Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
What does the above have to do with his claim that the % of black on black crime for the population is similar to the % of white on white crime for their population?
I don't get this. Black on black is over 4 times that of white on white. What is your point?
I thought the op was saying that the vast majority of murders in each population were by people of their own race.
not sure im following your point. Less police use of lethal force is a good thing. Or do you disagree with this?
Sure that is good, but it does not mean they are not negative impacts which are far greater. Cities like Seattle saw an astounding 74 percent spike in murders while several other major cities also experienced a greater than 50 percent spike. You may be saving 50-60 lives per year from police shootings, but at the expense of thousands of more innocent victim's lifes.
Got stats? Also are you saying lethal force is the solution here? Using lethal force will reduce murders? Is that your point?
I don't think it is about leathal force, but it is more likely about a less presence of police. My point is trying to celebrate an improvement in one stat while completely ignoring the bigger picture seems to point to a huge bias in trying to spin the best narrative for a csuse.
I mean the point of that post was one stat. If they weren’t related why wouldn’t you celebrate it? Instead you tried to undermine it. So are you happy to see less lethal force used?
Is more crime a good thing? That is exactly what is happening in major cities now. Commit a crime, let’s diffuse the situation with community policing or a social worker. Where is the deterrent?
No and i didnt say that. But you seem to be again relating this to less lethal force. What does it have to do with @gianmarcos post? Why cant one be good and the other be bad? None of this is going to be fixed over night but cant you at least acknowledge a good thing?
If the end game is less lethal force vs criminals, I guess it’s a good thing. If it’s at the expense of the police doing their jobs legally, I need more convincing. I realize there are very bad cops also, like the one in Minn.
Nuance. Bigger picture. All the factors and facts.
progress. Again, we have to take our wins. Im not saying we are finished. Of course we want less murders, less crime. But the excessive lethal force was a problem and i suspect this will in turn and in time lead to lower crime, better relationships with law enforcement, etc. Im not expecting it all right away. Its just odd that someone shared one point of progress and you try to undermine it.
To me it is odd that people would post something as fact that was originally stated as a question by the authors and also not care at all about any of the other impacts/consequences. Hard for me to not look at both.
who says G or I dont care about the other factors? The response was undermining. Period. Just say hey thats interesting and its some sort of progress(as it is) and keep it moving. Instead the choice was to undermine a study that showed interesting progress.
Undermine? The choice was to say dude you drew a conclusion that not even the author was willing to state and that this is incredibly unencompassing of a much bigger issue.
Ok it’s progress and that is a good thing. Now you can address this. https://blockclubchicago.org/2021/01/20/citys-carjacking-surge-shows-no-sign-of-slowing-so-residents-are-buying-guns/
This reduction is due to a reduction in arrests is what he is saying. (That study acknowledges this)
I think one important data point missing would be reported crimes for the areas involved. It is entirely possible that fewer arrests in these areas are due to what you are saying. It is also important to note that this study was over 5 years not just based on 2020, which undoubtedly had massive increases and we dont fully know why yet.
Question - why do you think there is such a discrepancy in the rates? Why is the black on black rate so much worse?
The two-parent family has been non existant for four generations now in black america. Countless studies about kids being more successful growing up in two parent families are real. Many kids go to gangs for acceptance and that is their family. The libs can spin white priviledge any way they want, but the blacks have to take care of their house.
Why do you think this is the case?
There are a lot of reasons but children from single parent homes (no matter the color) are at a disadvantage. Part of it is society’s acceptance with single parents as they can “have it all” - career, family, independence, and don’t have to be married to achieve it. This is especially true with whites. Teen pregnancy and a corrupt prison system are factors also.
Ok. And i agree with you there but is it single home or single parent involvement?FairWarning said:
This is a very dated article, but nothing has changed. I’m in this town right now. If it wasn’t a big deal, why would the LA Times write about it?
I’m not saying it’s not a big deal. I’m saying it’s not the root issue people think it is to solving issues in black communities. The articles are a few years old but still relevant especially since you referenced going back to the 60s. Historical context is important here. Too many people act like black communities have been playing on a level field since slavery ended. I think we all know that wasn’t true and still isn’t.
Pinky, what do you think is the root issue? Do you think one root issue is >50% of the total issue or is it a collection of primary issues (interested in your top 3-4). Thanks
There has been racism that has kept blacks down, from housing to jobs. It’s still life choices even in their teenage years that matter. I couldn’t imagine that responsibility at 15.
Even assuming this is the main issue, even though we can likely agree there are multiple factors, why aren't the fathers around? Why aren't there role models in black families if we are saying this is the main cause?
One of Pinky’s links above suggested that 75% of the single fathers are around. My BS meter went off at that point.
It shouldn't go off. But even still, why do you think those problems plague the black community assuming it's the main issue (or at least a significant issue)?
In the cases of guys I went to HS with immaturity and teen aged pregnancy is a big reason. One guy I know had 2 kids in HS and another at 19 by 2 different women. At first he thought is was cool. Now at 36 his one son quit school in 10th grade, the other has been in and out of trouble and his daughter just had a baby at 17. This guy is a good guy but is detached from his kids because he said he was not ready to be a father.
Definitely.
Plea deal or potential life in prison? With video of them fire bombing I would think they jump all over a plea deal.
