Triumph of Trump: NFL kneeling

[Roy]

But why would that be unusual or racial.

It doesn't seem to be. If blacks commit 52% of homicides, it makes sense that 52% of police shootings are of blacks.

MM cherry-picked data to claim that only 22% of police shootings were of blacks. Is that unusual or racial?

[seer]

How will the cycle be broken?

Two parent families with the father in the home would go a long way.

[seer]

It doesn't seem to be. If blacks commit 52% of homicides, it makes sense that 52% of police shootings are of blacks.

MM cherry-picked data to claim that only 22% of police shootings were of blacks. Is that unusual or racial?

I don't know if MM was being racial, he just had incomplete data.

[Roy]

I don't know if MM was being racial, he just had incomplete data.

Incomplete data that he selected.

[One Bad Pig]

When you say "we all", that's..... you and your imaginary admirers? Jimmy, there's not a single poster on here who thinks you're intelligent! Not ONE!

IIRC Starlight called him intelligent - and I wouldn't call Tassman and Charles imaginary.

Other than that, I got nothin'.

[Cow Poke]

IIRC Starlight called him intelligent -

Hmmmm.... given Star's most recent rant...

[Roy]

I don't know if MM was being racial, he just had incomplete data.

Incomplete data that he selected.

NB: The 2011 report MM cited contains historical data on police shootings from 2000-2011. MM could have used more than a decade's worth of data, but chose instead to pick data for a single year. MM didn't have incomplete data. He selected incomplete data.

[One Bad Pig]

NB: The 2011 report MM cited contains historical data on police shootings from 2000-2011. MM could have used more than a decade's worth of data, but chose instead to pick data for a single year. MM didn't have incomplete data. He selected incomplete data.

IMO, it's probably best to go with everyone fired at by police, since they shoot to kill. That way you get a more statistically significant sample size. I agree that one-year outliers are a rather poor selection of data, especially with such small sample sizes.

[JimL]

Ya know, this is a good example of the fact that you are often a total stranger to the truth. You're either ignorant, or an outright liar.

No, Tazz has you pegged exactly.

So, go ahead and say it, Tazzy. I double dog dare you. Say that you believe Jimmy is intelligent! In fact, admit that he's as smart as you are!

Way to go Preacher, way to keep exposing your true character.

[Sparko]

JimL reminds me of someone standing in a mud pit telling passersby that they need to take a shower.

[Cow Poke]

No, Tazz has you pegged exactly.

Yeah, I'll stay up all night worrying about that, Jimmy.

[Mountain Man]

Why you think this shows whites are statistically more likely...

I didn't say "more likely", I said "disproportionately more likely".

[Mountain Man]

MM cherry-picked data...

No, I didn't. That was just the report I happened to find with an internet search. It's not like I looked through several reports and then chose the one I liked the best.

At any rate, it just confirmed other studies that have been done showing that police are more likely to take a shot at a white person than a black person. I've referenced that study elsewhere in this thread.

[Mountain Man]

Here's one study...

Source: Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-surprise-you/

© Copyright Original Source

[Tassman]

Ya know, this is a good example of the fact that you are often a total stranger to the truth. You're either ignorant, or an outright liar.



So, go ahead and say it, Tazzy. I double dog dare you. Say that you believe Jimmy is intelligent! In fact, admit that he's as smart as you are!

Jim is intelligent and insightful, which is more than one can say for you with your constant carping and 'put-downs' which pass for debate in CP land.