Gun Control - Topic

[StringJunky]

Just now, DirtyChai said:

Ya, most likely in some cases, but probably not most.

I have a bit perspective I'd like to share,  but it's getting late and will probably have to wait till tomorrow. 

 

OK.

[iNow]

30 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

Ya, most likely in some cases, but probably not most.

Except, no. The opposite. If you disagree, you’ll need to offer data since this is a question of numbers and majorities.

Here the core point: Otherwise quite good people... well trained, well raised,  and well intentioned... you and me included... too often fall victim to unconscious biases and THAT is the single best and most parsimonious explanation for why black folks are so asymmetrically victimized by police relative to white folks. 

The only other explanation that makes any sense whatsoever in these scenarios is CONSCIOUS bias, and that IMO is a few orders of magnitude less relavant when considered in this context. 

Edited September 9, 2018 by iNow

[John Cuthber]

6 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Even if they did, the odds are that they wouldn't have a gun anyway. 

The last figure I saw  said that 42% of US households have a gun.

I suspect that the states where "stand your ground" laws are in force have higher ownership rates.

6 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Because most people aren't murderous arseholes looking for an excuse to kill their neighbor,

That would be relevant if I had said that most people would  kill people using this as a precedent.

I didn't.

6 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Furthermore, you couldn't really use this defense to "accidentally" walk into the wrong apartment miles away from your own and shoot the occupant,

True, but there are plenty of cases where people kill their neighbours.

This case  makes it easier for some of them.

[Ten oz]

8 hours ago, iNow said:

Except, no. The opposite. If you disagree, you’ll need to offer data since this is a question of numbers and majorities.

Here the core point: Otherwise quite good people... well trained, well raised,  and well intentioned... you and me included... too often fall victim to unconscious biases and THAT is the single best and most parsimonious explanation for why black folks are so asymmetrically victimized by police relative to white folks. 

The only other explanation that makes any sense whatsoever in these scenarios is CONSCIOUS bias, and that IMO is a few orders of magnitude less relavant when considered in this context. 

+1, I agree with this but think there is an important additional factors that grow out of unconscious bias. Apathy towards the notion that racism is a problem unabless the racists which do exist to work in the open. Some laws and policies are explicitly designed to disenfranchised and hurt specific groups of people. Refusing to identify that in pursuit of defending assumed views about race among the majority allows room for the ill-intentioned to cover. Lots of people who believe themselves to be fair minded end up supporting racist and sexist laws unwittedly because they are simply don't take the concepts seriously enough. Just as lots of people who otherwise care about clean air and water support policies destructive to both out if denial that corporations would do wrong or rather misplaced faith that free markets are self regulating. Bad people exist in all forms and every type of evil needs to be addressed. 

 

2 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

 

9 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Furthermore, you couldn't really use this defense to "accidentally" walk into the wrong apartment miles away from your own and shoot the occupant, especially if you had a previous relationship with this person and thus a possible motive to shoot them in the first place.

George Zimmerman spotted a teenage kid, parked his truck, got out with a gun, followed the teen, and then when he ended up killing the teen just a couple of blocks from home Zimmerman successfully argued self defense. No witnesses to what happened. Just Zimmerman's word that the teenage kid, one which Zimmerman chose to arm himself and follow, randomly attacked him out of the blue. Not only did Zimmerman win the case but police initially weren't even going to charge Zimmerman. It took national pressure just to get prosecutors involved. 

In my opinion laws need to impose responsibilities on gun owners. Fear as the lone criteria for shooting someone opens the door to nearly anyone being able to justify killing someone in nearly any situation. 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by Ten oz

[DirtyChai]

19 hours ago, iNow said:

Here the core point: Otherwise quite good people... well trained, well raised,  and well intentioned... you and me included... too often fall victim to unconscious biases and THAT is the single best and most parsimonious explanation for why black folks are so asymmetrically victimized by police relative to white folks. 

The problem with this is that we really don't know the level of unconscious bias a cop may have, nor the role it plays in determining whether or not they shoot a suspect.  How do you measure it?  How do you mitigate it's effect?

On top of that, it's just an unsatisfying answer.  What are we to tell black people,  "Yep, that's it, unconscious bias, nothing we can do about it, sorry, I really don't know what else to tell ya bud, just don't make any sudden movements I guess -  sucks to be you, eh?"

 

19 hours ago, iNow said:

If you disagree, you’ll need to offer data since this is a question of numbers and majorities.

Yep, numbers and majorities indeed.

The majority of whites are dispersed throughout the entire country.  They typically live in less populated suburban and rural areas  where there are fewer police and thus less interactions  with law enforcement in general.

The majority of blacks however tend to live densely populated within inner cities that have higher populations and more law enforcement officers policing a smaller area,  increasing the overall amount of police interactions.

Detroit for example has a population that is at least 4 times as dense, with 4 times the number of cops per 1000 people.  Add to that the heightened level of police suspicion due to higher crime rates and it's no wonder the numbers are disproportionate.

A white man in the inner city would most likely be treated with more suspicion and approached with more caution then he would  in the suburbs.  A good comparison study would be to look at the number of white men killed in the inner city as apposed to suburban/rural areas.

Having said all that, I must admit that a black man in the suburbs would most likely be approached with more suspicion than a white man due to conscious or unconscious bias as you claim.

To put it all very simply, shooting white men in the suburbs would be like shooting fish in a lake, whereas shooting black men in the inner city would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

We are still a very segregated country, and while I agree that racial bias plays a role in why black men are shot, I still see it more of an issue of demographics and an unbalanced socioeconomic structure built in part upon decades of institutional racism that must be undone.

[iNow]

55 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

we really don't know the level of unconscious bias a cop may have, nor the role it plays in determining whether or not they shoot a suspect.  How do you measure it?  How do you mitigate it's effect?

On top of that, it's just an unsatisfying answer.  What are we to tell black people,  "Yep, that's it, unconscious bias, nothing we can do about it, sorry, I really don't know what else to tell ya bud, just don't make any sudden movements I guess -  sucks to be you, eh?"

It’s not like we’re trying to find a rational number as the square root of 2 or travel backwards in time.

These questions have easy answers that have already been offered. Now we just need the will to act on those answers. 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9133.12269

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103103000209

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/12/cover-policing.aspx

 

1 hour ago, DirtyChai said:

while I agree that racial bias plays a role in why black men are shot, I still see it more of an issue of demographics and an unbalanced socioeconomic structure

Appreciate you sharing your opinion, but as it’s completely unsupported by evidence and numbers I find it unconvincing. 

What you’re suggesting may play a role. I won’t disagree with that. It’s likely only a third or fourth order effect though. 

[StringJunky]

49 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

We are still a very segregated country, and while I agree that racial bias plays a role in why black men are shot, I still see it more of an issue of demographics and an unbalanced socioeconomic structure built in part upon decades of institutional racism that must be undone.

Yes, this doesn't help. The geographical segregation, due to disparities in education/employment opportunities, which determines where one can live causes black and white ghettos. This perpetuates and reinforces the 'black and white' narrative. Although the person killed lived in an  upmarket building, it's what's happening in deprived areas that spills over  and feeds  what happens elsewhere. 

[iNow]

I didn’t push back too hard as it varies by location, but many of dirtychai’s demographic assumptions are also outdated and IMO misguided.

Below is data published just 4 months ago in 2018 by Pew:

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/

 

More importantly, given the comparatively high number of whites regardless of location type, his assumptions are simply wrong and consequently any conclusions he draws only accurate by accident. 

Edited September 10, 2018 by iNow

[KipIngram]

I'm not really familiar with the circumstances of this case, but I ran across some interesting statistics the other day.  In 2015 the Washington Post estimated that there were 350 million firearms in the US.  That same year, the Centers for Disease Control reported that approximately 36,000 individuals died from gunshot wounds.

I can't help noting that this implies that 99.99% of all firearms in the US in 2015 were not used to kill someone.  A better analysis would include non-fatal gunshot wounds as well, but I didn't see that data.  At any rate, it seems clear that the vast majority of firearms in the US are not used for "nefarious purposes."  Based on this, I find the notion of a complete and total ban heavy-handed.  It seems to me that solving any problem by producing 10,000 times the impact actually needed to solve the problem almost guarantees some form of unintended consequences.

So my question is simple.  Do we really think that the only way to reduce the 36k annual fatality count is by total disarmament?  I think there must be more intelligent ways to attack this problem. 

I'll share another anecdote - but I want to make clear that this is, in fact, just that: an anecdote.  Word of mouth from an IRC friend I regard as well read, but I have not checked his facts here - he can fall into hyperbole sometimes, so I am more inclined to accept the "spirit" of this story than the specific numbers.  According to this friend, the US ranks 3rd in the world on murder rates.  But, he said, if you remove New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington D.C. we drop to below 500th.  All of these cities have strong gun control legislation compared to the national average.  It seems unclear to me, therefore, that having laws against guns actually solves the gun violence problem (in fact, this anecdote implies that it may make it worse).  After all, the people who actually commit the violence are breaking the law - they are bad people.  Why would they hesitate to break a law re: having a gun?

I also feel fairly sure that if we waved a magic wand today and made every gun in America vanish, they'd immediately begin re-appearing.  And not just via illegal imports - if I were an enterprising Mafia don, the first thing I'd do in such a situation would be to hire gunsmiths, set up hidden gun shops, and start arming my troops.  This technology is "somewhat common knowledge" and it's not rocket science - Pandora's box is open and I doubt it can ever be closed.  A black market seems inevitable, and it will route guns primarily into the hands of people inclined to break the law.  So given that when a random person possesses a firearm, it's order of 10,000 times more likely that he or she will not commit violence with that the alternative, I think I like having plenty of armed good people in the population.  The alternative distribution seems far worse to me.

[iNow]

It’s not an issue of total ban or nothing at all. Lots of smart in between options exist. Hell, I’ve put forth probably 30 myself through the years just on this board alone. 

Edited September 10, 2018 by iNow

[StringJunky]

 

54 minutes ago, iNow said:

I didn’t push back too hard as it varies by location, but many of dirtychai’s demographic assumptions are also outdated and IMO misguided.

Below is data published just 4 months ago in 2018 by Pew:

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/

 

More importantly, given the comparatively high number of whites regardless of location type, his assumptions are simply wrong and consequently any conclusions he draws only accurate by accident. 

 What's important is the geographical distribution of ethnicities as this determines day-to-day exposure.This is New York:

http://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/23/nyregion/20110123-nyc-ethnic-neighborhoods-map.html?_r=0

Edited September 10, 2018 by StringJunky

[iNow]

Having grown up in New York, I’m familiar with it. The US, however, is large and NYC is not only exceptional, but also in large part an exception. 

[StringJunky]

13 minutes ago, iNow said:

Having grown up in New York, I’m familiar with it. The US, however, is large and NYC is not only exceptional, but also in large part an exception. 

Exception in what way? I picked it randomly, thinking it was a typical large US city area, then looked for a map of ethnic distribution.

[Ten oz]

10 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Yep, numbers and majorities indeed.

The majority of whites are dispersed throughout the entire country.  They typically live in less populated suburban and rural areas  where there are fewer police and thus less interactions  with law enforcement in general.

The majority of blacks however tend to live densely populated within inner cities that have higher populations and more law enforcement officers policing a smaller area,  increasing the overall amount of police interactions.

Half of the total total population of the country live in the top 30 metropolitan areas, About 100 million people live in just the top 10 alone. The majority everyone in the country lives in cities or suburbs. Those living in actual rural areas are in the minority regardless of race. 

11 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Detroit for example has a population that is at least 4 times as dense, with 4 times the number of cops per 1000 people.  Add to that the heightened level of police suspicion due to higher crime rates and it's no wonder the numbers are disproportionate.

A white man in the inner city would most likely be treated with more suspicion and approached with more caution then he would  in the suburbs.  A good comparison study would be to look at the number of white men killed in the inner city as apposed to suburban/rural areas.

Having said all that, I must admit that a black man in the suburbs would most likely be approached with more suspicion than a white man due to conscious or unconscious bias as you claim.

Many rural areas have much higher crime rates than densely populated cities. You are not speaking to real data but rather just repeating popular notions.

Quote

 

Violent crime is not limited to large urban areas. In fact, it thrives in towns with lower populations.

These 27 towns and cities have a higher per capita of violent crime per 10,000 residents than Detroit, Michigan, the city that leads the way with 204.65 violent crimes per 10,000 people. Some are suburbs, while others are rural areas.

The results are based off the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 2016 crime data report, looking at cities and towns with a population of less than 25,000 people. The FBI defines violent crime as murder and non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

https://madison.com/news/the-most-violent-small-towns-in-america/collection_5085a625-56c2-59c1-a230-b098d9877de1.html#1

 

 

[iNow]

10 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Exception in what way? I picked it randomly, thinking it was a typical large US city area, then looked for a map of ethnic distribution.

I guess my point is that using NYC as a representative example of most US cities is a mistake.

Probably too deep into the weeds already, and I don't have the time this morning to do justice to your question, but you can get a clearer picture of demographic breakdowns across various US cities (quite literally) by looking at graphics like these: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/08/us/census-race-map.html

You'll note NYC is much more colorful and more saturated / densely packed in those colors than many/most other big cities.

Either way, it's a distraction from the core point. Even in cities, whites are the largest population bloc and they're not being asymmetrically brutalized and killed by police. Even when one accounts for population density, even when one accounts for involvement of weapons or type of interaction, blacks still face massive injustice from our US justice system, including from the front-line boots on the ground enforcers themselves. 

When's the last time we heard a story about a white guy... unarmed... moving AWAY from the cop and doing so with their hands up... still being shot? I can't remember a single one, but I can think of about 6 for black men right off the top of my head.

Also as Ten Oz just pointed out, Chai is repeating popular myths and outdated narratives and appears not to be rooting any of his arguments in actual data. 

[StringJunky]

32 minutes ago, iNow said:

I guess my point is that using NYC as a representative example of most US cities is a mistake.

Probably too deep into the weeds already, and I don't have the time this morning to do justice to your question, but you can get a clearer picture of demographic breakdowns across various US cities (quite literally) by looking at graphics like these: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/08/us/census-race-map.html

You'll note NYC is much more colorful and more saturated / densely packed in those colors than many/most other big cities.

Either way, it's a distraction from the core point. Even in cities, whites are the largest population bloc and they're not being asymmetrically brutalized and killed by police. Even when one accounts for population density, even when one accounts for involvement of weapons or type of interaction, blacks still face massive injustice from our US justice system, including from the front-line boots on the ground enforcers themselves. 

When's the last time we heard a story about a white guy... unarmed... moving AWAY from the cop and doing so with their hands up... still being shot? I can't remember a single one, but I can think of about 6 for black men right off the top of my head.

Also as Ten Oz just pointed out, Chai is repeating popular myths and outdated narratives and appears not to be rooting any of his arguments in actual data. 

Those maps are exactly the type I was looking for but didn't know how to Google it.  I wonder if I can find one like that for the UK. Those maps show the problem right there.

[dimreepr]

The biggest problem is, we lose sight of the reason for 12 people in a jury, that cops are held to a different (much more lenient) standard which effectively creates a Judge Dredd mentality. 

[zapatos]

16 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

The biggest problem is, we lose sight of the reason for 12 people in a jury, that cops are held to a different (much more lenient) standard which effectively creates a Judge Dredd mentality. 

I feel we should have a different standard for police, just as we have a different standards for youth, people in their homes vs those in public, people who are afraid, the military, etc. The problem from my perspective is that the the police standard is TOO different in many cases.

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, zapatos said:

I feel we should have a different standard for police, just as we have a different standards for youth, people in their homes vs those in public, people who are afraid, the military, etc

Indeed, but the difference shouldn't be to not face the twelve.

[zapatos]

Just now, dimreepr said:

Indeed, but the difference shouldn't be to not face the twelve.

Sometimes it should. That's what makes the standard different.

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Sometimes it should. 

When?

[zapatos]

The law gives police wide discretion on when to use force, which is very reasonable considering we hand them a gun and insert them into potentially dangerous situations. We train them then ask them to make judgement calls. The average citizen is not allowed a similar wide discretion regarding use of force. It is therefore not reasonable to judge all police actions by the standards that apply to you and me.

I might not be allowed to shoot a man running away from me, but an officer is allowed to decide if that person is a danger to others, and therefore can be justified in shooting them in the back.

Police should only face the 12 if they've violated police standards, not if they've violated civilian standards.

 

[Ten oz]

16 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I feel we should have a different standard for police, just as we have a different standards for youth, people in their homes vs those in public, people who are afraid, the military, etc. The problem from my perspective is that the the police standard is TOO different in many cases.

I think it is bigger than just police officers. Rep. Duncan Hunter has been indicted by a federal grand jury for campaign finance crimes and he is still favored to win re-election in November. Who breaks the law always seems to matter more than what law was broken here in the U.S.. It is why white collar felonies seldom come with real prison time, why the opioid crisis is a health issue and not a criminal issue, and so on. Laws are written and voted on by people and people are bias at best and corrupt at worst. Our laws reflect as much.Donald J. Trump is our President for %&#$-sake.

16 minutes ago, zapatos said:

The law gives police wide discretion on when to use force, which is very reasonable considering we hand them a gun and insert them into potentially dangerous situations. We train them then ask them to make judgement calls. The average citizen is not allowed a similar wide discretion regarding use of force. It is therefore not reasonable to judge all police actions by the standards that apply to you and me.

I might not be allowed to shoot a man running away from me, but an officer is allowed to decide if that person is a danger to others, and therefore can be justified in shooting them in the back.

Police should only face the 12 if they've violated police standards, not if they've violated civilian standards.

 

Police here in the U.S. kill more people in an average month than all the police in the UK, Germany, and Japan combined (similar population) kill every few years. I personally do not think the discretion we give police is reasonable. I think there are given far too much discretion based on an over estimate of risk. Being a Police Officer is not even one of the 10 most dangerous jobs in the U.S. TOP 10 and known of the people in the top ten are armed are kill anywhere near the number of people Police in the U.S. do. 

[zapatos]

I agree. Lack of fairness is widespread. Whites have it better than blacks. The rich have it better than the poor. The powerful have it better than the weak.

A problem that arises when addressing those disparities though is that often times the same broad brush that is criticized for causing the disparities (e.g. police assuming blacks are reaching for a gun) is used to address the disparities (e.g. the cop shot a black man so he must be racist).

While things may get better over time, I fear the problems will never go away. The rich & powerful have been abusing the poor & weak forever. I see nothing that tells me that will change.

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

I feel we should have a different standard for police, just as we have a different standards for youth, people in their homes vs those in public, people who are afraid, the military, etc. The problem from my perspective is that the the police standard is TOO different in many cases.

That chap was shot by a civilian, not a police officer. He was not shot in the course of her executing her job.

Edited September 10, 2018 by StringJunky