More "largely peaceful" Portland protests

[*bfine32*]

(10-29-2020, 01:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That is one hell of a red herring.

I don't see how as you stated using race at all is disingenuous.

They BLM is painting the Leo killing issues as Cop v. Black. Would you not agree a bigger issue may be Cop v. Impoverished?

I should have asked are you against BLM I should have asked do you find it disingenuous.

[Belsnickel]

(10-29-2020, 01:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I don't see how as you stated using race at all is disingenuous.

They BLM is painting the Leo killing issues as Cop v. Black. Would you not agree a bigger issue may be Cop v. Impoverished?

I should have asked are you against BLM I should have asked do you find it disingenuous.

From the conversation, it was obvious that my commentary was regarding using race at all in discussing those crime statistics. You then went in a completely different direction with the commentary about BLM. That was a red herring.

[hollodero]

(10-29-2020, 01:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: White guys who always bring up the high crime rate among minorities never mention that 90% of murders in the United Sates are committed by men yet they make up less than half of the population.

So gender is a much stronger indicator of violent criminal behavior than race.  Yet none of these guys ever say that we are all justified in treating men as potential violent criminals

But no one (here) said we are justified to treat all black people as potential violent criminals either.

Also, I find it absolutely worthwhile to discuss male violent behaviour as well. It's just a slightly different topic with different causes.

(10-29-2020, 01:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If special steps need to be taken to address the high crime rate among certain races then what steps should be taken to address the high crime rate among certain genders?

For me, I'd say both things can and probably should be addressed honestly. Eg. it imho would be totally justified to discuss and possibly try to correct certain masculine cultures/patterns/belief systems that might contribute to this 90% number. That could start in schools, in the media, in communities, wherever.
What imho would be the wrong approach is to accuse you of sexism for bringing up that 90% number. Which, imho, is quite akin to what's happening regarding bringing up black homicide rates.

[Mickeypoo]

(10-29-2020, 01:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: White guys who always bring up the high crime rate among minorities never mention that 90% of murders in the United Sates are committed by men yet they make up less than half of the population.

So gender is a much stronger indicator of violent criminal behavior than race.  Yet none of these guys ever say that we are all justified in treating men as potential violent criminals or that police should naturally profile people based on their gender.

If special steps need to be taken to address the high crime rate among certain races then what steps should be taken to address the high crime rate among certain genders?

As far as men vs woman I think that is just biological, genetic and/or evolution.  Traditionally (thousands of years, 10's of thousands of years?) women stayed home, nurtured, fed the kids etc, while man had to go hunt and be the provider and protector.  Men are, not sure of the correct term.......naturally, biologically, genetically? stronger than woman.  Does that give them a tendency to be more violent?  I don't know.

Maybe genetics, evolution or evolution based on geographical location is involved with the black violence and murder problem.  Blacks tend to be dominant in physical type activities and their builds also tend to be stronger and more muscularly defined.  Do those traits also lend to a more violent disposition?  I don't know.  

I have seen far more blacks with great, natural physiques compared to other races.  Just throwing out some different ideas on what might cause men/women, different races to act differently or have different tendencies.

Going with your logic Fred, are you saying that now roughly half of the 13%, let's say 8%, are responsible for 50%+ of all violent crimes/homicides in the USA?

[hollodero]

(10-29-2020, 01:43 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Maybe genetics, evolution or evolution based on geographical location is involved with the black violence and murder problem.  Blacks tend to be dominant in physical type activities and their builds also tend to be stronger and more muscularly defined.  Do those traits also lend to a more violent disposition?  I don't know.  

I don't think a race-specific physique plays any significant part in that. I feel you're taking a wrong turn here.

I'd wager it's for the most part the dire life situations an ubersignificant amount of black people face, quite often due to systemic disadvantage.

[Mickeypoo]

(10-29-2020, 02:03 PM)hollodero Wrote: I don't think a race-specific physique plays any significant part in that. I feel you're taking a wrong turn here.

I'd wager it's for the most part the dire life situations an ubersignificant amount of black people face, quite often due to systemic disadvantage.

You may very well be correct.  

My thought process started off with Fred asking about the men vs woman as far as violence.

[Belsnickel]

(10-29-2020, 01:43 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Maybe genetics, evolution or evolution based on geographical location is involved with the black violence and murder problem.  Blacks tend to be dominant in physical type activities and their builds also tend to be stronger and more muscularly defined.  Do those traits also lend to a more violent disposition?  I don't know.  

(10-29-2020, 02:03 PM)hollodero Wrote: I don't think a race-specific physique plays any significant part in that. I feel you're taking a wrong turn here.

I'd wager it's for the most part the dire life situations an ubersignificant amount of black people face, quite often due to systemic disadvantage.

I missed that bit. Please, don't do the whole genetics and race thing. There is more genetic variation between people of the same race than there is between people of different races. Race is not rooted in genetics so trying to connect traits that are being tied to race to genetics as well is extremely problematic. I'm not accusing anyone of anything because this is something that most people honestly just don't know, but going down that route is what was used to justify early-twentieth century eugenics and white supremacist theories.

[hollodero]

(10-29-2020, 02:19 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: My thought process started off with Fred asking about the men vs woman as far as violence.

Well, I feel this is where you actually should be cautious. I don't mean it in an accusatory way, but starting to link violent behaviour to the genome is a train of thought that actually leads to dangerous territory. 
It's also wrong in its core. It's about society, culture, circumstances, not about the genetics. 

Edit I see Bels posted something similar already, he said it better.

[Mickeypoo]

Sorry all, I was just trying to think of things that could effect different tendencies and I know genetics control different things. Nothing bad intended. Like I said, my thought started off with Fred's question about men vs woman and violence.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-29-2020, 01:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: White guys who always bring up the high crime rate among minorities never mention that 90% of murders in the United Sates are committed by men yet they make up less than half of the population.

So gender is a much stronger indicator of violent criminal behavior than race.  Yet none of these guys ever say that we are all justified in treating men as potential violent criminals or that police should naturally profile people based on their gender.

If special steps need to be taken to address the high crime rate among certain races then what steps should be taken to address the high crime rate among certain genders?

I don't disagree that men disproportionately commit violent crime.  I do find your position interesting considering you've stated the exact same facts in the past as I did in this thread.  Also, it is extremely disingenuous to even insinuate that I stated that the reason for the criminal conduct was a person's ethnicity.  I do not, nor have I ever, think that a person's ethnicity made them more or less prone to criminal conduct.  Consequently we must look into other factors to explain the disproportionate criminal activity in the black community.  But to find out the root causes requires actually acknowledging the problem and starting to delve into it.

Also, no one said that specific steps needed to be taken to address this, so kindly stop misstating the positions of others.  I would certainly hope it's not deliberate

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-29-2020, 01:02 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Using race at all is disingenuous. The stronger correlation to violence is socioeconomic inequality.

Very true.  However it does not explain this entirely, otherwise Native Americans, who have an even higher poverty rate than African Americans would show the same disproportionate rate of criminal conduct.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

I realize this is a touchy subject, but we're all adults here.  Also, no one is using race as a determinant, no one here thinks any ethnicity is genetically predisposed towards criminality. 

[Mickeypoo]

(10-29-2020, 03:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Very true.  However it does not explain this entirely, otherwise Native Americans, who have an even higher poverty rate than African Americans would show the same disproportionate rate of criminal conduct.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

I realize this is a touchy subject, but we're all adults here.  Also, no one is using race as a determinant, no one here thinks any ethnicity is genetically predisposed towards criminality. 

Yes, please don't think that is what I was saying with my comments on genetics.  I absolutely was not.

[Belsnickel]

(10-29-2020, 02:53 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Sorry all, I was just trying to think of things that could effect different tendencies and I know genetics control different things. Nothing bad intended. Like I said, my thought started off with Fred's question about men vs woman and violence.

I know. This is why I approached it as I did. I'm not accusing you of anything, I just kind of cringe a little when race and genetics are tied together like that.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-29-2020, 03:12 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I know. This is why I approached it as I did. I'm not accusing you of anything, I just kind of cringe a little when race and genetics are tied together like that.

Yeah, I saw that and cringed.

Also, I am kicking myself for not bookmarking the website, but we had a really good training on determinant factors and this study found that the biggest single predictor of juvenile criminality (which is the biggest determinant of adult criminality) is a home with no father.  We could probably have hours of discussion about why that's the case, if you take me at my word that is. 

[Mickeypoo]

(10-29-2020, 03:12 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I know. This is why I approached it as I did. I'm not accusing you of anything, I just kind of cringe a little when race and genetics are tied together like that.

Thank you, and I did not think you were accusing me of anything. 

[Mickeypoo]

(10-29-2020, 03:18 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, I saw that and cringed.

Also, I am kicking myself for not bookmarking the website, but we had a really good training on determinant factors and this study found that the biggest single predictor of juvenile criminality (which is the biggest determinant of adult criminality) is a home with no father.  We could probably have hours of discussion about why that's the case, if you take me at my word that is. 

That would be an interesting article and I would certainly believe it. 

I have read multiple times that the fatherless rate in the black community is a huge issue and a major contributor to the problems they face.  It makes sense for sure.

[*bfine32*]

(10-29-2020, 01:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: From the conversation, it was obvious that my commentary was regarding using race at all in discussing those crime statistics. You then went in a completely different direction with the commentary about BLM. That was a red herring.

I suppose we have different definitions for what a red Herring is; as I found it to be quite relevant.

Why should we consider race when talking about Leo versus Civilian, but not Civilian versus Civilian?

it's the whole root of the issue with the BLM movement. Folks are asserting they are being shot simply because of the color of their skin, when the real issue is their environment.

There's a term for using the term BLM when the root problem is not race "something that misleads or distracts"...but that term escapes me right now.

[fredtoast]

(10-29-2020, 04:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: it's the whole root of the issue with the BLM movement. Folks are asserting they are being shot simply because of the color of their skin, when the real issue is their environment.

There's a term for using the term BLM when the root problem is not race

But the perception is that the issue is race.

Again, white people don't understand the perception of the minorities because they have not been the subject of racist policies like racial profiling.

Racial profiling is not based on the environment.  It happens everywhere.  Many of the studies involve traffic stops on highways that have nothing to do with inner city environment.   

There are many stories of wealthy black people being the victims of racial profiling.

The root of the problem is that white people just refuse to acknowledge that minorities are treated differently based on the color of their skin.  We will never be able to address this problem until white people acknowledge this basic fact that has been proven to exist by all types of scientific studies and analysis.

I showed people here proof of the existence of racial profiling for 30 years up to 2017, and you know what their response was?  Unless you can show me some proof of it existing today it no longer exists.

And they wonder what black people are so mad about?

[masterpanthera_t]

I also think in order to have serious conversation about race and crime, we must not end the conversation at "black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime (violent or otherwise, but especially violent)." I don't think this board broaches topics of even if black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime, what percentage of black people actually commit the crimes, and is it fair to take a small percentage of population committing crimes to then apply profiling (conscious/subconscious) to the larger population of that type EDIT: I meant I don't think this board broaches enough into the weeds of this, as IMO, is necessary.

I don't have the stats, and I'm not saying yes or no that the stats bear which way the argument would go, only that unless we bring out those stats, this conversation is not really meaningfully fair. For example, hypothetically if the stats show that while blacks commit 60 % of the crimes, while only being 10 % of the population, but within that, the stats were to show that only 5% of the black population was committing those crimes, then, we need to address if profiling is really applied correctly, or unfairly prejudicially. NOTE: All the numbers were made up and I just wanted to make a hypothetical scenario. I'm not claiming any of these numbers.

[*PhilHos*]

Philly Police Ordered to Not Arrest Looters

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2020/10/29/philly-police-ordered-not-arrest-looters/

Quote:As John pointed out yesterday, the Mayor of Philadelphia imposed a curfew last night in an attempt to quell the ongoing rioting and looting. Shockingly, many of the people who were already in the process of breaking any number of laws didn’t follow his orders and set out to continue the mayhem.

So why would the looters continue emptying the shelves of all the city’s stores after they’d been put on notice by the municipal government? Perhaps it’s because they’d heard that the cops had been ordered not to arrest any looters. Yes… you heard that correctly. The cops were told to simply “disperse” the looters and not take them into custody. This comes from one of the local Fox News reporters who heard it directly from multiple police sources.

Steve Keeley’s wording is significant in a couple of ways. First of all, he’s not just hearing complaints about this order from rank and file officers out on the streets. He’s also hearing carping from police commanders. So who would have the authority to give this sort of a “stand down” order to the entire Philadelphia Police force? The announcement says that it came from “CAR-2” but that’s Melvin Singleton, the Deputy Police Commissioner. Does anyone honestly think the Deputy would issue an order like that on his own?

No, that order had to come from the Commissioner herself, Danielle Outlaw, who we’ve discussed here on many occasions. It had to be either her or Mayor Jim Kenney, possibly a joint decision between the two of them.

As you may recall, Danielle Outlaw took the office of Police Commissioner on a promise to “put an end to the incarceration nation” that we all supposedly live in. She’s been one of the biggest proponents of the “empty the jails” movement in the country. When the pandemic hit, she quickly used that as an excuse to speed up her efforts to put as many convicts back out on the streets as possible.

Oh, and just in case you weren’t aware of her history prior to coming to Philadelphia, do you know where her last gig as Chief of Police was? In Portland, Oregon. It sounds like she was paving the way for the chaos and mayhem in Portland long before she brought those same theories of “law enforcement” to the City of Brotherly Love. You can probably tell how on the ball she is by one comment she gave during yesterday morning’s press conference. She said she “had no idea that 1,000 people would be swarming the Port Richmond area.” Seriously? Have you been watching what’s been going on in the other large cities around the country? This chaos caught you totally off guard?

With all of this history as context, should we really be shocked to learn that she ordered her cops to stand down and not arrest the looters when her new city began going up in flames? Heaven forbid we should put the guy carrying away five flatscreens behind bars for a few hours. Steve Keeley further clarified that all looting was being classified as burglary, and no calls regarding burglary would be responded to during this crisis.

Philadelphia is in a lot of trouble. Violent hoodlums have taken over the streets under the false pretense of protesting the death of Walter Wallace. At least the Governor has sent in the National Guard, but they have thus far been held back in “supporting roles.” The Mayor’s efforts at declaring a curfew are failing. And the police are under the command of someone who sees the idea of arresting criminals as a problem in our society. This might be a good time to flee Philadelphia for a while if you have the means to do so.