Tweet
Originally posted by Morgs153
View Post
Current data as of today in reference to just the city of Chicago.
Shot and killed : 164
Shot and wounded : 663
Total shot : 827
Total homicides :165
A person is shot every 5 hrs 11 minutes. A person is killed every 22 hrs 1 minute. 76% are male 24% are female. 72.6% are black, 19.4% Hispanic, 8% white or other.
Police involved shootings in Chicago year to date 2025 as of today 5 killed 6 wounded.
What those statistics don't really tell you is most assailants are often the same race as their victims. That's just the way it is. Whites most often have white victims, Native Americans have Native American victims, Hispanics have Hispanic victims, and blacks predominantly (but not exclusively) have black victims. It is the way it is because violent crimes are often committed against family, friends and people of the neighborhood/community of the assailant and offender relationship.
By and large gun violence statistics are skewed for the nation as a whole. The big factor is once you take away suicide you glean off a rather large number from the "gun violence" stat. Once you cut through the weeds you come to find that gun violence in this country is primarily a problem in some of our larger cities. That is why I used the Chicago example.
So, if you want to have effective policing in those communities you have to put your interdiction efforts into those communities. Chicago under Brandon Johnson cancelled their contract with Shot Spotter. Why? Probably because it was working too well. You don't want the cops responding to the areas where the gun fire came from if it results in uncomfortable arrests. Because that would be racial profiling. The Ferguson Effect is real. The trouble with it is that when police no longer police those areas it creates more victims in those areas, and those victims are minorities. But to police those areas means you have to interdict in those areas. A lot of that interdiction comes from traffic stops. Or you just ignore those areas for fear of being accused of profiling and the good people who live in those areas suffer for it. Professor Roland Fryer of Harvard put together a pretty good study on it. Link below.
Yes, the FBI data does show pretty much an annual trend of about 10-25 shootings of "unarmed" subjects and that goes back for years. The problem with FBI crime data is that many of our largest cities don't put their data in. Why? Who runs those cities? The other thing that is unclear is what the circumstances of the "unarmed" conflict were. An unarmed person attempting to disarm a police officer is fair game (as one example). An unarmed person trying to run over an officer with a car is likely to get a few through the windshield (as another example). It is not hundreds or thousands of unarmed black men like the left would like you to believe. It is maybe a couple dozen at best. Still troubling in some cases but without knowing the details of every encounter that had that result it would be problematic to paint with a broad brush. Are some cases screw ups? Yes they are. Cops who screw up lose their jobs and sometimes go to prison for screw ups. But those are rare in the big picture of things.
There is right around 750,000 police officers in this country. That is federal, state, county, municipal and other. When you divide that into shift components most work days because that is when your admin is in house along with much support staff and that's probably half your number. It is safe to estimate that in the dark hours you have maybe 150,000 on duty nationwide for a population of 330 million. That's actually impressive to think of it. By and large we're a well behaved country. Except for some he!! hole cities.
I did over 30 years in the job. I worked the road on patrol the entire time. I was regular a police officer and deputy sheriff, a training officer, crash reconstruction, SWAT for 17 of those years, a Sgt and then a Lt before retiring. Yes, please, tell me all about what I don't know about my experiences. Tell me how when I'm moving down the highway and my radar picks up a speeding vehicle nearly a mile away coming toward me that I'm supposed to know the ethnicity of who might be in the car. Tell me when I see a car with dark tinted windows blow a stop sign from a half a block away that I should know what the ethnicity of the occupant(s) will be. If you work in a white area, chances are they are white. If you work in a black area, chances are they are black. If you are focusing on high crime areas where open air drug sales are happening, or prostitutes are walking up on cars, or fights are breaking out by night clubs, guess what? You don't get to pick and choose who gets into that sh!t.
I thought this thread was about bombing Iran.
Are we profiling Iran?
Shot and killed : 164
Shot and wounded : 663
Total shot : 827
Total homicides :165
A person is shot every 5 hrs 11 minutes. A person is killed every 22 hrs 1 minute. 76% are male 24% are female. 72.6% are black, 19.4% Hispanic, 8% white or other.
Police involved shootings in Chicago year to date 2025 as of today 5 killed 6 wounded.
What those statistics don't really tell you is most assailants are often the same race as their victims. That's just the way it is. Whites most often have white victims, Native Americans have Native American victims, Hispanics have Hispanic victims, and blacks predominantly (but not exclusively) have black victims. It is the way it is because violent crimes are often committed against family, friends and people of the neighborhood/community of the assailant and offender relationship.
By and large gun violence statistics are skewed for the nation as a whole. The big factor is once you take away suicide you glean off a rather large number from the "gun violence" stat. Once you cut through the weeds you come to find that gun violence in this country is primarily a problem in some of our larger cities. That is why I used the Chicago example.
So, if you want to have effective policing in those communities you have to put your interdiction efforts into those communities. Chicago under Brandon Johnson cancelled their contract with Shot Spotter. Why? Probably because it was working too well. You don't want the cops responding to the areas where the gun fire came from if it results in uncomfortable arrests. Because that would be racial profiling. The Ferguson Effect is real. The trouble with it is that when police no longer police those areas it creates more victims in those areas, and those victims are minorities. But to police those areas means you have to interdict in those areas. A lot of that interdiction comes from traffic stops. Or you just ignore those areas for fear of being accused of profiling and the good people who live in those areas suffer for it. Professor Roland Fryer of Harvard put together a pretty good study on it. Link below.
Yes, the FBI data does show pretty much an annual trend of about 10-25 shootings of "unarmed" subjects and that goes back for years. The problem with FBI crime data is that many of our largest cities don't put their data in. Why? Who runs those cities? The other thing that is unclear is what the circumstances of the "unarmed" conflict were. An unarmed person attempting to disarm a police officer is fair game (as one example). An unarmed person trying to run over an officer with a car is likely to get a few through the windshield (as another example). It is not hundreds or thousands of unarmed black men like the left would like you to believe. It is maybe a couple dozen at best. Still troubling in some cases but without knowing the details of every encounter that had that result it would be problematic to paint with a broad brush. Are some cases screw ups? Yes they are. Cops who screw up lose their jobs and sometimes go to prison for screw ups. But those are rare in the big picture of things.
There is right around 750,000 police officers in this country. That is federal, state, county, municipal and other. When you divide that into shift components most work days because that is when your admin is in house along with much support staff and that's probably half your number. It is safe to estimate that in the dark hours you have maybe 150,000 on duty nationwide for a population of 330 million. That's actually impressive to think of it. By and large we're a well behaved country. Except for some he!! hole cities.
I did over 30 years in the job. I worked the road on patrol the entire time. I was regular a police officer and deputy sheriff, a training officer, crash reconstruction, SWAT for 17 of those years, a Sgt and then a Lt before retiring. Yes, please, tell me all about what I don't know about my experiences. Tell me how when I'm moving down the highway and my radar picks up a speeding vehicle nearly a mile away coming toward me that I'm supposed to know the ethnicity of who might be in the car. Tell me when I see a car with dark tinted windows blow a stop sign from a half a block away that I should know what the ethnicity of the occupant(s) will be. If you work in a white area, chances are they are white. If you work in a black area, chances are they are black. If you are focusing on high crime areas where open air drug sales are happening, or prostitutes are walking up on cars, or fights are breaking out by night clubs, guess what? You don't get to pick and choose who gets into that sh!t.
I thought this thread was about bombing Iran.
Are we profiling Iran?
Even if you choose to ignore the veil-of-darkness analysis (which is pretty telling if you ask me), you can't ignore the fact that Blacks and Hispanics are searched twice as much and yet they are less likely to possess contraband. That is a problem. It would not be an issue if they were searched more and they were found to possess contraband more.
I bring this issue up again because if bias exists in one part of the system it exists in other parts. If I understand your 3rd paragraph correctly, what you're trying to say is that black people need to be searched more, essentially. That would be true if those searches were successful. They aren't.
The FBI stats are kinda useless if we don't have a full sample size. I've read that some very large agencies haven't submitted data.
Why don't they submit data? Well I think Chicago is a good example. It has a poor reputation among a lot of right wing people yet I've spoken to people who have been there and they loved it and they said they felt very safe in the city. A few bad suburbs can go a long way to inflate statistics even if most of the city is fine. It is legitimately one of the best cities in the US and yet our current president thinks it's Afghanistan.
That goes for most cities. There's always going to be good and bad.
I could use the same "unarmed circumstance" argument for armed conflicts.
"If you are focusing on high crime areas where open air drug sales are happening, or prostitutes are walking up on cars, or fights are breaking out by night clubs, guess what? You don't get to pick and choose who gets into that sh!t."
Let me guess, that must be a black suburb?
Yes, black people do commit crime at a higher rate. I have two responses.
That is not always the reason for racial discrepancies. Tell me why Blacks and Hispanics get searched a 2 times the rate that white people do despite possessing less contraband? Why do they get pulled over in the less visible nighttime?
Secondly, should we not as a country look to change that? We need to get to the core of these issues.
Even if you don't believe bias exists at the policing level, you would have to admit that there are still systemic issues facing black people. It is in the nation's best interest to address these issue.
Here are some findings from the CEPR: "Our results show that the black–white gap in upward mobility is driven primarily by environmental factors that can be changed. But, the findings also highlight the challenges one faces in addressing these environmental disparities. Black and white boys have very different outcomes even if they grow up in two-parent families with comparable incomes, education, and wealth, live on the same city block, and attend the same school. This finding suggests that many widely discussed proposals may be insufficient to narrow the black–white gap themselves, and suggest potentially new directions to consider."
Statistically, you cannot deny that some racial bias is evident. Racism is still a thing. Don't act like it isn't. The numbers tell a pretty clear story.
Annnnd yeh this thread got sidetracked over on Page 2 when lurker brought up David Feldman being shared here which is ironic for a number of reasons but I digress.
Comment