Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

#blacklivesmatter Death Toll

KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2015 9:31:20 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
This is a serious thread created in response to people invoking racism, as the hashtag clearly refers, in police shootings.
I have had a few arguments with people who insert racism in these deaths and lack of prosecution, and site misleading facts to back up their "can't trust the police" attitude. I think this will be a step in proving them wrong (or proving me wrong).

What I want to do for 2015 is record every police shooting of dubious circumstances (like Michael Brown, and I'll even allow Eric Garner type cases), and at the end of the year, compare these to the total number of deaths by police.

I am looking only for United States deaths of blacks being shot by police (race of officer does not matter) under questionable circumstances. Questionable circumstances would include: Michael Brown's death, the toy gun incident, generally any "unarmed" situtation, and we'll even include excessive force deaths, like Eric Garner, and negligent deaths, like that white down syndrome man who suffocated on his stomach.

The rules for posting are simple. I require:
The name of the victim
The date of death
The location of death
And a link from a trusted news source (ideally) dated two days after the incident.

The reason for the delayed link is because I've seen headlines that are wrong and misleading in the direct aftermath. The most recent was Antonio Martin, where headlines were stating he was unarmed, while video surveillance heavily suggest he was armed, and after two days, there was little coverage about him (I wonder why....).

However, the mainstream media may well be to blame for this selective reporting of these facts, so I'm looking to the DDO community to be able to report on more local issues that don't make it to CNN or my facebook feed.

Together we can try to find the objective truth!!

The hypothesis of this experiment is to establish that blacks aren't dying by police in numbers that deserve the outrage the few incidents receive, and the issue is likely not racism. Or, to prove me wrong, by documenting just how dangerous the police are towards blacks, showing there is a real pervasive issue.

This is not to suggest there are not racist cops, or there is not racial profiling, or other issues that revolve around race and police. This is to examine if there are reasons to believe there are racial motivations for these deaths.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2015 9:41:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Do you believe society could function efficiently without some nature of conflict, no matter how trivial?

If not, then the actual numbers are meaningless.

I often wonder because of the human condition if it would be neccessary to create conflict in a perfectly peaceful society.

I watched an interesting twilight zone show recently. A gangster got shot by the cops. He went to this strange ethereal place. He was told by a guide that it was a peaceful place. He could have everything he ever wanted and nothing bad would ever happen to him. At the end of the show, his guide reveals to him that he is in hell.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2015 9:46:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/11/2015 9:41:41 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Do you believe society could function efficiently without some nature of conflict, no matter how trivial?

If not, then the actual numbers are meaningless.

I often wonder because of the human condition if it would be neccessary to create conflict in a perfectly peaceful society.
Perhaps. People like to complain and blame.
I think it depends on the society. If they are honest with themselves, maybe not. If it was like America is now, then yes, someone will always be the scapegoat.

I watched an interesting twilight zone show recently. A gangster got shot by the cops. He went to this strange ethereal place. He was told by a guide that it was a peaceful place. He could have everything he ever wanted and nothing bad would ever happen to him. At the end of the show, his guide reveals to him that he is in hell.

Are you sure that wasn't a gambler?
Gambling without risk is no fun after a while.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2015 9:55:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/11/2015 9:46:29 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/11/2015 9:41:41 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Do you believe society could function efficiently without some nature of conflict, no matter how trivial?

If not, then the actual numbers are meaningless.

I often wonder because of the human condition if it would be neccessary to create conflict in a perfectly peaceful society.
Perhaps. People like to complain and blame.
I think it depends on the society. If they are honest with themselves, maybe not. If it was like America is now, then yes, someone will always be the scapegoat.

I watched an interesting twilight zone show recently. A gangster got shot by the cops. He went to this strange ethereal place. He was told by a guide that it was a peaceful place. He could have everything he ever wanted and nothing bad would ever happen to him. At the end of the show, his guide reveals to him that he is in hell.

Are you sure that wasn't a gambler?
Gambling without risk is no fun after a while.

Most criminals are gamblers.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Fool: If you notice something about that campaign, you will notice that there is an exceptionally large proportion of "black women feminists" who are doing most of the talking..Many are white feminist women and men. In other words as SJW's, Who of course will not take responsibility for influencing the murder of the two cops in cold blood and despite despite the fact that 99% of these deaths are black men, Not woman.

Notice that when it is violence particular to women, they will stress that it's Violence against women, but when it's against men it's just violence, with no special attention, or concern to the demographic, as though it is 50-50.

Against The Ideologist

Black men as in descendants of slaves, don't owe black women anything.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 6:27:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: If you notice something about that campaign, you will notice that there is an exceptionally large proportion of "black women feminists" who are doing most of the talking..Many are white feminist women and men. In other words as SJW's, Who of course will not take responsibility for influencing the murder of the two cops in cold blood and despite despite the fact that 99% of these deaths are black men, Not woman.

Notice that when it is violence particular to women, they will stress that it's Violence against women, but when it's against men it's just violence, with no special attention, or concern to the demographic, as though it is 50-50.

Against The Ideologist

Black men as in descendants of slaves, don't owe black women anything.

You're connecting blaming dubious police shootings which are suspect of racist motivation, and overwhelmingly involve men being killed by other men, to... feminists? Could you, perhaps, have an unhealthy fixation on this topic?
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 6:33:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 6:27:50 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: If you notice something about that campaign, you will notice that there is an exceptionally large proportion of "black women feminists" who are doing most of the talking..Many are white feminist women and men. In other words as SJW's, Who of course will not take responsibility for influencing the murder of the two cops in cold blood and despite despite the fact that 99% of these deaths are black men, Not woman.

Notice that when it is violence particular to women, they will stress that it's Violence against women, but when it's against men it's just violence, with no special attention, or concern to the demographic, as though it is 50-50.

Against The Ideologist

Black men as in descendants of slaves, don't owe black women anything.

You're connecting blaming dubious police shootings which are suspect of racist motivation, and overwhelmingly involve men being killed by other men, to... feminists? Could you, perhaps, have an unhealthy fixation on this topic?

LOL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 9:55:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 6:27:50 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: If you notice something about that campaign, you will notice that there is an exceptionally large proportion of "black women feminists" who are doing most of the talking..Many are white feminist women and men. In other words as SJW's, Who of course will not take responsibility for influencing the murder of the two cops in cold blood and despite despite the fact that 99% of these deaths are black men, Not woman.

Notice that when it is violence particular to women, they will stress that it's Violence against women, but when it's against men it's just violence, with no special attention, or concern to the demographic, as though it is 50-50.

Against The Ideologist

Black men as in descendants of slaves, don't owe black women anything.

Skepsikyma: You're connecting blaming dubious police shootings which are suspect of racist motivation, and overwhelmingly involve men being killed by other men, to... feminists?

The Fool: I'm sorry perhaps you can clarify what you mean, because I'm a little confused which your use of terminology here.

I'm saying that most of the irrational claims this violence against black men, in this particular case, on #blacklivesmatter are particular to feminist, mostly composed of black women, and lightly composed of white women and effeminate white men, who are not part, nor share anything with the victim class but are wanting to share in the victim status, not because they genuinely care, but are ideologically motivated like a Scientologist is against psychology.

As a somewhat stereotypical black man I find it insulting, and phony. As the same feminists would condemn me as a toxic, for simply being a black man. So yes I am insulted, when they pretend to care about my issues especially when I do not want them to represent me.. Feminists themselves don't seem to understand when "no means no". Perhaps we need a yes means yes policy for feminist.

The non<x>stop campaign of bashing and demonizing men for the last 60 years does increase hostility between men, as by feminists own reasoning it causes men to internalize they misandry and see other men as more threatening, evil and sinister to each other, than they actually are.. They propagate the stereotype that men, all always the agents and deserve more punishment than women, and that women deserve less punishment for the same crime. This flames the fuel racism between black and white men, adding to the hostility which they themselves are supposed to be against, according to their own logic.

E.g.
If there is a fire in a building, we want everybody to stay calm and walk out in single file, so that most will get out safely. Feminism is analog us to those who scream out "we are all going to burn and die" causing everybody to panic, scream and run, irrationally destroying the efficiency of the evacuation.

And so, in this very way, they are in part responsible for the innocent killings of the police officers in this very way. But they then deny themselves the agency, as they themselves must retain victim status to keep its hegemony, on gender issues in Western society. Whether inadvertently or unfortunately this is what they do.

It happens with rape, it happens with violence, and harassment. The irrational, and emotive attempt to always express everything in hyperbole to get the most out of each complaint, has a maladaptive psychological effect on society at large over time. And we are now facing the consequences.

Skepsikyma : Could you, perhaps, have an unhealthy fixation on this topic?

The Fool: Who concern themselves with such perhaps's?

Do you have an argument, for your position yes or no? If you're going to character assassinate, give a fact, don't just make up shlt!!

Against The Ideologist

The Fool: It's beyond me, why feminists create for themselves false narratives which they then speak to, as though they are beyond themselves.
<(8D)

You go girl!!
<(XD)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:00:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 6:33:08 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 1/12/2015 6:27:50 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: If you notice something about that campaign, you will notice that there is an exceptionally large proportion of "black women feminists" who are doing most of the talking..Many are white feminist women and men. In other words as SJW's, Who of course will not take responsibility for influencing the murder of the two cops in cold blood and despite despite the fact that 99% of these deaths are black men, Not woman.

Notice that when it is violence particular to women, they will stress that it's Violence against women, but when it's against men it's just violence, with no special attention, or concern to the demographic, as though it is 50-50.

Against The Ideologist

Black men as in descendants of slaves, don't owe black women anything.

You're connecting blaming dubious police shootings which are suspect of racist motivation, and overwhelmingly involve men being killed by other men, to... feminists? Could you, perhaps, have an unhealthy fixation on this topic?

LOL(To myself in a knee-jerk fashion)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:06:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 9:55:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 1/12/2015 6:27:50 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: If you notice something about that campaign, you will notice that there is an exceptionally large proportion of "black women feminists" who are doing most of the talking..Many are white feminist women and men. In other words as SJW's, Who of course will not take responsibility for influencing the murder of the two cops in cold blood and despite despite the fact that 99% of these deaths are black men, Not woman.

Notice that when it is violence particular to women, they will stress that it's Violence against women, but when it's against men it's just violence, with no special attention, or concern to the demographic, as though it is 50-50.

Against The Ideologist

Black men as in descendants of slaves, don't owe black women anything.

Skepsikyma: You're connecting blaming dubious police shootings which are suspect of racist motivation, and overwhelmingly involve men being killed by other men, to... feminists?

The Fool: I'm sorry perhaps you can clarify what you mean, because I'm a little confused which your use of terminology here.

I'm saying that most of the irrational claims this violence against black men, in this particular case, on #blacklivesmatter are particular to feminist, mostly composed of black women, and lightly composed of white women and effeminate white men, who are not part, nor share anything with the victim class but are wanting to share in the victim status, not because they genuinely care, but are ideologically motivated like a Scientologist is against psychology.

As a somewhat stereotypical black man I find it insulting, and phony. As the same feminists would condemn me as a toxic, for simply being a black man. So yes I am insulted, when they pretend to care about my issues especially when I do not want them to represent me.. Feminists themselves don't seem to understand when "no means no". Perhaps we need a yes means yes policy for feminist.

The non<x>stop campaign of bashing and demonizing men for the last 60 years does increase hostility between men, as by feminists own reasoning it causes men to internalize they misandry and see other men as more threatening, evil and sinister to each other, than they actually are.. They propagate the stereotype that men, all always the agents and deserve more punishment than women, and that women deserve less punishment for the same crime. This flames the fuel racism between black and white men, adding to the hostility which they themselves are supposed to be against, according to their own logic.

E.g.
If there is a fire in a building, we want everybody to stay calm and walk out in single file, so that most will get out safely. Feminism is analog us to those who scream out "we are all going to burn and die" causing everybody to panic, scream and run, irrationally destroying the efficiency of the evacuation.

And so, in this very way, they are in part responsible for the innocent killings of the police officers in this very way. But they then deny themselves the agency, as they themselves must retain victim status to keep its hegemony, on gender issues in Western society. Whether inadvertently or unfortunately this is what they do.

It happens with rape, it happens with violence, and harassment. The irrational, and emotive attempt to always express everything in hyperbole to get the most out of each complaint, has a maladaptive psychological effect on society at large over time. And we are now facing the consequences.

Skepsikyma : Could you, perhaps, have an unhealthy fixation on this topic?

The Fool: Who concern themselves with such perhaps's?

Do you have an argument, for your position yes or no? If you're going to character assassinate, give a fact, don't just make up shlt!!

Against The Ideologist

The Fool: It's beyond me, why feminists create for themselves false narratives which they then speak to, as though they are beyond themselves.
<(8D)

You go girl!!
<(XD)

So, yes. You see absolutely everything in relation to feminism, even when it isn't even remotely connected.

The argument for my position has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism has nothing to do with abusive grand juries, conflicting interests in law enforcement, and the historical position of the police as the often violent oppressors of minorities which has inculcated a distrust of police in large segments of the black community. Those are what my arguments concern.

This behavior is reminiscent of the erratic gentleman on the History Channel who sees just about every historical occurrence as evidence of extraterrestrial interference, just with feminists substituted in as the shadowy menace at the root of every conceivable conflict or injustice. If I were speaking with some friends about the role of prophets in biblical Israel, and someone ran up ranting that Ezekiel saw a UFO, I wouldn't have a response or an argument because he wouldn't be even remotely on topic. Rather, he'd be attempting to derail a conversation into his favorite pet topic instead of actually discussing the matter at hand.

There are at least three threads in this subforum dedicated to ranting and bickering about feminism. Do we really need to derail another one? The horse is dead, for Christ's sake.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:07:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You Go Girl. Corrections

*The Fool: I'm sorry perhaps you can clarify what you mean, because I'm a little confused [with] your use of terminology here. [It seems it intentionally vague as to prevent accountability, stereotypical of feminist epistemology].


E.g.
*If there is a fire in a building, we want everybody to stay calm and walk out in single file, so that most will get out safely. Feminism is Analogous [] to those who scream out "we are all going to burn and die" causing everybody to panic, scream [and run into each other, clogging exists and thus] irrationally destroying the efficiency of the evacuation.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:31:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 10:07:44 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:

What is it you want exactly? I mean, what would it take for you to feel happy and that everything was sorted in relation to men and women? What should we be aiming for, in your opinion?
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:35:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Skepsikyma: So, yes. You see absolutely everything in relation to feminism, even when it isn't even remotely connected.

The Fool: For the most part we do not live in a social vacuum. Although some self-creations are limited to oneself.
<(89)

Skepsikyma: The argument for my position has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism has nothing to do with abusive grand juries, conflicting interests in law enforcement, and the historical position of the police as the often violent oppressors of minorities which has inculcated a distrust of police in large segments of the black community.

The Fool: It has a lot to do with abusive grand jury. The largest sentence disparity given out for the same crime is on average between white women judges and black men. This is directly related to the perception of men in the culture, which feminism highly affects through its social and psychological social engineering Marxist approach for over 100 years. You are not that familiar with feminist theory for someone speak so much on behalf of them. For your self of course..

Skepsikyma: Those are what my arguments concern.

The Fool: and you took it upon yourself to respond to me.. Except you were only able to speculate, on my position, and my mind state, without concern for rational entailment.

Skepsikyma: This behavior is reminiscent of the erratic gentleman on the History Channel who sees just about every historical occurrence as evidence of extraterrestrial interference, just with feminists substituted in as the shadowy menace at the root of every conceivable conflict or injustice.

The Fool: It doesn't matter what it reminds you of, it matters of" what it is", in fact this very subjectivist, selfish, internalized line of reasoning, is reminiscent of feminist theory. But how much of an argument is that really.?!?

Skepsikyma:If I were speaking with some friends about the role of prophets in biblical Israel, and someone ran up ranting that Ezekiel saw a UFO, I wouldn't have a response or an argument because he wouldn't be even remotely on topic.

The Fool: who cares..

Skepsikyma: Rather, he'd be attempting to derail a conversation into his favorite pet topic instead of actually discussing the matter at hand.

The Fool: who cares.

Skepsikyma:There are at least three threads in this subforum dedicated to ranting and bickering about feminism.

The Fool: Who cares, they are different topics. If you don't like it then report me.

Skepsikyma:Do we really need to derail another one?

The Fool: you're the one who derailed it. (loaded question)

Skepsikyma :The horse is dead, for Christ's sake.

The Fool: yet here you are ,still talking.
<(89)

Against The Ideologist

Forever your Fool.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:39:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 10:35:01 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Skepsikyma: So, yes. You see absolutely everything in relation to feminism, even when it isn't even remotely connected.

The Fool: For the most part we do not live in a social vacuum. Although some self-creations are limited to oneself.
<(89)

Skepsikyma: The argument for my position has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism has nothing to do with abusive grand juries, conflicting interests in law enforcement, and the historical position of the police as the often violent oppressors of minorities which has inculcated a distrust of police in large segments of the black community.

The Fool: It has a lot to do with abusive grand jury. The largest sentence disparity given out for the same crime is on average between white women judges and black men.

Grand juries do not pass sentences, just as an aside. They decide who goes to trial to begin with.

This is directly related to the perception of men in the culture, which feminism highly affects through its social and psychological social engineering Marxist approach for over 100 years. You are not that familiar with feminist theory for someone speak so much on behalf of them. For your self of course..

I'm not even speaking on behalf of them, I just don't want to hear about them on a thread that has nothing to do with them. That's why this will be my last response to you.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:57:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You Go Girl
Part 3

Skepsikyma: So, yes. You see absolutely everything in relation to feminism, even when it isn't even remotely connected.
The Fool: For the most part we do not live in a social vacuum. Although some"self-creations"are limited to"oneself.
<(89)

Skepsikyma: The argument for my position has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism has nothing to do with abusive grand juries, conflicting interests in law enforcement, and the historical position of the police as the often violent oppressors of minorities which has inculcated a distrust of police in large segments of the black community.
The Fool: It has a lot to do with abusive grand jury. The largest sentence disparity given out for the same crime is on average between white women judges and black men.
Skepsikyma: Grand juries do not pass sentences, just as an aside. They decide who goes to trial to begin with.

The Fool: So I need only then, extend the argument to the perception of the jury. You're wasting time, by avoiding the obvious interpretation. But why else would you do that?

This is directly related to the perception of men in the culture, which feminism highly affects through its social and psychological social engineering Marxist approach for over 100 years. You are not that familiar with feminist theory for someone speak so much on behalf of them. For your self of course.

Skepsikyma: I'm not even speaking on behalf of them, I just don't want to hear about them on a thread that has nothing to do with them.

The Fool: The OP was in regards to the silliness on the #blacklivesmatter twitter # which makes black people, particularly black men look stupid, when they hardly make up most of the stupid claims on there.

That is relevant to the thread. I assume, based off what you say that you are just upset at my constant and fully justified criticisms of feminism. Perhaps because of shared affinities and the habit to underestimate how well-founded and informed my criticisms actually are. I know I come off obnoxiously as somebody who stereotypically critical to feminism for all the wrong reasons. Except, as argued, I have good reason to do so.

Skepsikyma: That's why this will be my last response to you.

The Fool: It's probably not your best interest, I'm sure it will be less stressful for you.
<(89)

Against The Ideologist

All the power to you. Cheers..
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 10:59:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You Go Girl
Part 3..Fixed

Skepsikyma: So, yes. You see absolutely everything in relation to feminism, even when it isn't even remotely connected.

The Fool: For the most part we do not live in a social vacuum. Although some"self-creations"are limited to"oneself.
<(89)

Skepsikyma: The argument for my position has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism has nothing to do with abusive grand juries, conflicting interests in law enforcement, and the historical position of the police as the often violent oppressors of minorities which has inculcated a distrust of police in large segments of the black community.
The Fool: It has a lot to do with abusive grand jury. The largest sentence disparity given out for the same crime is on average between white women judges and black men.
Skepsikyma: Grand juries do not pass sentences, just as an aside. They decide who goes to trial to begin with.

The Fool: So I need only then, extend the argument to the perception of the jury. You're wasting time, by avoiding the obvious interpretation. But why else would you do that?

This is directly related to the perception of men in the culture, which feminism highly affects through its social and psychological social engineering Marxist approach for over 100 years. You are not that familiar with feminist theory for someone speak so much on behalf of them. For your self of course.

Skepsikyma: I'm not even speaking on behalf of them, I just don't want to hear about them on a thread that has nothing to do with them.

The Fool: The OP was in regards to the silliness on the #blacklivesmatter twitter # which makes black people, particularly black men look stupid, when they hardly make up most of the stupid claims on there.

That is relevant to the thread. I assume, based off what you say that you are just upset at my constant and fully justified criticisms of feminism. Perhaps because of shared affinities and the habit to underestimate how well-founded and informed my criticisms actually are. I know I come off obnoxiously as somebody who stereotypically critical to feminism for all the wrong reasons. Except, as argued, I have good reason to do so.

Skepsikyma: That's why this will be my last response to you.

The Fool: It's probably not your best interest, I'm sure it will be less stressful for you.
<(89)

Against The Ideologist

All the power to you. Cheers..

"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 11:04:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 10:31:46 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 1/12/2015 10:07:44 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:

What is it you want exactly? I mean, what would it take for you to feel happy and that everything was sorted in relation to men and women? What should we be aiming for, in your opinion?

The Fool: We should be aiming for what is best.
<(8D)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 11:09:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 11:04:46 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 1/12/2015 10:31:46 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 1/12/2015 10:07:44 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:

What is it you want exactly? I mean, what would it take for you to feel happy and that everything was sorted in relation to men and women? What should we be aiming for, in your opinion?

The Fool: We should be aiming for what is best.
<(8D)

You got nothing. :(
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 11:20:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 11:09:07 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 1/12/2015 11:04:46 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 1/12/2015 10:31:46 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 1/12/2015 10:07:44 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:

What is it you want exactly? I mean, what would it take for you to feel happy and that everything was sorted in relation to men and women? What should we be aiming for, in your opinion?

The Fool: We should be aiming for what is best.
<(8D)

You got nothing. :(

The Fool: Your background in ethics is lacking to even begin such a conversation. For starters, equal advocacy for men and woman in academia. From their own perspectives, not advocacy for men through feminist theory which is generally hostile to men. That is, a men studies program, which is not merely made up of feminist puppets, who generally see masculinity as toxic, but MRA's.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/12/2015 11:31:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/11/2015 9:31:20 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
This is a serious thread created in response to people invoking racism, as the hashtag clearly refers, in police shootings.
I have had a few arguments with people who insert racism in these deaths and lack of prosecution, and site misleading facts to back up their "can't trust the police" attitude. I think this will be a step in proving them wrong (or proving me wrong).

What I want to do for 2015 is record every police shooting of dubious circumstances (like Michael Brown, and I'll even allow Eric Garner type cases), and at the end of the year, compare these to the total number of deaths by police.

I am looking only for United States deaths of blacks being shot by police (race of officer does not matter) under questionable circumstances. Questionable circumstances would include: Michael Brown's death, the toy gun incident, generally any "unarmed" situtation, and we'll even include excessive force deaths, like Eric Garner, and negligent deaths, like that white down syndrome man who suffocated on his stomach.

The rules for posting are simple. I require:
The name of the victim
The date of death
The location of death
And a link from a trusted news source (ideally) dated two days after the incident.

The reason for the delayed link is because I've seen headlines that are wrong and misleading in the direct aftermath. The most recent was Antonio Martin, where headlines were stating he was unarmed, while video surveillance heavily suggest he was armed, and after two days, there was little coverage about him (I wonder why....).

However, the mainstream media may well be to blame for this selective reporting of these facts, so I'm looking to the DDO community to be able to report on more local issues that don't make it to CNN or my facebook feed.

Together we can try to find the objective truth!!

The hypothesis of this experiment is to establish that blacks aren't dying by police in numbers that deserve the outrage the few incidents receive, and the issue is likely not racism. Or, to prove me wrong, by documenting just how dangerous the police are towards blacks, showing there is a real pervasive issue.

This is not to suggest there are not racist cops, or there is not racial profiling, or other issues that revolve around race and police. This is to examine if there are reasons to believe there are racial motivations for these deaths.

This kind of experiment really requires academic discipline and rigor for it to have any sort of validity. If you can bring that to the table, power to you, but an informal web survey of volunteers does not sound promising.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 9:27:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 11:31:15 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

This kind of experiment really requires academic discipline and rigor for it to have any sort of validity. If you can bring that to the table, power to you, but an informal web survey of volunteers does not sound promising.

Why is there no validity?
Since when do academic studies show similar results?
The issue is, if people help, we can see just how lethal the police are towards blacks.
Since we are dealing with societal views, I see no reason for a layman survey.

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 9:28:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/12/2015 5:42:22 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Why should I care about any of that in this thread?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 9:27:02 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/12/2015 11:31:15 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

This kind of experiment really requires academic discipline and rigor for it to have any sort of validity. If you can bring that to the table, power to you, but an informal web survey of volunteers does not sound promising.

Why is there no validity?

It all depends upon how you go about doing it. You'd have to control for quite a bit for your results to actually mean anything. You're asking to do exactly this:

What I want to do for 2015 is record every police shooting of dubious circumstances (like Michael Brown, and I'll even allow Eric Garner type cases), and at the end of the year, compare these to the total number of deaths by police.

Some issues:

1) How are you going to know if you recorded "every police shooting of dubious circumstances"? Maybe you only recorded 10% of them? Personally I doubt you're going to be able to do this unless you and a team of researchers really put a lot of effort into it.
2) What about other instances of police brutality that don't involve a firearm and the death of the victim?
3) What exactly constitutes "dubious circumstances"? You give examples but no parameters.
4) What about deaths that at first glance look justifiable but upon review would become questionable? You'd have to look at every single death-by-cop instance to make this determination.

Since when do academic studies show similar results?

Academic studies are typically good at stating exactly what point their data is making, while accounting for issues beyond the control of the research group. Usually the point is rather precise and not general.

The issue is, if people help, we can see just how lethal the police are towards blacks.
Since we are dealing with societal views, I see no reason for a layman survey.

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then? Why bother collecting any data at all? You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 10:05:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 9:27:02 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/12/2015 11:31:15 PM, wrichcirw wrote:

This kind of experiment really requires academic discipline and rigor for it to have any sort of validity. If you can bring that to the table, power to you, but an informal web survey of volunteers does not sound promising.

Why is there no validity?

It all depends upon how you go about doing it. You'd have to control for quite a bit for your results to actually mean anything.
I have to control for nothing.
I am looking at deaths by police of black suspects/victims that are unjustified, according to some source.

You're asking to do exactly this:

What I want to do for 2015 is record every police shooting of dubious circumstances (like Michael Brown, and I'll even allow Eric Garner type cases), and at the end of the year, compare these to the total number of deaths by police.

Some issues:

1) How are you going to know if you recorded "every police shooting of dubious circumstances"? Maybe you only recorded 10% of them? Personally I doubt you're going to be able to do this unless you and a team of researchers really put a lot of effort into it.
I won't. Do you expect me to prove a negative? I'll never know.
Regardless, the issue is the perception.
2) What about other instances of police brutality that don't involve a firearm and the death of the victim?
I only care about deaths at this time.
3) What exactly constitutes "dubious circumstances"? You give examples but no parameters.
I'm leaving it open for obvious reasons.
Someone pointing a gun is obviously not "dubious circumstances".
4) What about deaths that at first glance look justifiable but upon review would become questionable? You'd have to look at every single death-by-cop instance to make this determination.
Then report them, though I'm not sure how they would be questionable, except for probable cause, which is beyond the scope of this survey.

Since when do academic studies show similar results?

Academic studies are typically good at stating exactly what point their data is making, while accounting for issues beyond the control of the research group. Usually the point is rather precise and not general.
Not an answer.
Academic studies constantly contradict others' findings.

The issue is, if people help, we can see just how lethal the police are towards blacks.
Since we are dealing with societal views, I see no reason for a layman survey.

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then?
A record of events.
Why bother collecting any data at all?
To have a record of events.
You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
Doubtful.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 10:09:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 10:05:46 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM, wrichcirw wrote:

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then?
A record of events.
Why bother collecting any data at all?
To have a record of events.
You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
Doubtful.

Ok, this really is the only point that matters as it's the goal of your experiment.

You said, exactly, that you are "challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor."

Right here you essentially stated that the people you are trying to convince do not respect data. So why bother collecting data?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 10:13:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 10:09:02 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:05:46 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM, wrichcirw wrote:

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then?
A record of events.
Why bother collecting any data at all?
To have a record of events.
You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
Doubtful.

Ok, this really is the only point that matters as it's the goal of your experiment.

You said, exactly, that you are "challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor."

Right here you essentially stated that the people you are trying to convince do not respect data. So why bother collecting data?

Because the data I seek is not reported or currently found elsewhere.
And, just because they don't care about vigor, bias, stats, and math, doesn't mean they don't believe said analyses, while often quoting them.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 10:15:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 10:13:23 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:09:02 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:05:46 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM, wrichcirw wrote:

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then?
A record of events.
Why bother collecting any data at all?
To have a record of events.
You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
Doubtful.

Ok, this really is the only point that matters as it's the goal of your experiment.

You said, exactly, that you are "challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor."

Right here you essentially stated that the people you are trying to convince do not respect data. So why bother collecting data?

Because the data I seek is not reported or currently found elsewhere.
And, just because they don't care about vigor, bias, stats, and math, doesn't mean they don't believe said analyses, while often quoting them.

They obviously don't believe in any type of analysis, as you've given them analysis on a different point, and they challenge you anyway. What's going to stop them from challenging your new data?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 10:18:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 10:15:12 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:13:23 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:09:02 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:05:46 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM, wrichcirw wrote:

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then?
A record of events.
Why bother collecting any data at all?
To have a record of events.
You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
Doubtful.

Ok, this really is the only point that matters as it's the goal of your experiment.

You said, exactly, that you are "challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor."

Right here you essentially stated that the people you are trying to convince do not respect data. So why bother collecting data?

Because the data I seek is not reported or currently found elsewhere.
And, just because they don't care about vigor, bias, stats, and math, doesn't mean they don't believe said analyses, while often quoting them.

They obviously don't believe in any type of analysis, as you've given them analysis on a different point, and they challenge you anyway. What's going to stop them from challenging your new data?

From the OP:
The hypothesis of this experiment is to establish that blacks aren't dying by police in numbers that deserve the outrage the few incidents receive, and the issue is likely not racism. Or, to prove me wrong, by documenting just how dangerous the police are towards blacks, showing there is a real pervasive issue.

I care, and I will have the numbers.
If they still want to be stupid, which they generally are, since these specific people are hypocritical and/or ignorant, that is their problem. However, if I am wrong, they won't convince me, but this survey might.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2015 10:19:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/13/2015 10:18:45 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:15:12 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:13:23 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:09:02 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/13/2015 10:05:46 AM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/13/2015 9:50:28 AM, wrichcirw wrote:

When I am challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor.

What possible value do you aim to get out of your research then?
A record of events.
Why bother collecting any data at all?
To have a record of events.
You're aiming to convince people who do not respect data and probably just want you to tell them what they want to hear.
Doubtful.

Ok, this really is the only point that matters as it's the goal of your experiment.

You said, exactly, that you are "challenged that more whites are killed by police than blacks, when that information is clearly evident via extrapolation from studies, it is evident that the general public do not care about "academic" vigor."

Right here you essentially stated that the people you are trying to convince do not respect data. So why bother collecting data?

Because the data I seek is not reported or currently found elsewhere.
And, just because they don't care about vigor, bias, stats, and math, doesn't mean they don't believe said analyses, while often quoting them.

They obviously don't believe in any type of analysis, as you've given them analysis on a different point, and they challenge you anyway. What's going to stop them from challenging your new data?

From the OP:
The hypothesis of this experiment is to establish that blacks aren't dying by police in numbers that deserve the outrage the few incidents receive, and the issue is likely not racism. Or, to prove me wrong, by documenting just how dangerous the police are towards blacks, showing there is a real pervasive issue.

I care, and I will have the numbers.
If they still want to be stupid, which they generally are, since these specific people are hypocritical and/or ignorant, that is their problem. However, if I am wrong, they won't convince me, but this survey might.

fair enough. Good luck,
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?