deserved a trial and prison time. How about arresting her?
676   richwicks   2022 Nov 30, 10:42pm  

DeficitHawk says


You can look for pictures of BLM protests that are peaceful, and you can look for ones that are violent, and you will find both.


I saw BLM protests in both San Jose and Oakland, NEITHER were peaceful.

Show me one that was. Name it. I will look it up, and I won't restrict myself to Google, Facebook, or Twitter, which would just delete it.

DeficitHawk says


I think you are trying to use cherry picking to support a mantra of "only the left is violent"


Show us an example of when the right has been violent. Name some place where they started fires and looted stores - name the protest.

Media simply ignores the riots for the most part. I've seen it first hand, and they ignore BLM and Antifa violence, because, the government fully supports Antifa and BLM.

More than 40 people were MURDERED in BLM and Antifa protests - name one person that was prosecuted.
677   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 10:43pm  

mell says


I am not defending trespassing, but nothing more happened


IF you insist on wearing patnet conformity blinders, i can not help you. I showed you the pictures. I linked the report of 114 injured officers. If you do not think there was any violence, I just dont think you are being honest with yourself.

Do you think they were giving this guy a back massage? Is that why he is lying on the ground?

678   PeopleUnited   2022 Nov 30, 10:44pm  

DeficitHawk says


PeopleUnited says


Are individual white males less likely to be involved in/associates/colleagues with criminals or more
likely to be criminals than individual black males?

I dont know about associates/colleagues, but for violent crimes committed, yes, I linked the FBI crime rates by race above. My overall take is that officer involved shootings are roughly proportional to the rate of police encounters with individuals involved in violent crime.

This does NOT agree with the left's position that cops are racist and prefer to shoot black people.

Its closer to saying cops do NOT have a preference for which race they shoot, but a certain fraction of interactions with individuals involved in violent crime result in an officer involved shooting regardless of race.



Well said, however I think any type of crime increases an individuals risk of exposure to increased interaction with police. And police are more likely to shoot you when you are interacting with them, and if they believe you are a criminal (including non violent crimes like driving while high etc....) so the moral of the story is do less crime, get shot less often by police. Also, running from police, trying to avoid or resist arrest, those also increase your risk of being shot by police. So don’t do that either. And avoid drugs in general, police view drug users and sellers as criminals, and potentially dangerous.
679   richwicks   2022 Nov 30, 10:48pm  

DeficitHawk says


mell says


staged

Staged? You think the images/videos were staged? they were broadcast live... how could it be staged?



Here's how:


original link

That's Ray Epps.

HE hasn't been arrested, because he's part of the FIB - he's an agent provocateur. HIS job was to incite violence and lawlessness. His job was to entrap people. He's an unconvicted felon.
680   DeficitHawk   2022 Nov 30, 10:57pm  

PeopleUnited says


And police are more likely to shoot you when you are interacting with them, and if they believe you are a criminal (including non violent crimes like driving while high etc....)

Yeah. I have no data on how often shootings happen durring arrests for violent crime vs. non violent crimes.

I do make an ASSUMPTION that officers feel more threat to themselves if they think they are dealing with a violent person, and are more likely to draw their weapon and defend themselves if they feel threatened. That assumption is purely based on how I think I would feel, not data.

There are also a lot of officer involved shootings that start out with a mental health crisis where the officer is there because the person is acting out and then the situation escalates. Not all officer involved shootings involve a rational criminal resisting arrest.

« First        Comments 641 - 680 of 730       Last »

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions