Trump

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I know it's just one example but when I switched from just purchasing a policy outright and moved to the ACA I saved about $200 per month. Same coverage and provider, no subsidy. I might be the only person that benefitted, but I doubt it.

There are countless types of scenarios people have faced regarding ACA. You may have benefited. You are definitely not unique. But you are also not a majority group.

Anyone who says ACA was bad for everyone is lying.
Anyone who says ACA was good for everyone is lying.

(not claiming you are saying either. Just making a point)

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I wish this were so, but I do not agree.

How do you disagree?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

The statistics show that black people are much more likely to get shot by cops than white people.

and I think @wufan:'s point is that intersectionality often gets used (misused?) by the left to make false claims of racism against good cops where the evidence shows that a specific shooting was justified.

The right needs to be more open to the idea that racism is still around and needs dealt with. Unfortunately, the left does stupid things all the time that push people on the right into believing most racism claims are fabricated. In this regard, the left can be its own worst enemy some times.

[pinstripers]

How do you disagree?

I do not think there are MANY.

[jdshock]

and I think @wufan's point is that intersectionality often gets used (misused?) by the left to make false claims of racism against good cops where the evidence shows that a specific shooting was justified.

The right needs to be more open to the idea that racism is still around and needs dealt with. Unfortunately, the left does stupid things all the time that push people on the right into believing most racism claims are fabricated. In this regard, the left can be its own worst enemy some times.

Again, I agree wholeheartedly. But intersectionality is not what should be thrown under the bus. Naive and immature liberals are the problem.

A liberal that says "white cops oppress black people" is not relying on intersectionality in any way. My stance is that that is not what the theory means.

[shockfan89_]

The statistics show that black people are much more likely to get shot by cops than white people.

Actually that isn't totally true. Police kill more than twice as many white people as black people annually. As a percentage of the population, black people are shot by police 2 1/2 times more than white people. But when factoring in the number of police interactions and race as a percentage of the population, black people are shot by cops at the same rate as white people. Statistics show that black people have more interactions with police due to the amount of violent crime committed as a percentage of the population, but are no more likely to be shot by police than white people.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I do not think there are MANY.

Ahhh.

Many amongst those vocal in politics? Maybe not. But I still think there are many reasonable folks with political opinions, but a lot of them stay rather quiet on politics because they don't want to get pulled into the garbage that the Ann Coulters and Elizabeth Warrens have made it.

[shockmonster]

and I think @wufan:'s point is that intersectionality often gets used (misused?) by the left to make false claims of racism against good cops where the evidence shows that a specific shooting was justified.

The right needs to be more open to the idea that racism is still around and needs dealt with. Unfortunately, the left does stupid things all the time that push people on the right into believing most racism claims are fabricated. In this regard, the left can be its own worst enemy some times.

I am open to racism being something under the surface that cannot be totally controlled or easily defined. In other words, I'm open to racism being a fact just because another person cannot totally "walk in a person of another race' moccasins". However, the problem is that when "racism" is cried out at events that are not obvious racism, then when racism really occurs, no one reacts, or takes it seriously, because the very word "racism" has lost it's importance ("meaning"). One needs to save racism for when it is an obvious act and at this time, the term "racist" and "institutional racism" are terms that are being totally overused and not saved for overt acts that all good people can come together and defeat that act.

An example is Ferguson Mo. There is no evidence in the Michael Brown shooting, that the policeman shot him because of a racist act. The facts show that Michael Brown was a "thug" or at least a kid with a minor criminal background at the least. The evidence showed that Brown and the policeman scuffled, and during the scuffle, the gun discharged, killing Brown. There were mistakes made (like leaving the body on the ground for a longer period than necessary-but not racism), but the findings of the Justice Department investigation basically accused Ferguson of "institutional racism". Ferguson had hired many more white policemen that black policemen. From that incident, the quote "HANDS UP, DON'T SHOOT" was placed into our vernacular for all racist incidents.

Another related example: BLM is a group that has some reasons to exist. There have been some police shootings that have not been good shootings. Some of them may even be racist shootings. However, it is difficult to prove racism because some white people are also shot by the police, who are bad shootings, so just a white or black policeman shoot a black person, it is not always because of race. BLM's responses are racist comments like "Pigs in a Blanket", calling for shooting cops, or "Hands up, don't shoot". Sometimes, BLM now holds BLACKS ONLY rallies, because they don't want whites in their movement, or at one BLM rally, whites had to "stand in the back".

3rd Example: Look up a Professor at Essex College in New Jersey named Durden. She came on Tucker Carlson's show to defend a Blacks only rally for BLM. She went into a racist rant on Fox, berating ALL white people. In this case, she was fired from her job at the college for her racist comments. In conclusion, there are a majority of white people and black people who have good motives, and SHARE the same values on racism, but when RACISM and FASCISM rants are cried when they aren't warranted, the two groups, can't get together.

[jdshock]

Actually that isn't totally true. Police kill more than twice as many white people as black people annually.

My sentence stated "much more likely," which has to do with percentage of the population.

As a percentage of the population, black people are shot by police 2 1/2 times more than white people.

Correct. This is why my sentence is true.

But when factoring in the number of police interactions and race as a percentage of the population, black people are shot by cops at the same rate as white people.

1. That is an alternate measure. My statement was just that a black person is more likely to get shot by a cop than a white person. You are proposing an alternative metric which is the rate at which a person gets shot by a police officer per interaction with police officers. I think this is a bad metric. Assume many cops are racist, and that is why black people are being shot at a higher rate than white people. In this scenario, the cops would also be more likely to pull over or stop a black person for racist reasons as opposed to justified reasons. This would dilute the denominator of your ratio.
2. I'd still be interested in seeing a source that states the rate per stop is identical.

Statistics show that black people have more interactions with police due to the amount of violent crime committed as a percentage of the population

Police shootings appear not to be correlated with violent crime: https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/

but are no more likely to be shot by police than white people.

Yes, per your own statistic, a black person is 2 1/2 times more likely to be shot by a police officer than a white person. Period.

Additionally, new studies come out constantly on this topic. Newest one that came out is very interesting: http://news.stanford.edu/2017/06/05/...unity-members/

[WuShock16]

I am open to racism being something under the surface that cannot be totally controlled or easily defined. In other words, I'm open to racism being a fact just because another person cannot totally "walk in a person of another race' moccasins". However, the problem is that when "racism" is cried out at events that are not obvious racism, then when racism really occurs, no one reacts, or takes it seriously, because the very word "racism" has lost it's importance ("meaning"). One needs to save racism for when it is an obvious act and at this time, the term "racist" and "institutional racism" are terms that are being totally overused and not saved for overt acts that all good people can come together and defeat that act.

An example is Ferguson Mo. There is no evidence in the Michael Brown shooting, that the policeman shot him because of a racist act. The facts show that Michael Brown was a "thug" or at least a kid with a minor criminal background at the least. The evidence showed that Brown and the policeman scuffled, and during the scuffle, the gun discharged, killing Brown. There were mistakes made (like leaving the body on the ground for a longer period than necessary-but not racism), but the findings of the Justice Department investigation basically accused Ferguson of "institutional racism". Ferguson had hired many more white policemen that black policemen. From that incident, the quote "HANDS UP, DON'T SHOOT" was placed into our vernacular for all racist incidents.

Another related example: BLM is a group that has some reasons to exist. There have been some police shootings that have not been good shootings. Some of them may even be racist shootings. However, it is difficult to prove racism because some white people are also shot by the police, who are bad shootings, so just a white or black policeman shoot a black person, it is not always because of race. BLM's responses are racist comments like "Pigs in a Blanket", calling for shooting cops, or "Hands up, don't shoot". Sometimes, BLM now holds BLACKS ONLY rallies, because they don't want whites in their movement, or at one BLM rally, whites had to "stand in the back".

3rd Example: Look up a Professor at Essex College in New Jersey named Durden. She came on Tucker Carlson's show to defend a Blacks only rally for BLM. She went into a racist rant on Fox, berating ALL white people. In this case, she was fired from her job at the college for her racist comments. In conclusion, there are a majority of white people and black people who have good motives, and SHARE the same values on racism, but when RACISM and FASCISM rants are cried when they aren't warranted, the two groups, can't get together.

Not sure if this is another example of what you are trying to say, but one that bothered me was when the "BLM protest" here in Wichita turned into a cookout with police and community. Actual dialogue was happening, which is a good productive step.

So what does the official BLM group do? "This is not what we do." They could have said that while it was not one of their sanctioned events, it was a step in bringing positive energy to the community. However, they absolutely dismissed it. It was at that point that I was pretty much done with giving any sympathy towards that particular group.

[shockmonster]

Not sure if this is another example of what you are trying to say, but one that bothered me was when the "BLM protest" here in Wichita turned into a cookout with police and community. Actual dialogue was happening, which is a good productive step.

So what does the official BLM group do? "This is not what we do." They could have said that while it was not one of their sanctioned events, it was a step in bringing positive energy to the community. However, they absolutely dismissed it. It was at that point that I was pretty much done with giving any sympathy towards that particular group.

Yes at least it is related. Racism can be difficult to define because everyone has their own perspective of it. Intersectionalism basically creates a victim group and ultimately, gets in the way of finding solutions to racism and the way out of a cycle.

[shockfan89_]

1. That is an alternate measure. My statement was just that a black person is more likely to get shot by a cop than a white person. You are proposing an alternative metric which is the rate at which a person gets shot by a police officer per interaction with police officers. I think this is a bad metric. Assume many cops are racist, and that is why black people are being shot at a higher rate than white people. In this scenario, the cops would also be more likely to pull over or stop a black person for racist reasons as opposed to justified reasons. This would dilute the denominator of your ratio.
2. I'd still be interested in seeing a source that states the rate per stop is identical.

Police shootings appear not to be correlated with violent crime.

It's not an alternate metric. Police shootings correlate to interactions (namely armed interactions) with police. The more interactions you have (regardless of your race), the more your chance of being shot by police increases. The fact that black Americans make up less than 15% of the population but commit 50% of the murders and over 55% of robberies has much more to do with how often they interact with police and how often they are shot by police than their race.

So while it is true that a black person is 2 1/2 times more likely to be shot by a police officer than a white person (there is no period), it is also true that a black person is much more likely to have more encounters with police due to the disproportional amount of crimes committed by black people.

The rate per stop is not identical. Black people are stopped way more (percentage wise) than any other race. The problem is that same race is committing a vastly disproportional amount of violent crime. So are they being stopped because they are committing crimes or being stopped because of their race? You can make a statistical argument that based on the number of white people in the US and based on the number of violent crimes committed by white people, that police shootings are more racist against white people than black people. Again, statistically speaking. And I know you can't use just homicides, but a black person is 6 times as likely to commit homicide as a white person, but is only 2 1/2 times more likely to be shot by police.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Yes, per your own statistic, a black person is 2 1/2 times more likely to be shot by a police officer than a white person. Period.

But clearly this distinction matters greatly. Are the interactions more dangerous, or are they simply more numerous? Either way, there might be a problem, but they would be totally different problems.

If the numbers say that "blacks get shot at a higher rate than whites, per interaction", then yes, the problem is likely cops with a preconceived notion that blacks are more dangerous, and thus, a little quicker trigger finger any time a black person is involved.

If the numbers say this is purely a "more interactions, more shootings" issue, then the argument the left is always making about how fearful blacks are (and supposedly should) be when they get pulled over is baseless. Given these numbers, once pulled over, a black or white person has the EXACT SAME statistical chance of being shot.

I'm not claiming to have any special insight on what the actual statistics are. I'm happy to read new statistics as they become available. I'm just saying that these two different baselines lead to significantly different conclusions. If the stats say this is an interactions issue, maybe we need to evaluate why blacks have more interactions, and whether there is some racism leading to a higher interaction rate. However, in that case, all the screaming from the left about how cops "shot him because he was black... wouldn't if he were white" would not be backed by the numbers.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

To be more concise:

If we look at all the traffic stops of blacks, and all the stops of whites, and pull 1 million random samples from each pool, and if each sample comes back with an equal number of folks getting shot by police (which is a stat some here are claiming to be true), then the left has been wildly missing the mark with much of their protesting in recent years, and blacks should not feel any less safe than whites when they see the flashing lights behind them.

[jdmee]

Police shootings appear not to be correlated with violent crime: https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/

You probably are aware but your source is very slanted. A person who gets into a fight with a police officer, kicks and beats them, runs away, hears the police officer getting up and starts to run back towards the officer and is then shot and killed according to your source is not considered Armed and Violent. A person who runs into a house grabs a BB gun runs out of the house pointing the gun at the cops and was shot and killed, Not armed and Violent.

A victim was coded as Unarmed in the database if they were one or more of the following:
•not holding any objects or weapons when killed
•holding household/personal items that were not used to attack others (cellphone, video game controller, cane, etc.)
•holding a toy weapon (BB gun, pellet gun, air rifle, toy sword)
•an innocent bystander or hostage killed
•a pedestrian or motorist accidentally hit by a police car or passengers in a vehicle chased by police with no weapon on them
•drivers or passengers accidentally hit by a police car
•a person who dies in police custody after a police use of force or police neglect of their medical needs
•alleged to be armed by the police, but multiple independent witnesses maintain the person was unarmed, video evidence shows that the person was unarmed, and/or circumstances indicate it was physically impossible for that person to be armed (i.e. claiming a person shot themselves with their own gun while handcuffed and under surveillance in police custody after being searched for weapons)