Off Topic - ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP - Forum

" ScrotieMcB wrote: " Turtledove wrote: " we find that black drivers comprise a smaller proportion of drivers stopped after sunset, which is suggestive of racial bias in stop decisions. Not really. Here is a sound logic chain for that conclusion: Premise 1: The ratio of black drivers — pulled over or not — to nonblack drivers stopped before sunset is equal to or less than the ratio of black drivers to nonblack drivers after sunset. Premise 2: The rate of suspicious behavior (that is, to actually warrant pulling over) on the part of black drivers before sunset is equal to or less than the rate of suspicious behavior of black drivers after sunset. Premise 3: The rate of pulling over black drivers relative to nonblack drivers before sunset is greater than the rate of pulling them over after sunset. Therefore: the motive behind pulling over the black drivers before sunset is partially motivated by racism. You need all 3 premises to really prove it; I'd consider 2 out of 3 suggestive. 1 out of 3 is just a situation with no particular inquiry into the cause. As it stands, you're only citing evidence of one premise. Here's one possible non-racist explanation: let's imagine that black people in this area are more likely to drive cars with expired registration. Drivers of cars with expired registration are less likely to be pulled over at night, so a greater percentage of black drivers would be pulled over during daylight hours. If I was some kind of peace officer with authority (e.g. judge, police chief) and you came to me with only evidence of premise 3, I'd advise you to collect evidence of premise 1 — which would be simple enough, it's just a random sampling of drivers over different time periods — and dismiss you. If you then came with evidence of premises 1 and 3, I'd say that would merit an investigation, but not yet be proof of guilt. Bottom line is that Boem "remembered"the exact opposite of what the statistical analysis bore out. The quoted piece said, " which is suggestive of racial bias in stop decisions. I will assert that race is a more likely explanation than the possibilities that you suggested. Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!	Posted by Turtledove on Apr 26, 2019, 10:24:48 PM Quote this Post
" Turtledove wrote: I will assert that race is a more likely explanation than the possibilities that you suggested. A. An accusation of racism is a serious thing, a stigma worthy of ruining a person's career, marriage and social life, and therefore accusations should only be made when supremely confident of guilt — not merely "more likely than" alternative explanations. B. Someone who is racist isn't necessarily a bad person overall, therefore it is okay to casually call someone a racist because it's not like they'll get fired or get divorced or anything. Choose only one. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Apr 26, 2019, 10:40:23 PM	Posted by ScrotieMcB on Apr 26, 2019, 10:31:14 PM Quote this Post
" ScrotieMcB wrote: " Turtledove wrote: I will assert that race is a more likely explanation than the possibilities that you suggested. A. An accusation of racism is a serious thing, a stigma worthy of ruining a person's career, marriage and social life, and therefore accusations should only be made when supremely confident of guilt — not merely "more likely than" alternative explanations. B. Someone who is racist isn't necessarily a bad person overall, therefore it is okay to casually call someone a racist because it's not like they'll get fired or get divorced or anything. Choose only one. IIRC this was a study of some 100 million police stops. I'll guess that works out to be hundreds of thousands of police officers. It is not reasonable to try to identify individual officers from such a study. I'm not labeling anyone racist? Police racial profiling does not automatically mean that the police officer that does that racial profiling is a racist. Even labeling someone with a racial bias does not necessarily mean an evil racist either, at least not in my mind. I have to assume that I'm not properly understanding your point but your concern seems irrelevant to the study as well as irrelevant to my comments on the study. Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!	Posted by Turtledove on Apr 26, 2019, 11:08:22 PM Quote this Post
" Turtledove wrote: " Boem wrote: " faerwin wrote: The only? no. But it is a big one. It might also be drilled into officers that blacks are much more dangerous and as such a non-racist is more prone to shoot a black than not due to racist protocols/trainers. It's more complex than simply "cops are all racist" but denying that racism is a part of the problem is ridiculous. That's hardly what you stated previously and all of a sudden it's being "drilled into people". So what if my counter-argument is "gang culture indoctrinates youth to not comply with authority on the street and view them as enemys"? And what if i told you statements like "cops are racist's" is doing the same thing, polarize normal people and cops. And what about black cops shooting black perpetrators? Are they racists? Have you seen the discussions on cop applications drops ever since the "racist cops" movement started? What do you think happens to crime in general when a station is understaffed. Did you know that more black lives have been lost since the "racism bias" concept was introduced? Since cops are no longer pro-actively policing black neighbourhoods out of fear of being judged bigots or having to cope with consequences of such a label. (concept was introduced in 2015, black homicide rates have risen in inner-city's, if i remember correctly chicago has a 73% increase, unprecedented) Keep beating the drum, but realise your forcing people in a camp against cops by doing it and at the same time hollowing out the usage of the word "racist" by stigmatizing entire groups of people under that label. Carry on, i hope you realize or at least contemplate the consequences though. Peace, -Boem- Cops are sometimes racist. More or less than the population as a whole, I don't know. My old neighbor of 25 years was black. (I'm white.) In those 25 years I never got stopped by the police once in our neighborhood. He got stopped and harassed at least a dozen times in our neighborhood. None of those times did he get a ticket or anything. It was just racial profiling and harassment. What I do know though is that it is worse having a racist cop than a racist truck driver or racist computer programmer. Americans dont know racist. My gandfather is a Harzara from afghanistan and today the pashtun kill them on the reg. but when he was growing up it was better, they couldn't even talk to one another in lunch room at school and other social settings. Do we even need to talk abot things like Hutus/Tutsis 1 million hacking each other to death? Anyways USA is the most unracist country although we still have issues as in Trumps muslim ban and braying on about mexicans or whatever. I wish he'd chill on that. Pitting people against each other with cheap tactics like race/religion/sex is a sad tactic. Dem do it too. Idenity politics is straight up evil IMO. Git R Dun! Last edited by Aim_Deep on Apr 26, 2019, 11:47:43 PM	Posted by Aim_Deep on Apr 26, 2019, 11:34:07 PM Quote this Post
It wasn't a Muslim ban, Aim. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.	Posted by ScrotieMcB on Apr 26, 2019, 11:46:44 PM Quote this Post
" ScrotieMcB wrote: It wasn't a Muslim ban, Aim. It was and wasnt. He didnt ban some did ban many. What funny he didnt ban Saudi - which some like 19/21 highjacker came not to mention a very fundamentalist whabism practiced. Git R Dun!	Posted by Aim_Deep on Apr 26, 2019, 11:49:51 PM Quote this Post
" Aim_Deep wrote: " ScrotieMcB wrote: It wasn't a Muslim ban, Aim. It was and wasnt. He didnt ban some did ban many. What funny he didnt ban Saudi - which some like 19/21 highjacker came not to mention a very fundamentalist whabism practiced. More importantly, the countries on the list where a copy-paste of high-risk nations as determined by the Obama administration. The Obama Administration had already put travel restrictions on all of those countries on the original order. All Trump did was increase the severity of existing travel restrictions for nations previously determined to be security risks — for instance, going from visas requiring case-by-case approval by a senior official, to just not allowing the visa. Yes, a lot of those were primarily Islamic countries. But that's because Bush and Obama bombed primarily Islamic countries, and it's unwise to accept travelers from countries you've recently bombed. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Apr 27, 2019, 12:06:43 AM	Posted by ScrotieMcB on Apr 27, 2019, 12:03:37 AM Quote this Post
" ScrotieMcB wrote: It wasn't a Muslim ban, Aim. Didn't it take three tries before your statement was true? Meaning the first two bans were ruled unconstitutional because they discriminated against Muslims? Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!	Posted by Turtledove on Apr 27, 2019, 12:20:49 AM Quote this Post
" Turtledove wrote: " ScrotieMcB wrote: It wasn't a Muslim ban, Aim. Didn't it take three tries before your statement was true? Meaning the first two bans were ruled unconstitutional because they discriminated against Muslims? No, that's not what happened. I read the original travel ban and the first 9th circuit decision that ruled it unconstitutional. They explicitly said they did not have a First Amendment (freedom of religion) problem with it; they had a Fourth Amendment (specifically, due process) problem with it. And I completely agree with that; the original EO ordered federal government officials to deny visas to some current visa holders, legally staying and working in the US, without any official to appeal that decision to. That was truly wrong and needed fixing. You could read the ruling yourself, you know. Best policy in an age of Fake News on both sides of the aisle. For me, the Trump EO was a case of Fake News reality vs Actual reality forcing me into opposing positions. The fake news was that it was a Muslim ban, which I felt compelled to defend against (and still do); the reality was that it was unconstitutional for reasons completely disconnected from the popular criticism, which I tried to tell people about, but they'd keep going back to the media lies. It was, and is, very frustrating. If you want to criticize the travel ban as an attempt to unconstitutionally attack the rights of immigrants — not Muslims, but visa holders — that's completely fair criticism. I didn't read the second version or the second ruling, but I suspect that the Trump EO went from blatantly against the 4th Amendment to just slightly against it, and the third time was a charm. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Apr 27, 2019, 12:59:07 AM	Posted by ScrotieMcB on Apr 27, 2019, 12:50:13 AM Quote this Post
" Turtledove wrote: " Boem wrote: For example a study showed that a police force was stopping more black and hispanic drivers for control. So they did a study and looked at the data from night-time(when racial prejudice cannot occur, since cars are stopped before race could be identified), nothing changed in the outcomes of the data sets. Flat out bullshit wrong. It is the exact OPPOSITE! " Our statistical analysis of these records proceeds in three steps. First, we assess potential bias in stop decisions by applying the “veil of darkness” test developed by Grogger and Ridgeway [13]. The test is based on a simple observation: because the sun sets at different times throughout the year, one can examine the racial composition of stopped drivers as a function of sunlight while controlling for time of day. If black drivers make up a smaller share of stopped drivers after sunset, when it is difficult to determine a driver’s race, that suggests black drivers were stopped before sunset in part because of their race. In both state patrol and municipal police stops, we find that black drivers comprise a smaller proportion of drivers stopped after sunset, which is suggestive of racial bias in stop decisions. https://5harad.com/papers/100M-stops.pdf Wow that's amazing, thats the same studie i remember from 2012. Just like the studie i remember done in 2013 that analyzed data of 3000 active officers and concluded that 15 showed racial bias in active practice. When can we expect data on the rise or fall of racism upon the introduction of racial bias workshops for the police force?(entered 2015 if i recall correctly?) I don't even know if any stream of psychology backs up the workshops methods. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes	Posted by Boem on Apr 27, 2019, 1:09:29 AM On Probation Quote this Post