boyst Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Why you ripping on me? I hold a lot of the same beliefs you do... Especially in this case. I didn't rip on you. I said you were an intellectual. It's not at all a rip or sarcasm. You are hard to give a comeback to because anyone could simply say "beans are green" and you'd type 3 paragraphs responding to them. You win by attrition every single time. haha
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 I didn't rip on you. I said you were an intellectual. It's not at all a rip or sarcasm. You are hard to give a comeback to because anyone could simply say "beans are green" and you'd type 3 paragraphs responding to them. You win by attrition every single time. haha Purple monkey dishwasher
boyst Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Purple monkey dishwasher hula hoop decimal point! jerk!
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 (edited) hula hoop decimal point! jerk! Hey! You're Kareem Abdul-Jabbar... My father says you don't work hard enough on defense... But I think you are gr8! Edited August 22, 2014 by ExiledInIllinois
Koko78 Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 No, Brown was shot in the back. That's already well established fact. It's not reality, mind you... Shot in the back while going from choir practice to the local food bank to feed the poor, after which he was going to head to orphanage to read to the children,
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Cop hasn't filed a report on this incident? Can't say his computer crashed, I wonder how far away that shot that went into the top of his head was fired from?
boyst Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 I was mocking you do you like movies about gladiators?
IDBillzFan Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 (edited) I wonder how far away that shot that went into the top of his head was fired from? I guess that depends on how far away the cop was when the 300-pound doped up teenager started to attack him again after beating in his head and trying to take his gun. Edited August 22, 2014 by LABillzFan
birdog1960 Posted August 22, 2014 Author Posted August 22, 2014 so why no data on police involved killings? http://www.npr.org/2014/08/21/342228794/ferguson-turns-lens-on-police-involved-killings-but-some-facts-are-few. we can get data on traffic deaths, suicides or overdoses but not this. seems to speaks to 1/2 of 4mer's question on how transparent police might be on this issue...
boyst Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 so why no data on police involved killings? http://www.npr.org/2014/08/21/342228794/ferguson-turns-lens-on-police-involved-killings-but-some-facts-are-few. we can get data on traffic deaths, suicides or overdoses but not this. seems to speaks to 1/2 of 4mer's question on how transparent police might be on this issue... Shirley this is something Holder and the DOJ should a dress! Heck. Those numbers are out there I am sure
/dev/null Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 do you like movies about gladiators? In the spirit of all the Airplane! references, here's Airplane!'s version of how PPP usually responds to Gatorman:
3rdnlng Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 so why no data on police involved killings? http://www.npr.org/2014/08/21/342228794/ferguson-turns-lens-on-police-involved-killings-but-some-facts-are-few. we can get data on traffic deaths, suicides or overdoses but not this. seems to speaks to 1/2 of 4mer's question on how transparent police might be on this issue... Most likely because it is such a small sample size.
birdog1960 Posted August 22, 2014 Author Posted August 22, 2014 Most likely because it is such a small sample size. a small sample size would make it more likely to get the data right. how many unaccounted for police involved killings are ok? it's not a subjective measurement. that's just stupid.
GG Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 so why no data on police involved killings? http://www.npr.org/2...e-facts-are-few. we can get data on traffic deaths, suicides or overdoses but not this. seems to speaks to 1/2 of 4mer's question on how transparent police might be on this issue... It's that symptom vs cause again isn't it? Are the police shootings the root cause of the issues that you're so concerned about?
birdog1960 Posted August 22, 2014 Author Posted August 22, 2014 It's that symptom vs cause again isn't it? Are the police shootings the root cause of the issues that you're so concerned about? makes no difference. the point is the data is not accurate. that's important. there's no technical reason that it shouldn't be. that leaves willful misreporting as the most likely explanation. i can fathom a likely cause for that as did the author interviewed on npr about it.
GG Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 makes no difference. the point is the data is not accurate. that's important. there's no technical reason that it shouldn't be. that leaves willful misreporting as the most likely explanation. i can fathom a likely cause for that as did the author interviewed on npr about it. While there's inconsistency in the reported data between FBI & local police numbers, it is not at a level where you can extrapolate mass cover ups or a hidden epidemic of police shootings. But if polite society spent as much energy discussing and addressing the root causes and not shouting about the symptoms, then maybe some kids will have a chance in their lives.
birdog1960 Posted August 22, 2014 Author Posted August 22, 2014 While there's inconsistency in the reported data between FBI & local police numbers, it is not at a level where you can extrapolate mass cover ups or a hidden epidemic of police shootings. But if polite society spent as much energy discussing and addressing the root causes and not shouting about the symptoms, then maybe some kids will have a chance in their lives. is that your thresahold for concern? mass coverups and hidden epidemics. we don't have reliable numbers on police associated killings. that should be the threshold.
GG Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 is that your thresahold for concern? mass coverups and hidden epidemics. we don't have reliable numbers on police associated killings. that should be the threshold. Ok, so if you eliminate the discrepancy in the reporting numbers and have clean data, then what? Will that solve the problem?
DC Tom Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 Ok, so if you eliminate the discrepancy in the reporting numbers and have clean data, then what? Will that solve the problem? Of course not. There's still a mass cover-up either way. Why are you even arguing with this doorknob? Wasn't it clear from the start he was going to circularly argue that his preconceived notions explained the data that justified his preconceived notions?
....lybob Posted August 23, 2014 Posted August 23, 2014 Bureau of justice statistics - Data from the Arrest-Related Deaths (ARD) component of the Deaths in Custody Reporting Program (DCRP) represent a national accounting of persons who have died during the process of arrest from 2003 through 2009. Highlights: A total of 4,813 deaths were reported to the Arrest-Related Deaths program from January 2003 through December 2009. Of reported arrest-related deaths, 61% (2,931) were classified as homicides by law enforcement personnel, 11% (541) were suicides, 11% (525) were due to intoxication, 6% (272) were accidental injuries, and 5% (244) were attributed to natural causes. State and local law enforcement agencies employing 100 or more full-time sworn personnel accounted for 75% of the 4,813 arrest-related deaths reported during 2003-2009. Among reported arrest-related deaths, 42% of persons were white, 32% were black, and 20% were Hispanic.
Recommended Posts