Jump to content
The Smoakhouse Forums
CarthDawg77

16 Dead, at Least 30 injured in second straight week of violence in Chicago.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, JETT said:

Black people were 24% of those killed despite being only 13% of the population.
 

Police killed 1,099 people in 2019

 

when you look at prison demographics and this 24% number you start to realize that police shoot whites at a much higher percentage. 

 

but I think he was asking for a source of black officers shooting white perps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JETT said:

From your source.  I'll give you three guesses which political party controls those areas that kill a higher percentage of black Americans.  Sad that you think the Republicans are against you.  If you would open your eyes you would see the truth.

Most states’ police forces killed black people at a higher rate per capita rate than white people, with Illinois, New York and Washington D.C. carrying some of the largest discrepancies by state. D.C., with a black population of nearly 50 percent, had 88 percent of all police killings be against black Americans – a discrepancy of over 38 percentage points. Rhode Island had the largest discrepancy of 44 points, albeit with a much smaller sample size of four police killings in 2019 – two of them being African American.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Youngcoach123 said:

You are super sharp and I value your insight. I disagree slightly with some of what is in your post but it’s not worth the pettyness.  As an American first (which is what I am) I hope we all learn to live what we say. 

It's important to have healthy dissent in order to grow together. If your goal is to truly be an American first (I think it's safe to say that is all of our goals), then conversations about things that make you uncomfortable need to happen in order to reconcile. 

With that said, what you perceive as pettiness is a shield of protecting comfort in my opinion. I value everyone's insight who shares the goal of finding an equitable solution. I hope this helps you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

It's important to have healthy dissent in order to grow together. If your goal is to truly be an American first (I think it's safe to say that is all of our goals), then conversations about things that make you uncomfortable need to happen in order to reconcile. 

With that said, what you perceive as pettiness is a shield of protecting comfort in my opinion. I value everyone's insight who shares the goal of finding an equitable solution. I hope this helps you.

Conversations shouldn’t make anyone uncomfortable. Perspectives are always different and as I’ve told friends of mine I need other prospectives. You can’t make factual and accurate conclusions with hearing as much on the subject as possible. The pettiness I speak of is tit for tat on small points that don’t move the conversation. Not that I’m uncomfortable with doing that but it lacks the ability for progress. You, like Jett, are a good dude. We wont always, if likely, agree but I think you have a good perspective.  👍

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ObiOne said:

From your source.  I'll give you three guesses which political party controls those areas that kill a higher percentage of black Americans.  Sad that you think the Republicans are against you.  If you would open your eyes you would see the truth.

Most states’ police forces killed black people at a higher rate per capita rate than white people, with Illinois, New York and Washington D.C. carrying some of the largest discrepancies by state. D.C., with a black population of nearly 50 percent, had 88 percent of all police killings be against black Americans – a discrepancy of over 38 percentage points. Rhode Island had the largest discrepancy of 44 points, albeit with a much smaller sample size of four police killings in 2019 – two of them being African American.

 

This isn't a republican/democrat issue. Both parties have dropped the ball on the issue of inequality for African Americans up to this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Youngcoach123 said:

Conversations shouldn’t make anyone uncomfortable. Perspectives are always different and as I’ve told friends of mine I need other prospectives. You can’t make factual and accurate conclusions with hearing as much on the subject as possible. The pettiness I speak of is tit for tat on small points that don’t move the conversation. Not that I’m uncomfortable with doing that but it lacks the ability for progress. You, like Jett, are a good dude. We wont always, if likely, agree but I think you have a good perspective.  👍

 

Likewise my friend, and I welcome a healthy conversation with you anytime. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CUJO85 said:

This isn't a republican/democrat issue. Both parties have dropped the ball on the issue of inequality for African Americans up to this point. 

It might be more than you think. Only one party exclusively expresses the concerns of the AA community but in statistics is exactly the opposite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

This isn't a republican/democrat issue. Both parties have dropped the ball on the issue of inequality for African Americans up to this point. 

I agree that it isn't strictly a political issue.  But politics play a huge role.  Both sides have dropped the ball.  But one side controls every area with high crime, poverty, and more corrupt police and it only gets worse by the day.  Find a republican controlled areas with those characteristics. There are some but very few.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Youngcoach123 said:

It might be more than you think. Only one party exclusively expresses the concerns of the AA community but in statistics is exactly the opposite. 

I agree that the Democratic establishment has been counterproductive to the progress of AA since the Clinton presidency. Incremental change for AA, while catering almost exclusively to corporate interests. The Republican party of today, though, is not even worth discussing as it relates to AA progress. 

I despise neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism because they both stoke cultural divide in rural America, while passing economic policies that primarily benefit corporations and corporatists. Big money in politics has corrupted both sides. 

The sad part is we have much more in common than Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC wants us to believe. But as long as we're fighting over cultural differences, we will never see the economic disservice being done to us by this two-party system government. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Youngcoach123 said:

Black people were 24% of those killed despite being only 13% of the population.
 

Police killed 1,099 people in 2019

 

when you look at prison demographics and this 24% number you start to realize that police shoot whites at a much higher percentage. 

 

but I think he was asking for a source of black officers shooting white perps.

Adjusted to take into account the racial breakdown of the U.S. population, he said black men are 3.5 times more likely to be killed by police than white men. But also adjusted to take into account the racial breakdown in violent crime, the data actually show that police are less likely to kill black suspects than white ones.

“If one adjusts for the racial disparity in the homicide rate or the rate at which police are feloniously killed, whites are actually more likely to be killed by police than blacks,” said Mr. Moskos, a former Baltimore cop and author of the book “Cop in the Hood.”

 

 

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

I agree that the Democratic establishment has been counterproductive to the progress of AA since the Clinton presidency. Incremental change for AA, while catering almost exclusively to corporate interests. The Republican party of today, though, is not even worth discussing as it relates to AA progress. 

I despise neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism because they both stoke cultural divide in rural America, while passing economic policies that primarily benefit corporations and corporatists. Big money in politics has corrupted both sides. 

The sad part is we have much more in common than Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC wants us to believe. But as long as we're fighting over cultural differences, we will never see the economic disservice being done to us by this two-party system government. 

You are a smart guy, so I know you know this.  But most jobs in America are provided by corporations.  Most big businesses and most small businesses are corporations.  Do some executives get paid too much? I guess it could be argued the same way that people say NFL QB's and MLB Pitchers make too much money.  But they make what the market will bear. 

I just don't understand the anger at corporations.  When they get tax breaks they grow their business and hire more people.  When they are taxed too heavily they normally cut jobs and sometimes move to more favorable areas (see california).  When corporations taxes go up, they still have make a profit to stay in business.  When WalMart's taxes go up by 2%, they don't just eat that 2%.  It gets passed on to the consumer in the form of higher priced goods.  Corporations don't really pay taxes.  Consumers do.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Youngcoach123 said:

Adjusted to take into account the racial breakdown of the U.S. population, he said black men are 3.5 times more likely to be killed by police than white men. But also adjusted to take into account the racial breakdown in violent crime, the data actually show that police are less likely to kill black suspects than white ones.

“If one adjusts for the racial disparity in the homicide rate or the rate at which police are feloniously killed, whites are actually more likely to be killed by police than blacks,” said Mr. Moskos, a former Baltimore cop and author of the book “Cop in the Hood.”

 

 

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/

I read the article; thanks for sharing. It's important to have full context of these stats:

1. The percentages are not per capita, which is misleading when considering AA make up 13% (12 in this article) vs 63% being comprised of white Americans. Whites statically should be killed more by cops. White people should be higher in all statistical categories due to this. 

2. The only per capita stat I saw in this article (“The odds that a black man will be shot and killed by a police officer is about 1 in 60,000. For a white man those odds are 1 in 200,000.”) illustrates that AA are over 3 times more likely to be killed although we only make up 13%. Big problem here; this is part of the reason why there are protests.  

Here are some additional statistics that point to the same inequities as well:

 

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CUJO85 said:

See my post above for your response. 

To add, your question isn't posed to find a solution for your fellow Americans, it's to create a "gotcha" moment. I've had enough dialogue with white allies to understand the difference when posed. With that said, I have no need to shift the conversation. Rather, you should consider shifting your intent. 

So, you know what my intent was? Please enlighten me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2020 at 6:14 AM, CarthDawg77 said:

16 dead, at least 30 injured in second straight weekend of violence in Chicago - Fox News https://apple.news/As0xzBUmLS9eRkjmJY_MZ_A

 

Where is the Public outcry and rioting/looting/burning over THESE Deaths, Hypocrits?!

Well only certain black lives matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

I read the article; thanks for sharing. It's important to have full context of these stats:

1. The percentages are not per capita, which is misleading when considering AA make up 13% (12 in this article) vs 63% being comprised of white Americans. Whites statically should be killed more by cops. White people should be higher in all statistical categories due to this. 

2. The only per capita stat I saw in this article (“The odds that a black man will be shot and killed by a police officer is about 1 in 60,000. For a white man those odds are 1 in 200,000.”) illustrates that AA are over 3 times more likely to be killed although we only make up 13%. Big problem here; this is part of the reason why there are protests.  

Here are some additional statistics that point to the same inequities as well:

 

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

Yes I think it how you choose to analyze the stats. If you go by population percentages then yes, AA are def shot at a higher rate. If you go by FBI crime stats vs percentage who get shot, then you are more likely to be shot if your white. I can see how certain media would inflate to create controversy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ObiOne said:

You are a smart guy, so I know you know this.  But most jobs in America are provided by corporations.  Most big businesses and most small businesses are corporations.  Do some executives get paid too much? I guess it could be argued the same way that people say NFL QB's and MLB Pitchers make too much money.  But they make what the market will bear. 

I just don't understand the anger at corporations.  When they get tax breaks they grow their business and hire more people.  When they are taxed too heavily they normally cut jobs and sometimes move to more favorable areas (see california).  When corporations taxes go up, they still have make a profit to stay in business.  When WalMart's taxes go up by 2%, they don't just eat that 2%.  It gets passed on to the consumer in the form of higher priced goods.  Corporations don't really pay taxes.  Consumers do.  

I respectfully disagree, and while there is a book's worth of response I can give here, but I'll try my best to sum it up:

Corporations have one goal; to optimize revenue while squeezing expenses as much as humanly possible. Why? Because perception is reality in the business world, and healthy numbers to report (regardless of the ethics and morals stepped over to achieve them) means a healthy response in the stock market. Capitalism 101, and yes that's the goal of small and local businesses as well, albeit there is more community here which means morals play a larger role in this vertical. Do you know the most optimal form of capitalism? Free labor (aka slavery), which explains the economic boom in the south during that time (shout out to 200 years of unpaid internships of my so called lazy people). Legislation is the reason while that is partly but not completely gone (hello 13th amendment), and legislation is also the reason why we have 40 hour work weeks, unions to negotiate, and social security (all forms of democratic socialism for anyone out there who hasn't connected the dots), not out of the kindness of corporations' hearts. 

Elected leaders were smart enough to understand this when the Tillman Act was passed in 1907, but Citizens United (pushed by conservative leaders) changed that and effectively made corporations able to donate (buy) politicians from both sides. Big win for corporations as this allows them to finance campaigns, draft, and pass their own legislation via the candidate they are successful in coalescing (aka lobbying). As a corporation, why would you invest millions of dollars in politics? Why do you invest in any situation? A return,  and just has it has been since day 1, their return is less social regulations drafted for the working people (and exponential financial growth). There are plenty sources that explain the ever-increasing wealth gap between those who make over $400k and those below them since the 1970s. Those tax breaks you speak of do not bear out on paper as a positive for the working people. 

In short, there needs to be a balance. It's well documented that corporatism ideology is anti working people and anything else that hurts the bottom-line. There is humanity in small and local business which is crucial to community. 

I encourage you to read Title 26 of the US tax code. Corporations do pay taxes (suppose to at least).

Last point; you described trickle-down economics above. Pass economic policy for corporations, which has direct and indirect consequences for working people. I ask you:

  • What are the trickle down economics for slavery?
  • When those slaves were freed, they were not given a dime, land, nor an education to build wealth from. What are the trickle down effects of that?
  • These freed slaves could not participate in the economy due to strong Jim Crow legislation; what do you think the trickle down effect is from that?
  • The 13th amendment states that if you are in jail, you are still subject to slavery. I can answer this trickle down effect for you, it's called mass incarceration and criminalization of an entire culture.
  • What is the trickle down effect of redlining in real estate, so your community saw no appreciation in property for decades, thus no wealth creation? 
  • This same culture who endured strict legislation to create as small a window as possible to ascend economically could not vote until the 1960's. What is the trickle down effect of not having a seat at the policy table for 200 years?

I can go on, but we can agree that trickle down economics is a real thing. For anyone who things people are rebelling due to one murder, you have clearly chose to look the other way at the list of things above that has trickled down to systematic inequality for AA. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, CarthDawg77 said:

So, you know what my intent was? Please enlighten me.

You showed your intent and lack of genuine concern in the last ignorant and judgement filled sentence of the original post. If you think there isn't enough outrage, go lead. Period. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Youngcoach123 said:

Yes I think it how you choose to analyze the stats. If you go by population percentages then yes, AA are def shot at a higher rate. If you go by FBI crime stats vs percentage who get shot, then you are more likely to be shot if your white. I can see how certain media would inflate to create controversy.

There is only one way to interpret an AA being 3 times more likely to be shot than someone white. I don't need the media to tell me that's a problem. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

There is only one way to interpret an AA being 3 times more likely to be shot than someone white. I don't need the media to tell me that's a problem. 

That’s not the case when using FBI stats tho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Youngcoach123 said:

That’s not the case when using FBI stats tho

The article you posted states the FBI data is "notoriously incomplete". Also, I would rather not rely on data (incomplete or not) from an entity that is part of the problem. It's plenty of university and non-profit studies to source as well that have no dog in the fight, but good conversation nonetheless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people want to play around with FBI crime stats, I wonder which is more prevalent White on black violent crime vs Black on white violent crime.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Greezychef said:

If people want to play around with FBI crime stats, I wonder which is more prevalent White on black violent crime vs Black on white violent crime.   

Go look it up, kid. They are virtually the same. 

As an independent, it's amazing how Republicans like to point out sensationalism of Democrats, while not realizing they are being done the same way. You were taught to assume it's worse than it actually is. It's called criminalization of blacks. 

Speaking of identity politics that you seem to only like when trying to make a point for yourself, understand that crime is more about socioeconomics than race. Go chew on that for moment then come back and let's have an intellectual conversation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

I respectfully disagree, and while there is a book's worth of response I can give here, but I'll try my best to sum it up:

Corporations have one goal; to optimize revenue while squeezing expenses as much as humanly possible. Why? Because perception is reality in the business world, and healthy numbers to report (regardless of the ethics and morals stepped over to achieve them) means a healthy response in the stock market. Capitalism 101, and yes that's the goal of small and local businesses as well, albeit there is more community here which means morals play a larger role in this vertical. Do you know the most optimal form of capitalism? Free labor (aka slavery), which explains the economic boom in the south during that time (shout out to 200 years of unpaid internships of my so called lazy people). Legislation is the reason while that is partly but not completely gone (hello 13th amendment), and legislation is also the reason why we have 40 hour work weeks, unions to negotiate, and social security (all forms of democratic socialism for anyone out there who hasn't connected the dots), not out of the kindness of corporations' hearts. 

Elected leaders were smart enough to understand this when the Tillman Act was passed in 1907, but Citizens United (pushed by conservative leaders) changed that and effectively made corporations able to donate (buy) politicians from both sides. Big win for corporations as this allows them to finance campaigns, draft, and pass their own legislation via the candidate they are successful in coalescing (aka lobbying). As a corporation, why would you invest millions of dollars in politics? Why do you invest in any situation? A return,  and just has it has been since day 1, their return is less social regulations drafted for the working people (and exponential financial growth). There are plenty sources that explain the ever-increasing wealth gap between those who make over $400k and those below them since the 1970s. Those tax breaks you speak of do not bear out on paper as a positive for the working people. 

In short, there needs to be a balance. It's well documented that corporatism ideology is anti working people and anything else that hurts the bottom-line. There is humanity in small and local business which is crucial to community. 

I encourage you to read Title 26 of the US tax code. Corporations due pay taxes (suppose to at least).

Last point; you described trickle-down economics above. Pass economic policy for corporations, which has direct and indirect consequences for working people. I ask you:

  • What are the trickle down economics for slavery?
  • When those slaves were freed, they were not given a dime, land, nor an education to build wealth from. What are the trickle down effects of that?
  • These freed slaves could not participate in the economy due to strong Jim Crow legislation; what do you think the trickle down effect is from that?
  • The 13th amendment states that if you are in jail, you are still subject to slavery? I can answer this trickle down effect for you, it's called mass incarceration and criminalization of an entire culture
  • What is the trickle down effect of redlining in real estate, so your community saw no appreciation in property for decades, thus no wealth creation? 
  • This same culture who endured strict legislation to create as small a window as possible to ascend economically could not vote until the 1960's. What is the trickle down effect of not having a seat the policy table for 200 years?

I can go own, but we can agree that trickle down economics is a real thing. For anyone who things people are rebelling due to one murder, you have clearly chose to look the other way at the list of things above that has trickled down to systematic inequality for AA. 

 

Thanks for the thoughtful post.  I can agree with a lot of it.  America isn't perfect.  But it is a heck of a lot better than any other country I have seen.  I think that is why we still have millions of folks of every race, religion, creed, trying to become Americans.  It isn't so they can come here and be more oppressed than they currently are.  But we still need to improve.

I hear your arguments against corporations and definitely agree big changes should be made in campaign finance laws and lobbying.  But that would take money out of the pockets of those making the laws.  Kind of like term limits.   Something I strongly support that will likely never happen.  

I'd like to hear your thoughts on how regulating corporations and taxing them more heavily would help working people.  I don't think that is possible except maybe in some type of socialist utopia.  To have a robust job market, we need strong companies that grow enough to keep up with population growth.  

I'd also like to hear your proposal for closing the wealth gap.  Do you want the government to regulate salaries?  We don't have a perfect system.  But it is about the best that I've heard of in the history of the world.  We should always work to improve, but not destroy something great in the process.  It is the only country in the world where any able person born today can work hard and become wealthy (maybe even president).  Do some have more obstacles to overcome?  Yes, obviously.  But that opportunity does not exist in other countries.  Let us not throw out the good with the bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CUJO85 said:

The article you posted states the FBI data is "notoriously incomplete". Also, I would rather not rely on data (incomplete or not) from an entity that is part of the problem. It's plenty of university and non-profit studies to source as well that have no dog in the fight, but good conversation nonetheless. 

Yes it is. Please list the  studies when you get a chance.

Also, I’ve discredited a lot of sources in my life. Never the FBI tho. Also pretty sure they are not part of the problem that we are discussing. 
 

also this from the article

“police shootings by race is notoriously incomplete, which may explain why Peter Moskos, assistant professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, decided to use figures from the website Killed by Police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...