The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Liberals Are Uninformed, Part 627
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Civil Unrest and the Presidential Election Study, a poll of 980 people:

Washington Post’s Fatal Force database lists 134 unarmed blacks being shot dead by the police over the last 6.2 years, or about 22 per year.

The Post reports a little under 24% being black from 2015 onward, although another 10% of the data base are listed as race unknown, so call it 26% or 27% as a best estimate.

 
Hide 36 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. What percentage of negroes are incapable of reading and understanding graphs?

  2. On average 22 unarmed Black men are killed in The U.S per year. Extremely low when you factor in that Black men are the least law abiding demographic group in The U.S. It’s also extremely low when you factor in that there are individual lone wolf serial killers who have murdered more than 22 people. John Wayne Gacy for example has atleast 34 murders under his belt. So 22 unarmed Black men dying per year by law enforcement is nowhere close to being racial genocide like Demorat fearmongers claim!

  3. Liberals are misinformed, not uninformed. I have a close friend of is a corporate litigator for a medium sized firm in San Fran (he is my older daughter’s godfather). He is not unintelligent, but he staunchly believes that “the extreme right” is as big a threat to the stability of our government as anything else. It’s impossible to convince him otherwise.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Mike Tre


    He is not unintelligent, but he staunchly believes that “the extreme right” is as big a threat to the stability of our government as anything else. It’s impossible to convince him otherwise.
     
    For the same reason a devout Catholic can't be convinced that the Pope isn't God's right hand man on Earth.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  4. From Jeffrey H. Anderson in the WSJ. Link below.

    ‘Absolutely,” President Biden said last year when a reporter asked him if he believes there’s “systemic racism in law enforcement.” That’s hard to square with a presidential memorandum Mr. Biden recently issued, stating: “It is the policy of my Administration to make evidence-based decisions guided by the best available science and data.” The claim of “systemic racism in law enforcement” defies the best available science and data.

    [MORE]

    In a report released days before Mr. Biden’s inauguration, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics examined whether people of different races were arrested to a degree that was disproportionate to their involvement in crime. The report concluded that there was no statistically significant difference by race between how likely people were to commit serious violent crimes and how likely they were to be arrested. In other words, the data suggested that police officers and sheriff’s deputies focus on criminals’ actions, not their race…

    These statistics don’t indicate that police officers are never racist. Individual officers, like people in any profession, run the gamut from laudable to deplorable. But what they do show is that Mr. Biden’s claim of “systemic racism” in American police forces is contrary to the best data we have on the subject.

    It’s good news that police are arresting those who actually commit crimes, and that the data doesn’t support the claim of “systemic racism.” In his inaugural address, Mr. Biden emphasized the need for unity and said that “demonization” has “long torn us apart.” Yet the president’s demonization of America as a land of “systemic racism,” a claim that he roots in the alleged racism of police, contradicts the evidence. It would be more accurate, as well as more unifying, to refer to America as what it has always aspired to be and what the data generally shows it to be—a land of justice.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-claiming-systemic-racism-in-policing-defies-science-11614969593

  5. There are people who believe the police killed over 10,000 blacks in one year? Amazing.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @peterike


    There are people who believe the police killed over 10,000 blacks in one year? Amazing.

     

    "Conservatives" are more dismissive than "Very Conservatives". (The latter must refer to us reactionaries.) Would these be the neocons, with "my Negro problem, and ours"?

    The VCs, in turn, are more open to the higher figures. "Shoot an unarmed black man? Of course. Wouldn't you?"
  6. Hey, you did this already, Steve, at least the top graph. Maybe this one was for reinforcement.

    Though there’s a political component to it, that 2nd graph represents just pure guesswork for almost all being polled beside the occasional aware city cop or Unz Review blogger. If I hadn’t have read lots of your, VDare’s, and Paul Kersey’s posts, I’d have guessed 25% one day, maybe 50% another.

    Regarding the top graph, though, man! Those yellow and green bars mean 27 a week, so about 4 per day (or over for green). You’d think DIMS* would kick in for some of these people. I mentioned the innumeracy last time. I think the orange guessers are reasonable people, and grey is a grey area as far as reasonableness goes.

    With even hard-lefties being 46% blue and orange, how can they support rioting about it, if this is their idea of the scope of the problem? Wouldn’t there be a dozen other things to riot over? It’s the Lyin’ Press narrative that matters though.

    .

    * Does It Make Sense?

    • Agree: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Achmed E. Newman


    DIMS*

    * Does It Make Sense?

     

    Does It Make Sense? Um, Maybe...


    https://images.dailyhive.com/20181211112738/shutterstock_628640663.jpg
  7. Reminds to me the often discussed fact that Germans constantly overestimate the number of Jews in Germany – because they estimate it according to the frequency Jewish representatives are interviewed in the TV.
    Of course this is not explained as a result of TV politics, but as a proof for the Anti-Semitic obsession of Germans about Jews.

  8. Do you mean to tell me that people believe in myths?

    I’m shocked, shocked that this is so.

  9. Confirmation, if any was needed, that a powerful faction (not large at all), with significant control of the means of mass communication, and thus extraordinary influence, is increasingly absorbed in their own self-generated “reality” bubble.

  10. People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies – even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays – you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It’s going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Jack D

    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he'd go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @William Badwhite

    , @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Jack D


    The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies – even a second of hesitation might cost you your life.
     
    Isn't this just a standard case of self defense?

    People who think this is just about police use of force rather than establishing as a first principle that "blacks can do whatever they want" might want to pause a bit here. You're not going to satisfy the crocodile by feeding it the (predominantly white and male, middle class) police. They're not going to stop there - they're going to gin up the mob in other clear cut cases of self defense.

    During the Trayvon Martin affair, you would hear people say that Zimmerman was a "wannabe cop" and that he should have left the matter to the police and I suppose ignored the suspicious behavior that he had witnessed. Then without a hitch they dropped the notion that cops investigating the behavior of blacks in suspicious circumstances was the only acceptable state and immediately made the outrage about police themselves. There is no consistent standard being observed - the sole conclusion to be drawn is that blacks should be immune from interference regardless of what it is that they happen to be doing the law and civil order be damned.
    , @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia
    @Jack D

    Correct.

    So the next questions are these.

    1. Has the plan of the woke all along been to inculcate in law enforcement a fear of shooting a black armed aggressive criminal because the woke KNOW that blacks are more likely to BE aggressive criminals, and so we need to "protect" these criminal nutjobs from proper policing?

    or

    2. The woke truly -- and ignorantly -- believe that police are just racist scumbags who disproportionally kill the wondrous black folk who are just engaging in their harmless cultural norms?

    Number 1 is pure evil. Number 2 is stupidity that tolerates evil without recognizing it AS evil.

    I will let better minds that me decide which is worse.

    , @ben tillman
    @Jack D


    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.
     
    Yes, that makes sense. Well said.
    , @Neuday
    @Jack D


    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.
     
    Have you seen the videos of what the police have to put up with from Blacks? Ever seen the Cops TV show?

    As one of those VERY conservative people, I think the number of Blacks killed by police is overestimated because we can't imagine that so few get what they f___ing deserve.

    , @Luzzatto
    @Jack D

    It’s extremely Cuck for those Latino Democrats who are not visibly Afro Hispanic in phenotype, Asian Democrats, and for White Democrats to race riot over the death of an unarmed African American male when African Americans would NEVER return them the favor meaning race riot over the death of an unarmed Nonblack male. African Americans are extremely selfish like that. In Wakanda Nonblack Lives Do Not Matter!
    https://youtu.be/LAYCfZYLWMw

  11. Fred Sanford was a believer.

    LAMONT: Did’t you know that hypertension and heart disease kill more blacks than anything else in America?

    FRED: I didn’t know that. I thought it was the police.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    @Harry Baldwin

    Best.
    Show.
    Ever.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stdi-1tIUhM

  12. @Jack D
    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies - even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays - you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It's going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia, @ben tillman, @Neuday, @Luzzatto

    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he’d go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Harry Baldwin


    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he’d go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

     

    Do you really think that this is something you can "sense" or "feel" strongly or otherwise in your gut?

    I wouldn't want the calculus in such a case to come down to one's intuition about the mental state of a violent criminal with demonstrated low time preference (and, probably, poor trigger discipline).

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    , @William Badwhite
    @Harry Baldwin


    most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.
     
    Speaking (ok writing) as a concealed weapon carrier, you should strongly urge your weapon-carrying friends to 1) take a tactical handgun course and 2) read "In the Gravest Extreme" (though its a bit long in the tooth) or one of the similar books on the topic.

    The gist is, if there is anyway to extricate yourself from such a situation without shooting one of the Gentle Giants, they should do so (short of allowing themselves or a friend/family member) to be harmed. Depending on the state they will likely be fine from a criminal perspective, but they WILL be sued for wrongful death. The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Also, the jury will be filled with his peers, not your friend's (moral and intellectual) peers. If they're lucky, the Gentle Giant's family will accept a settlement.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @kaganovitch, @kaganovitch, @Alden

  13. @Jack D
    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies - even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays - you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It's going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia, @ben tillman, @Neuday, @Luzzatto

    The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies – even a second of hesitation might cost you your life.

    Isn’t this just a standard case of self defense?

    People who think this is just about police use of force rather than establishing as a first principle that “blacks can do whatever they want” might want to pause a bit here. You’re not going to satisfy the crocodile by feeding it the (predominantly white and male, middle class) police. They’re not going to stop there – they’re going to gin up the mob in other clear cut cases of self defense.

    During the Trayvon Martin affair, you would hear people say that Zimmerman was a “wannabe cop” and that he should have left the matter to the police and I suppose ignored the suspicious behavior that he had witnessed. Then without a hitch they dropped the notion that cops investigating the behavior of blacks in suspicious circumstances was the only acceptable state and immediately made the outrage about police themselves. There is no consistent standard being observed – the sole conclusion to be drawn is that blacks should be immune from interference regardless of what it is that they happen to be doing the law and civil order be damned.

  14. @Jack D
    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies - even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays - you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It's going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia, @ben tillman, @Neuday, @Luzzatto

    Correct.

    So the next questions are these.

    1. Has the plan of the woke all along been to inculcate in law enforcement a fear of shooting a black armed aggressive criminal because the woke KNOW that blacks are more likely to BE aggressive criminals, and so we need to “protect” these criminal nutjobs from proper policing?

    or

    2. The woke truly — and ignorantly — believe that police are just racist scumbags who disproportionally kill the wondrous black folk who are just engaging in their harmless cultural norms?

    Number 1 is pure evil. Number 2 is stupidity that tolerates evil without recognizing it AS evil.

    I will let better minds that me decide which is worse.

  15. Hysterical BLM ladies are still being given a platform to claim, “black men are risking their lives every time they leave the house because of police violence”.

  16. @Harry Baldwin
    @Jack D

    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he'd go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @William Badwhite

    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he’d go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

    Do you really think that this is something you can “sense” or “feel” strongly or otherwise in your gut?

    I wouldn’t want the calculus in such a case to come down to one’s intuition about the mental state of a violent criminal with demonstrated low time preference (and, probably, poor trigger discipline).

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Do you really think that this is something you can “sense” or “feel” strongly or otherwise in your gut?

    As I said, it's a dilemma. You could be dead if you don't shoot, but are likely to have your life destroyed if you do. The choice is yours.

  17. @Harry Baldwin
    @Jack D

    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he'd go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

    Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @William Badwhite

    most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

    Speaking (ok writing) as a concealed weapon carrier, you should strongly urge your weapon-carrying friends to 1) take a tactical handgun course and 2) read “In the Gravest Extreme” (though its a bit long in the tooth) or one of the similar books on the topic.

    The gist is, if there is anyway to extricate yourself from such a situation without shooting one of the Gentle Giants, they should do so (short of allowing themselves or a friend/family member) to be harmed. Depending on the state they will likely be fine from a criminal perspective, but they WILL be sued for wrongful death. The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Also, the jury will be filled with his peers, not your friend’s (moral and intellectual) peers. If they’re lucky, the Gentle Giant’s family will accept a settlement.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Inquiring Mind
    @William Badwhite

    Does that explain the viral video https://onscene.tv/car-thief-drinks-whole-bottle-of-wine-during-police-standoff/?

    When I asked on another iSteve thread why this "young woman didn't just walk away when the cops didn't put the cuffs on her", some wise acre suggested this person was a "trap", i.e. a male prostitute who poses as a woman and that my "guy-dar" set was malfunctioning.

    I don't care if this person is he, she, zher or whatever or how that putative male acquired a "rack" of those proportions through surgery or hormones. My original question is why didn't "they" just walk away? Would the phalanx of San Diego's Finest have given chase? And if they did, could that not lead to another civil disturbance-worthy "incident"?

    But it appears that the police are being extra cautious of arresting anybody? The news report suggested that this wasn't as much a stand-off but rather the result of a negotiation, where the cops agreed that this person could finish their bottle of wine (wasn't the brand, ironically, Trojan Horse?), and the cops were sticking to their part of the bargain?

    , @kaganovitch
    @William Badwhite

    The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Nah, it's an aspiring patent holder now. Try to keep up.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    , @kaganovitch
    @William Badwhite

    left out link in previous comment
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/what-blacks-really-want-mailbox-money/#comment-4460491

    , @Alden
    @William Badwhite

    If you carry a gun get criminal and civil defense insurance. It’s not expensive and well worth it.

  18. @Jack D
    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies - even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays - you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It's going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia, @ben tillman, @Neuday, @Luzzatto

    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Yes, that makes sense. Well said.

  19. @Jack D
    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies - even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays - you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It's going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia, @ben tillman, @Neuday, @Luzzatto

    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Have you seen the videos of what the police have to put up with from Blacks? Ever seen the Cops TV show?

    As one of those VERY conservative people, I think the number of Blacks killed by police is overestimated because we can’t imagine that so few get what they f___ing deserve.

  20. @William Badwhite
    @Harry Baldwin


    most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.
     
    Speaking (ok writing) as a concealed weapon carrier, you should strongly urge your weapon-carrying friends to 1) take a tactical handgun course and 2) read "In the Gravest Extreme" (though its a bit long in the tooth) or one of the similar books on the topic.

    The gist is, if there is anyway to extricate yourself from such a situation without shooting one of the Gentle Giants, they should do so (short of allowing themselves or a friend/family member) to be harmed. Depending on the state they will likely be fine from a criminal perspective, but they WILL be sued for wrongful death. The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Also, the jury will be filled with his peers, not your friend's (moral and intellectual) peers. If they're lucky, the Gentle Giant's family will accept a settlement.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @kaganovitch, @kaganovitch, @Alden

    Does that explain the viral video https://onscene.tv/car-thief-drinks-whole-bottle-of-wine-during-police-standoff/?

    When I asked on another iSteve thread why this “young woman didn’t just walk away when the cops didn’t put the cuffs on her”, some wise acre suggested this person was a “trap”, i.e. a male prostitute who poses as a woman and that my “guy-dar” set was malfunctioning.

    I don’t care if this person is he, she, zher or whatever or how that putative male acquired a “rack” of those proportions through surgery or hormones. My original question is why didn’t “they” just walk away? Would the phalanx of San Diego’s Finest have given chase? And if they did, could that not lead to another civil disturbance-worthy “incident”?

    But it appears that the police are being extra cautious of arresting anybody? The news report suggested that this wasn’t as much a stand-off but rather the result of a negotiation, where the cops agreed that this person could finish their bottle of wine (wasn’t the brand, ironically, Trojan Horse?), and the cops were sticking to their part of the bargain?

  21. @Harry Baldwin
    Fred Sanford was a believer.

    LAMONT: Did't you know that hypertension and heart disease kill more blacks than anything else in America?

    FRED: I didn't know that. I thought it was the police.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoHBhosppfw

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

    Best.
    Show.
    Ever.

  22. Leftists believe a lot of things. They believe Derek Chauvin cut off George Floyd’s oxygen supply and suffocated him. They believe Mike Brown had his hands up and was begging for mercy. They believe Qanon was going to invade DC on 3/4 and take hostages. They believe Putin ran the U.S. government for 4 years. They believe Cuomo is an amazing public speaker and tremendously accomplished leader. It’s almost too easy ridiculing them at this point, but I’m glad you did.

  23. @William Badwhite
    @Harry Baldwin


    most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.
     
    Speaking (ok writing) as a concealed weapon carrier, you should strongly urge your weapon-carrying friends to 1) take a tactical handgun course and 2) read "In the Gravest Extreme" (though its a bit long in the tooth) or one of the similar books on the topic.

    The gist is, if there is anyway to extricate yourself from such a situation without shooting one of the Gentle Giants, they should do so (short of allowing themselves or a friend/family member) to be harmed. Depending on the state they will likely be fine from a criminal perspective, but they WILL be sued for wrongful death. The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Also, the jury will be filled with his peers, not your friend's (moral and intellectual) peers. If they're lucky, the Gentle Giant's family will accept a settlement.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @kaganovitch, @kaganovitch, @Alden

    The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Nah, it’s an aspiring patent holder now. Try to keep up.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @kaganovitch


    Nah, it’s an aspiring patent holder now. Try to keep up.
     
    Aspiring engineering physicist who dreamt of working at SpaceX.
  24. @William Badwhite
    @Harry Baldwin


    most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.
     
    Speaking (ok writing) as a concealed weapon carrier, you should strongly urge your weapon-carrying friends to 1) take a tactical handgun course and 2) read "In the Gravest Extreme" (though its a bit long in the tooth) or one of the similar books on the topic.

    The gist is, if there is anyway to extricate yourself from such a situation without shooting one of the Gentle Giants, they should do so (short of allowing themselves or a friend/family member) to be harmed. Depending on the state they will likely be fine from a criminal perspective, but they WILL be sued for wrongful death. The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Also, the jury will be filled with his peers, not your friend's (moral and intellectual) peers. If they're lucky, the Gentle Giant's family will accept a settlement.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @kaganovitch, @kaganovitch, @Alden

  25. “Hey, you did this already, Steve…”

    Good catch. Same poll, filtered through a different source, a year later.

    And, btw, note that the second graph is about a different question than the first. It says nothing about “unarmed”.

  26. @Jack D
    People who are VERY conservative overestimate the % of people who are killed by the police who are black almost as much as liberals but for different reasons. People who are very conservative must assume that blacks are shot by the police in proportion to the % of violent crimes that they commit. But turns out that the racist po-lice shoot blacks less often than their level of criminality would indicate.

    Nowadays, a cop knows that if he shoots a white guy with a weapon, everyone is going to agree that it was self defense, open and shut, no need to hesitate and risk your life. This is how police shootings have always been handled. The presumption is that if someone pulls a weapon on you, you should shoot them before they have a chance to kill you and such shootings are almost always considered legally justified. This is how it is taught in the police academies - even a second of hesitation might cost you your life. But if a black guy is holding the weapon then you really have to think twice nowadays - you might have to do so anyway in order to save your life but you realize that they are going to go over this shooting with a fine tooth comb and look for any possible way to blame you and possibly even arrest you for murder and that your shooting might cause a race riot that will result in half your city being burned and looted. It's going to be a life changing event for you so you have to be really really sure before you pull that trigger.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin, @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @kpkinsunnyphiladelphia, @ben tillman, @Neuday, @Luzzatto

    It’s extremely Cuck for those Latino Democrats who are not visibly Afro Hispanic in phenotype, Asian Democrats, and for White Democrats to race riot over the death of an unarmed African American male when African Americans would NEVER return them the favor meaning race riot over the death of an unarmed Nonblack male. African Americans are extremely selfish like that. In Wakanda Nonblack Lives Do Not Matter!

  27. @William Badwhite
    @Harry Baldwin


    most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.
     
    Speaking (ok writing) as a concealed weapon carrier, you should strongly urge your weapon-carrying friends to 1) take a tactical handgun course and 2) read "In the Gravest Extreme" (though its a bit long in the tooth) or one of the similar books on the topic.

    The gist is, if there is anyway to extricate yourself from such a situation without shooting one of the Gentle Giants, they should do so (short of allowing themselves or a friend/family member) to be harmed. Depending on the state they will likely be fine from a criminal perspective, but they WILL be sued for wrongful death. The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Also, the jury will be filled with his peers, not your friend's (moral and intellectual) peers. If they're lucky, the Gentle Giant's family will accept a settlement.

    Replies: @Inquiring Mind, @kaganovitch, @kaganovitch, @Alden

    If you carry a gun get criminal and civil defense insurance. It’s not expensive and well worth it.

  28. @Mike Tre
    Liberals are misinformed, not uninformed. I have a close friend of is a corporate litigator for a medium sized firm in San Fran (he is my older daughter's godfather). He is not unintelligent, but he staunchly believes that "the extreme right" is as big a threat to the stability of our government as anything else. It's impossible to convince him otherwise.

    Replies: @Muggles

    He is not unintelligent, but he staunchly believes that “the extreme right” is as big a threat to the stability of our government as anything else. It’s impossible to convince him otherwise.

    For the same reason a devout Catholic can’t be convinced that the Pope isn’t God’s right hand man on Earth.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Muggles


    For the same reason a devout Catholic can’t be convinced that the Pope isn’t God’s right hand man on Earth.

     

    Who? This one?


    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56302173


    https://www.americamagazine.org/sites/default/files/styles/article_image_750_x_503_/public/main_image/2021/03/06/20210306T0000-POPE-IRAQ-SISTINI-1166015.JPG.JPG.png?itok=fqalrkYU

    https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/165A3/production/_117455519_6d2bb0f5-7063-4c2e-88be-aa3797269272.jpg
  29. It wouldn’t matter if they were perfectly informed. The objections are based on status considerations.

  30. Well, they listen to NPR and CNN (nobody listens to MSNBC), they listen to experts, and right now our lyingpress is monolithic, especially on this issue. They think they’re getting good information from legitimate experts.
    So it’s just like Steve and the rona.

  31. @kaganovitch
    @William Badwhite

    The person they shot will have been a young father who doted on his kids, and who was just starting to turn his life around and was an aspiring rapper who dreamed of playing in the NBA.

    Nah, it's an aspiring patent holder now. Try to keep up.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    Nah, it’s an aspiring patent holder now. Try to keep up.

    Aspiring engineering physicist who dreamt of working at SpaceX.

  32. @Alec Leamas (hard at work)
    @Harry Baldwin


    One of my friends is a retired officer of the LAPD, a superb shot who who has carried a gun every day of his adult life, including concealed when off duty. He once told me that if a black man were to rob him at gunpoint when he was off duty, and had a strong sense that the robber would be content with his money and would pose no further threat, he would not draw and shoot his weapon. He felt that the legal risks and financial ramifications that result from shooting someone were serious enough that he’d go with his gut feeling.

    I was surprised that he would say this, and most of my CCW-permit holding fellows thought it outrageous, but I understood the dilemma.

     

    Do you really think that this is something you can "sense" or "feel" strongly or otherwise in your gut?

    I wouldn't want the calculus in such a case to come down to one's intuition about the mental state of a violent criminal with demonstrated low time preference (and, probably, poor trigger discipline).

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    Do you really think that this is something you can “sense” or “feel” strongly or otherwise in your gut?

    As I said, it’s a dilemma. You could be dead if you don’t shoot, but are likely to have your life destroyed if you do. The choice is yours.

  33. @peterike
    There are people who believe the police killed over 10,000 blacks in one year? Amazing.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    There are people who believe the police killed over 10,000 blacks in one year? Amazing.

    “Conservatives” are more dismissive than “Very Conservatives”. (The latter must refer to us reactionaries.) Would these be the neocons, with “my Negro problem, and ours”?

    The VCs, in turn, are more open to the higher figures. “Shoot an unarmed black man? Of course. Wouldn’t you?”

  34. @Achmed E. Newman
    Hey, you did this already, Steve, at least the top graph. Maybe this one was for reinforcement.

    Though there's a political component to it, that 2nd graph represents just pure guesswork for almost all being polled beside the occasional aware city cop or Unz Review blogger. If I hadn't have read lots of your, VDare's, and Paul Kersey's posts, I'd have guessed 25% one day, maybe 50% another.

    Regarding the top graph, though, man! Those yellow and green bars mean 27 a week, so about 4 per day (or over for green). You'd think DIMS* would kick in for some of these people. I mentioned the innumeracy last time. I think the orange guessers are reasonable people, and grey is a grey area as far as reasonableness goes.

    With even hard-lefties being 46% blue and orange, how can they support rioting about it, if this is their idea of the scope of the problem? Wouldn't there be a dozen other things to riot over? It's the Lyin' Press narrative that matters though.

    .

    * Does It Make Sense?

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    DIMS*

    * Does It Make Sense?

    Does It Make Sense? Um, Maybe…

  35. @Muggles
    @Mike Tre


    He is not unintelligent, but he staunchly believes that “the extreme right” is as big a threat to the stability of our government as anything else. It’s impossible to convince him otherwise.
     
    For the same reason a devout Catholic can't be convinced that the Pope isn't God's right hand man on Earth.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    For the same reason a devout Catholic can’t be convinced that the Pope isn’t God’s right hand man on Earth.

    Who? This one?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56302173

  36. But white racism makes the 26% killed by police feel like 60.4%

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement