Washington DC Carjacking Teenage Girls

[Brisketexan 105432]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

What's ledge space renting our for these days ?

Same as everything around here....

'bout tree fiddy.

[fattyflattie 4638]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Same as everything around here....

'bout tree fiddy.

That's a bit steep.  Anything waterfront?

[Brisketexan 105432]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

That's a bit steep.  Anything waterfront?

Sorry, man.....all that lies below is lava.  The floor is lava.

[TwiceHorn 31551]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Actually, it appears that "media reports of white supremacy" are this year's new undefinable all-encompassing bogeyman for everything you don't like. 

Well, white supremacy, despite its connotations, has become the phrase for institutional or systemic racism that doesn't require individuals to believe in white supremacy in the Klan sense.

It's kind of unfortunate because it grinds a lot of white people's gears.  And these are the white people that are willing to help eliminate systemic racism, not the Klan types.  I don't think the Klan types give a fuck about being called a white supremacist.  It's pretty much what they call themselves.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

49 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Same as everything around here....

'bout tree fiddy.

I walked right into that one.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

26 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

That's a bit steep.  Anything waterfront?

Waterfront on the ledge is an outside corner with a window behind you.

[workswithseed 2119]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, white supremacy, despite its connotations, has become the phrase for institutional or systemic racism that doesn't require individuals to believe in white supremacy in the Klan sense.

It's kind of unfortunate because it grinds a lot of white people's gears.  And these are the white people that are willing to help eliminate systemic racism, not the Klan types.  I don't think the Klan types give a fuck about being called a white supremacist.  It's pretty much what they call themselves.

I have reread your first paragraph 5 times, and still don't understand what you mean. What and who is the institution/systematic racism? What's your definition of racism here? What's your definition of white supremacy? Maybe if you explain, I'll be able to understand what you mean. 

[Kyle 207]

5 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Actually, it appears that "media reports of white supremacy" are this year's new undefinable all-encompassing bogeyman for everything you don't like. 

Whatever Q.

[Kyle 207]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, white supremacy, despite its connotations, has become the phrase for institutional or systemic racism that doesn't require individuals to believe in white supremacy in the Klan sense.

It's kind of unfortunate because it grinds a lot of white people's gears.  And these are the white people that are willing to help eliminate systemic racism, not the Klan types.  I don't think the Klan types give a fuck about being called a white supremacist.  It's pretty much what they call themselves.

I've been asking for about a year if someone can tell me a system that's racist.

[Dahobbs 17691]

16 minutes ago, Kyle said:

I've been asking for about a year if someone can tell me a system that's racist.

Are you asking for a definition? Here is wikipedia:

Quote

 

Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is a form of racism that is embedded as normal practice within society or an organization. It can lead to such issues as discrimination in criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education, among other issues. Institutional racism can have harmful effects on people, especially on students in school where it is prominent.[1]

The term institutional racism was first coined in 1967 by Stokely Carmichael and Charles V. Hamilton in Black Power: The Politics of Liberation.[2] Carmichael and Hamilton wrote that while individual racism is often identifiable because of its overt nature, institutional racism is less perceptible because of its "less overt, far more subtle" nature. Institutional racism "originates in the operation of established and respected forces in the society, and thus receives far less public condemnation than [individual racism]".[3]

Institutional racism was defined by Sir William Macpherson in the UK's Lawrence report (1999) as: "The collective failure of an organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour that amount to discrimination through prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism

In the US, a specific example would be the criminal justice system which disproportionality incarcerates black men and gives them more severe sentences than their white counterparts. 

[Kyle 207]

10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Are you asking for a definition? Here is wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism

In the US, a specific example would be the criminal justice system which disproportionality incarcerates black men and gives them more severe sentences than their white counterparts. 

I was not looking for a definition but a system. Criminal justice is fair. No pun intended ... but is there a reasonable study done that shows in clear black and white the average sentence for Crime X led to Y sentencing for African Americans and Z sentencing for Caucasians? Please trust me, that is a genuine seeking to understand request and not an argument disguised as a question. I do not doubt it, but a lot of those conversations get fuzzy with trying to compare crack vs. power cocaine and other types of stretches. Now, one could argue both sides of that particular coin and not really interested in that here; but am curious if there really is an apples to apples comparison.

Edited March 31, 2021 by Kyle

[TwiceHorn 31551]

1 hour ago, workswithseed said:

I have reread your first paragraph 5 times, and still don't understand what you mean. What and who is the institution/systematic racism? What's your definition of racism here? What's your definition of white supremacy? Maybe if you explain, I'll be able to understand what you mean. 

There are all sorts of laws and policies that discriminate against black people.  There are also unconcious biases that operate to discriminate against black people, and in some cases just the economically disadvantaged broadly.

Some of these were designed to do that, many weren't, at least consciously.

I'm going to guess that most people don't want such discrimination to occur, they just don't know that it is occurring or how.

"White supremacy" now encompasses all of that.

[TwiceHorn 31551]

6 minutes ago, Kyle said:

I was not looking for a definition but a system. Criminal justice is fair. No pun intended ... but is there a reasonable study done that shows in clear black and white the average sentence for Crime X led to Y sentencing for African Americans and Z sentencing for Caucasians? Please trust me, that is a genuine seeking to understand request and not an argument disguised as a question. I do not doubt it, but a lot of those conversations get fuzzy with trying to compare crack vs. power cocaine and other types of stretches. Now, one could argue both sides of that particular coin and not really interested in that here; but am curious if there really is an apples to apples comparison.

https://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2020/07/visualizing-the-racial-disparities-in-mass-incarceration.html

Go to that blog, and put "racial disparity" in the search box on the middle left and you will come up with a couple of dozen references to statistical and other reports of disparate bad outcomes for minorities in the federal and state justice systems.

[Dahobbs 17691]

5 minutes ago, Kyle said:

I was not looking for a definition but a system. Criminal justice is fair. No pun intended ... but is there a reasonable study done that shows in clear black and white the average sentence for Crime X led to Y sentencing for African Americans and Z sentencing for Caucasians? Please trust me, that is a genuine seeking to understand request and not an argument disguised as a question. I do not doubt it, but a lot of those conversations get fuzzy with trying to compare crack vs. power cocaine and other types of stretches. Now, one could argue both sides of that particular coin and not really interested in that here; but am curious if there really is an apples to apples comparison.

I don't know what you consider reasonable, but from the wiki link:

• "Although approximately two-thirds of crack cocaine users are whites or Hispanic people (reported past-year use in 2013 of 0.8%, 0.3%, and 0.1% for Black, white, and Hispanic, respectively),[59] a large percentage of people convicted of possession of crack cocaine in federal courts in 1994 were Black people. In 1994, 86.3% of the defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession were Black people while 10.3% were whites and 5.2% were Hispanic people. In the state of California, 38% of people halted by police officers in Los Angeles were Black people, despite accounting for only 9% of the population.[74] In Washington D.C Black people make up 46% of the population but composed 72% of the people stopped even though the contraband hit rates between the two races are not statistically significant.[75] In Boston, Blacks made up 64% of those stopped despite making up only 24% of the population, even after controlling for alleged gang involvement and prior arrest records Blacks were more likely to experience repeat police encounters and to be frisked or searched during an encounter.[76] In Illinois minority drivers are stopped 1.5 more times than White drivers and latino drivers are nearly 2 times more likely to be subjected to dog sniff searches than White people but are found with contraband 1.6 times less.[77]"

• "A Stanford University study that analyzed 93 million traffic stops in the United States revealed that African Americans are twenty percent more likely to be stopped despite being less likely to be in possession of contraband compared to White people.[73]"

• "A Harvard University study[78] found that in Massachusetts' criminal justice system minorities face greater risk to be represented across all parts of the criminal justice system in excess of their proportion of the population in that state. The likelihood that they will get arrested and convicted due to drug or weapons charges is eight times greater than whites. Black people were found to receive average sentences that were 238 days longer for the same offences and Latino people 178 days longer. "

 

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Race isn't the biggest driver in sentencing disparity, gender is. By an order of magnitude.

[dcar00 14378]

43 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't know what you consider reasonable, but from the wiki link:

• "Although approximately two-thirds of crack cocaine users are whites or Hispanic people (reported past-year use in 2013 of 0.8%, 0.3%, and 0.1% for Black, white, and Hispanic, respectively),[59] a large percentage of people convicted of possession of crack cocaine in federal courts in 1994 were Black people. In 1994, 86.3% of the defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession were Black people while 10.3% were whites and 5.2% were Hispanic people. In the state of California, 38% of people halted by police officers in Los Angeles were Black people, despite accounting for only 9% of the population.[74] In Washington D.C Black people make up 46% of the population but composed 72% of the people stopped even though the contraband hit rates between the two races are not statistically significant.[75] In Boston, Blacks made up 64% of those stopped despite making up only 24% of the population, even after controlling for alleged gang involvement and prior arrest records Blacks were more likely to experience repeat police encounters and to be frisked or searched during an encounter.[76] In Illinois minority drivers are stopped 1.5 more times than White drivers and latino drivers are nearly 2 times more likely to be subjected to dog sniff searches than White people but are found with contraband 1.6 times less.[77]"

• "A Stanford University study that analyzed 93 million traffic stops in the United States revealed that African Americans are twenty percent more likely to be stopped despite being less likely to be in possession of contraband compared to White people.[73]"

• "A Harvard University study[78] found that in Massachusetts' criminal justice system minorities face greater risk to be represented across all parts of the criminal justice system in excess of their proportion of the population in that state. The likelihood that they will get arrested and convicted due to drug or weapons charges is eight times greater than whites. Black people were found to receive average sentences that were 238 days longer for the same offences and Latino people 178 days longer. "

 

 

interesting, who would have guessed that Boston and LA are racist?

[ChickenSandwich 9853]

8 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Race isn't the biggest driver in sentencing disparity, gender is. By an order of magnitude.

over 90% of inmates are male yet we don’t use the same “logic” when comparing incarceration and race. 
 

 

[workswithseed 2119]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

There are all sorts of laws and policies that discriminate against black people.  There are also unconcious biases that operate to discriminate against black people, and in some cases just the economically disadvantaged broadly.

Some of these were designed to do that, many weren't, at least consciously.

I'm going to guess that most people don't want such discrimination to occur, they just don't know that it is occurring or how.

"White supremacy" now encompasses all of that.

What and who is the institution/systematic racism? Consciously or unconsciously discriminate mostly black people, but sometimes poor people in general.

 

What's your definition of white supremacy? White supremacy is institutional/ systematic racism.

What is your definition of racism? n/a

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, white supremacy, despite its connotations, has become the phrase for Consciously or unconsciously discriminate mostly black people, but sometimes poor people in general. that doesn't require individuals to believe in white supremacy in the Klan sense.

It's kind of unfortunate because it grinds a lot of white people's gears.  And these are the white people that are willing to help eliminate systemic racism, not the Klan types.  I don't think the Klan types give a fuck about being called a white supremacist.  It's pretty much what they call themselves.

 

That makes sense in a way, but racism defined by Oxford is defined as "The inability or refusal to recognize the rights, needs, dignity, or value of people of particular races or geographical origins. More widely, the devaluation of various traits of character or intelligence as ‘typical’ of particular peoples. The category of race may itself be challenged, as implying an inference from trivial superficial differences of appearance to allegedly significant underlying differences of nature; increasingly evolutionary evidence suggests that the dispersal of one original people into different geographical locations is a relatively recent and genetically insignificant matter."Or the tl;dr version as people can't or won't recognize people as humans for superficial reasons. So that means it's either known but there isn't power enough to change it, or they just don't want to change it, so what do you mean in the "Klan sense?" 

[52-80 19262]

Google employees are very mad that YouTube won't take down a rap song.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-30/youtube-refuses-to-remove-anti-asian-song-drawing-staff-ire

Quote

YouTube’s refusal to remove a song some employees find racist to people of Asian origin has caused a fracas inside the company, the latest clash in a growing national debate about anti-Asian hate.

...

 

Workers at Google’s YouTube recently posted on internal message boards to criticize executives who decided against taking down videos featuring the rap song “Meet the Flockers,” which debuted in 2014 from recording artist YG. The track, about a burglary, includes lyrics that encourage the targeting of neighborhoods where Chinese people live.

...

The disagreement over “Meet the Flockers” began when some YouTube employees asked the company’s Trust & Safety team to purge the song from the video platform. An executive from that department, and another content policy leader, denied the request in an email to staff on March 22.

“We find this video to be highly offensive and understand it is painful for many to watch, including many in Trust & Safety and especially given the ongoing violence against the Asian community,” the executives wrote. While the lyrics may otherwise violate the company’s hate speech policy, they said YouTube makes exceptions for clips that have an Educational, Documentary, Scientific or Artistic (EDSA) context.

...

“While we debated this decision at length amongst our policy experts, we made the difficult decision to leave the video up to enforce our policy consistently and avoid setting a precedent that may lead to us having to remove a lot of other music on YouTube,”

 

Google is not.... wrong?

 

Here's the lyrics to that song.  The lyrics seem terrible (as in having low creativity and artistic value), but is anyone convinced this is meant to or has the actual effect of inciting race-specific targeted violence? 

That sounds as dumb a claim as wanting to cancel 2Pac's Hit Em Up for promoting violence against Puff Daddy

Quote

First, you find a house and scope it out
Find a Chinese neighborhood
'Cause they don't believe in bank accounts
Second, you find a crew and a driver
Someone to ring the doorbell
And someone that ain't scared to do what it do
Third, you pull up at the spot
Park, watch, ring the doorbell and knock
Four, make sure nobody is home (knock knock)
They gone, okay it's on
Don't be scared, nigga, you're in now
If the police come you gonna find out who your friends now
That ain't me talking, that's your mind playing tricks on you
You're conscious cause you know you got nines with two clips on you
But fuck that, motherfuck that plasma
And fuck that laptop, go and get that jewelry box
You tryna get paid? Go take that jewelry box to the Slauson
They'll give you cash back in the same day

Meet the motherfucking flockers
Make money-money, make money-money-money
(Make some noise if you've ever stole something in your life)
Take money-money, take money-money-money
Don't be ashamed, it's okay, baby
Make money-money, make money-money-money
Make some noise if you've ever stole a dollar out your mama's purse
When she wasn't lookin while y'all was in Church
Take money-money, take money-money-money

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Google employees are very mad that YouTube won't take down a rap song.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-30/youtube-refuses-to-remove-anti-asian-song-drawing-staff-ire

 

Google is not.... wrong?

 

Here's the lyrics to that song.  The lyrics seem terrible (as in having low creativity and artistic value), but is anyone convinced this is meant to or has the actual effect of inciting race-specific targeted violence? 

That sounds as dumb a claim as wanting to cancel 2Pac's Hit Em Up for promoting violence against Puff Daddy

 

MO MONEY... MO MONEY.... MO MONEY.....

[TwiceHorn 31551]

13 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

What and who is the institution/systematic racism? Consciously or unconsciously discriminate mostly black people, but sometimes poor people in general.

 

What's your definition of white supremacy? White supremacy is institutional/ systematic racism.

What is your definition of racism? n/a

 

That makes sense in a way, but racism defined by Oxford is defined as "The inability or refusal to recognize the rights, needs, dignity, or value of people of particular races or geographical origins. More widely, the devaluation of various traits of character or intelligence as ‘typical’ of particular peoples. The category of race may itself be challenged, as implying an inference from trivial superficial differences of appearance to allegedly significant underlying differences of nature; increasingly evolutionary evidence suggests that the dispersal of one original people into different geographical locations is a relatively recent and genetically insignificant matter."Or the tl;dr version as people can't or won't recognize people as humans for superficial reasons. So that means it's either known but there isn't power enough to change it, or they just don't want to change it, so what do you mean in the "Klan sense?" 

It's not my definition of anything.

White supremacy is now a buzz phrase for any and all discrimination against black people.

Don't be a dumbass about what Klan white supremacy is.

[scottsins 1975]

1 hour ago, dcar00 said:

interesting, who would have guessed that Boston and LA are racist?

Anyone that's been to Boston, perhaps?

[workswithseed 2119]

53 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's not my definition of anything.

White supremacy is now a buzz phrase for any and all discrimination against black people.

Don't be a dumbass about what Klan white supremacy is.

You used it and seem to believe it. I just wanted to make sure I understand without making myself look like a fool. Do you believe white supremacy is the best word for the definition then?

[Dahobbs 17691]

3 hours ago, dcar00 said:

interesting, who would have guessed that Boston and LA are racist?

Everyone who has been to either? I swear y'all are purposefully obtuse. The whole issue of systemic racism is that it isn't overt and obvious, and it is probably not intentional.  Y'all think you're being personally attacked. That isn't the case. Stop focusing on you, start thinking about others. 

[Kyle 207]

4 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't know what you consider reasonable, but from the wiki link:

• "Although approximately two-thirds of crack cocaine users are whites or Hispanic people (reported past-year use in 2013 of 0.8%, 0.3%, and 0.1% for Black, white, and Hispanic, respectively),[59] a large percentage of people convicted of possession of crack cocaine in federal courts in 1994 were Black people. In 1994, 86.3% of the defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession were Black people while 10.3% were whites and 5.2% were Hispanic people. In the state of California, 38% of people halted by police officers in Los Angeles were Black people, despite accounting for only 9% of the population.[74] In Washington D.C Black people make up 46% of the population but composed 72% of the people stopped even though the contraband hit rates between the two races are not statistically significant.[75] In Boston, Blacks made up 64% of those stopped despite making up only 24% of the population, even after controlling for alleged gang involvement and prior arrest records Blacks were more likely to experience repeat police encounters and to be frisked or searched during an encounter.[76] In Illinois minority drivers are stopped 1.5 more times than White drivers and latino drivers are nearly 2 times more likely to be subjected to dog sniff searches than White people but are found with contraband 1.6 times less.[77]"

• "A Stanford University study that analyzed 93 million traffic stops in the United States revealed that African Americans are twenty percent more likely to be stopped despite being less likely to be in possession of contraband compared to White people.[73]"

• "A Harvard University study[78] found that in Massachusetts' criminal justice system minorities face greater risk to be represented across all parts of the criminal justice system in excess of their proportion of the population in that state. The likelihood that they will get arrested and convicted due to drug or weapons charges is eight times greater than whites. Black people were found to receive average sentences that were 238 days longer for the same offences and Latino people 178 days longer. "

There are myriad factors that could explain these things ... what I am asking for is this: a study that shows on average white people convicted of the exact same crime were given significantly less severe sentences. I thought that was clear (not being sarcastic). 

[Dahobbs 17691]

4 minutes ago, Kyle said:

There are myriad factors that could explain these things ... what I am asking for is this: a study that shows on average white people convicted of the exact same crime were given significantly less severe sentences. I thought that was clear (not being sarcastic). 

Oh sure, you can just ignore everything that doesn't fit the worldview you would prefer, limit your acceptable evidence to very specific topics, and require an impossible level of proof. 

At any rate, that was directly addressed in what I quoted:

"Black people were found to receive average sentences that were 238 days longer for the same offences and Latino people 178 days longer. "

There are more sources. Just Google and you'll find plenty.

[Dahobbs 17691]

9 minutes ago, Kyle said:

There are myriad factors that could explain these things ... what I am asking for is this: a study that shows on average white people convicted of the exact same crime were given significantly less severe sentences. I thought that was clear (not being sarcastic). 

Here are some more:

Quote

Black male offenders continued to receive longer sentences than similarly situated White male offenders. Black male offenders received sentences on average 19.1 percent longer than similarly situated White male offenders during the Post-Report period (fiscal years 2012-2016), as they had for the prior four periods studied. The differences in sentence length remained relatively unchanged compared to the Post-Gall period

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/demographic-differences-sentencing

https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2413&context=articles

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23366801?seq=1

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208129.pdf

https://news.gsu.edu/research-magazine/spring2020/incarceration

[Dahobbs 17691]

4 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Race isn't the biggest driver in sentencing disparity, gender is. By an order of magnitude.

Ok. Let's fix that. Or are you saying that racial disparity can't or shouldn't be addressed until gender disparity is addressed to your satisfaction?

[Kyle 207]

9 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Here are some more:

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/demographic-differences-sentencing

https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2413&context=articles

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23366801?seq=1

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208129.pdf

https://news.gsu.edu/research-magazine/spring2020/incarceration

The Mitchell-MacKenzie article seemed to get the closest to answering the question and acknowledged of the studies they reviewed, the results were inconclusive. A few of the others are articles with sensational headlines not supported by the study being discussed. For example, the "Same Crime, More Time" article discussed a study that just compares incarceration rates and does not examine disparate sentencing for the exact same crime with the exact same criminal history of the convicted; but it gets emotions up.

Stop projecting. Proof is not impossible. If you cannot find evidence to support your contention, the answer is not to change the evidence but change your contention. 

[Dahobbs 17691]

18 minutes ago, Kyle said:

The Mitchell-MacKenzie article seemed to get the closest to answering the question and acknowledged of the studies they reviewed, the results were inconclusive. A few of the others are articles with sensational headlines not supported by the study being discussed. For example, the "Same Crime, More Time" article discussed a study that just compares incarceration rates and does not examine disparate sentencing for the exact same crime with the exact same criminal history of the convicted; but it gets emotions up.

Stop projecting. Proof is not impossible. If you cannot find evidence to support your contention, the answer is not to change the evidence but change your contention. 

The very first study by the US Sentencing commission pretty thoroughly addressed the topic. What issue did you have with the government's methodology? 

And, how exactly are you reading the mitchell mackenzie study as being inclusive? It is a meta analysis of a variety of other studies, and the conclusion is that a statistically signicant difference exists. 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Dahobbs

[Johnny Sack 8397]

9 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Ok. Let's fix that. Or are you saying that racial disparity can't or shouldn't be addressed until gender disparity is addressed to your satisfaction?

No I’m saying the gender disparity is much more of an issue but no one cares.  Perhaps we should start with the bigger problems first then work our way down. 
 

If you're a criminal defendant, it may help—a lot—to be a woman. At least, that's what Prof. Sonja Starr's research on federal criminal cases suggests. Prof. Starr's recent paper, "Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases," looks closely at a large dataset of federal cases, and reveals some significant findings. After controlling for the arrest offense, criminal history, and other prior characteristics, "men receive 63% longer sentences on average than women do," and "[w]omen are…twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted." This gender gap is about six times as large as the racial disparity that Prof. Starr found in another recent paper.

[Dahobbs 17691]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

No I’m saying the gender disparity is much more of an issue but no one cares.  Perhaps we should start with the bigger problems first then work our way down. 
 

If you're a criminal defendant, it may help—a lot—to be a woman. At least, that's what Prof. Sonja Starr's research on federal criminal cases suggests. Prof. Starr's recent paper, "Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases," looks closely at a large dataset of federal cases, and reveals some significant findings. After controlling for the arrest offense, criminal history, and other prior characteristics, "men receive 63% longer sentences on average than women do," and "[w]omen are…twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted." This gender gap is about six times as large as the racial disparity that Prof. Starr found in another recent paper.

That gap is regularly studied and discussed. Efforts have been made to address it. I'm not sure what you're complaining about. People can care about more than one thing. Your real issue is that you dont want them caring about anything but your preferred issues. 

Edited April 1, 2021 by Dahobbs

[DigglerontheHoof 21254]

14 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Race isn't the biggest driver in sentencing disparity, gender is. By an order of magnitude.

Always the victim, aren't you, you cowardly twat. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

 How far back are these have these studies been conducted because you can definitely make the argument that before a certain date  minorities would be given stiffer sentences and more unfair sentences than whites.  

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

what about this story is red meat for the usual DT crowd that's definitely not talking politics?

not gonna watch the video, but just reading the posts, it sounds horrific. 

but...what's the outrage angle here? obviously it's not about the murder itself...those happen every day and it doesn't move the needle. 

 

[workswithseed 2119]

35 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That gap is regularly studied and discussed. Efforts have been made to address it. I'm not sure what you're complaining about. People can care about more than one thing. Your real issue is that you dont want them caring about anything but your preferred issues. 

This sounds really close to arguments about BLM needing to look at the crime rates of black people, but only focus on cops. 

[Dahobbs 17691]

54 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

This sounds really close to arguments about BLM needing to look at the crime rates of black people, but only focus on cops. 

What? I have no idea what this means. 

[Dahobbs 17691]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

 How far back are these have these studies been conducted because you can definitely make the argument that before a certain date  minorities would be given stiffer sentences and more unfair sentences than whites.  

The evidence is that the gap has been narrowing over the last 60 years. But it still exists. Part of the issue is that the sentencing gap is only part of the problem, there is also the higher probability of ending up in the system in the first place.  

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

On 3/30/2021 at 6:12 PM, Nivek said:

Armed 13 year olds?  

We needs sensible gun laws to stop this!!!

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

14 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

We needs sensible gun laws to stop this!!!

counterpoint: we need more armed 13 year olds that can defend themselves.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

2 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

counterpoint: we need more armed 13 year olds that can defend themselves.

[Kyle 207]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

The very first study by the US Sentencing commission pretty thoroughly addressed the topic. What issue did you have with the government's methodology? 

And, how exactly are you reading the mitchell mackenzie study as being inclusive? It is a meta analysis of a variety of other studies, and the conclusion is that a statistically signicant difference exists. 

Agreed. Admit I did not read every word of every study, but IIRC the first study noted 1) things progressively improving with mandatory guidelines and 2) did not account for distinctions in other factors such as previous convictions. (if I am incorrect, then fair enough)

Absolutely on the M-M study ... which is generally why "science" is hard because its says concurrently there is statistical significant differences and studies are inconclusive. Tough to process that.

This is consistent with the trouble of a lot of these issues - it is very difficult to tease out what is driven by race and what is driven by economics, i.e. inability to afford sophisticated, focused legal counsel. Even if we grant there is systematic racism in the criminal justice system, as noted above ... there is a very easy way not to become of victim of it.

[Brisketexan 105432]

29 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

The evidence is that the gap has been narrowing over the last 60 years. But it still exists. Part of the issue is that the sentencing gap is only part of the problem, there is also the higher probability of ending up in the system in the first place.  

This.  One nice illustrative statistic is the arrest rates for petty crimes -- jaywalking, marijuana possession -- in NYC, compared to 1) population percentages by race/ethnicity and 2) percentage of marijuana users.  Bottom line -- minorities, particularly blacks and to a lesser extent hispanics -- were arrested/charged at a MUCH higher rate than their percentage of population/rate of offense.

However, it's also a problem that we have shitty, limited data on this sort of thing....and it's on purpose.  PDs and governments have resisted like hell any suggestion that such things be tracked by race (things like recording race on traffic stops).  We all KNOW that a black guy driving a generic Toyota Camry through a given neighborhood is more likely to be pulled over than a white guy in the same car.  Talk to every black man you know -- including the ones who are regular old professionals, wear gray slacks, that sort of thing -- and they will tell you matter-of-factly that of course they have more encounters with police than the average white guy.  They know it.  You and I know it.  We all know it.  I have no idea why we still have this conversation as an argument.

The average black guy has a higher chance of interactions with the cops.

He has a higher chance of not getting cut the same amount of slack that a white guy would get.

He thus has a higher chance of facing criminal judicial action than a similar white guy.

And when he does, he will generally face greater consequences than a similar white guy.

Do we have perfect data on all of those?  Hell no.  Because we don't want to know.  But come on.....every single one of us who has been in this world for more than a hot minute knows they are generally true.  Generic black guy in gray slacks, compared to an identical white guy, living in the same hood, having the same job, has a higher chance as to all of the categories I listed above.

[Dahobbs 17691]

2 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Agreed. Admit I did not read every word of every study, but IIRC the first study noted 1) things progressively improving with mandatory guidelines and 2) did not account for distinctions in other factors such as previous convictions. (if I am incorrect, then fair enough)

Absolutely on the M-M study ... which is generally why "science" is hard because its says concurrently there is statistical significant differences and studies are inconclusive. Tough to process that.

This is consistent with the trouble of a lot of these issues - it is very difficult to tease out what is driven by race and what is driven by economics, i.e. inability to afford sophisticated, focused legal counsel. Even if we grant there is systematic racism in the criminal justice system, as noted above ... there is a very easy way not to become of victim of it.

(1) The study by the US Sentencing Commission considered a wide variety of factors, which are listed in Appendix C of the report (see page 37). A portion of the study was directed to answer the specific question of whether accounting for violence in an offender's criminal history changed the analysis. The conclusion was that it did not. 

(2) On the M&M study you're conflating the description on why the study was being conducted (i.e., there were multiple studies with inconsistent results) and the conclusion of the study (a statistical significant difference exists). 

I agree science is hard. And science on social issues is in many ways more difficult than "hard" sciences because of the difficulty in measurement and controlling for all variables.  That said, it really helps to have an understanding of the different ways studies are conducted, statistical analysis, and the general layout of the final written reports. 

Finally, I agree that economics are absolutely a factor. And that is part of the systemic problem. Black people as a whole are poorer than their white counterparts. That said, economics are partially accounted for the US Sentencing Commission study in the form of education level. And it still found a difference in outcomes depending upon race. 

[Brisketexan 105432]

7 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Even if we grant there is systematic racism in the criminal justice system, as noted above ... there is a very easy way not to become of victim of it.

And this is where I disagree.  And that's because of something that is next-to-impossible to track (and again, we don't want to track it): interactions with cops, even when doing nothing wrong.

I've told the story before -- my law school classmate, who is now a senior general counsel at a Fortune 100 company.  Brilliant.  Black guy from a NE US city.  On Christmas break, he was home, and meeting some friends (of similar character) who were staying at a nice hotel in his city.  He went into the lobby, sat in one of the seating areas to wait for them.  Wearing jeans and button down.  Pretty generic.  Within a few minutes, cops came in to ask him what he was doing there, and were telling him that he needed to wait outside, when his friends came downstairs and asked what the deal was.

That interaction could have gone sideways in an instant.  All he had to do is what many of us would have done -- lose patience, mouth off to the cops, and then he would have ended up in cuffs, charged with resisting, trespassing, and what have you.  Even if we concede that cops are arbitrary dickheads to EVERYONE....the more run-ins you have with arbitrary dickheads, the higher your chances of something bad happening.

You and I wouldn't have had that interaction, that chance for shit to go south.  And the kicker is...that was far from the ONLY interaction he had like that over the years.  Every one of those is an extra chance to get your life fucked.   That is life for a black man in America.  Even a brilliant, well-dressed, straightlaced guy like my friend.

[Dahobbs 17691]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And this is where I disagree.  And that's because of something that is next-to-impossible to track (and again, we don't want to track it): interactions with cops, even when doing nothing wrong.

I've told the story before -- my law school classmate, who is now a senior general counsel at a Fortune 100 company.  Brilliant.  Black guy from a NE US city.  On Christmas break, he was home, and meeting some friends (of similar character) who were staying at a nice hotel in his city.  He went into the lobby, sat in one of the seating areas to wait for them.  Wearing jeans and button down.  Pretty generic.  Within a few minutes, cops came in to ask him what he was doing there, and were telling him that he needed to wait outside, when his friends came downstairs and asked what the deal was.

That interaction could have gone sideways in an instant.  All he had to do is what many of us would have done -- lose patience, mouth off to the cops, and then he would have ended up in cuffs, charged with resisting, trespassing, and what have you.  Even if we concede that cops are arbitrary dickheads to EVERYONE....the more run-ins you have with arbitrary dickheads, the higher your chances of something bad happening.

You and I wouldn't have had that interaction, that chance for shit to go south.  And the kicker is...that was far from the ONLY interaction he had like that over the years.  Every one of those is an extra chance to get your life fucked.   That is life for a black man in America.  Even a brilliant, well-dressed, straightlaced guy like my friend.

For the peanut gallery, here is an example of a helpful anecdote. It illustrates the problem on a human level. 

[Nivek 16992]

There is also a disparity in sentencing for attractive and non-attractive people.


Not that I have to worry about that.....

[GringoSalado 1652]

Systemic racism is an unsolvable problem, which is its entire point imo. What "system" can be created that has no racially disparate outcome? So all systems are racist.

[Dahobbs 17691]

1 hour ago, GringoSalado said:

Systemic racism is an unsolvable problem, which is its entire point imo. What "system" can be created that has no racially disparate outcome? So all systems are racist.

This is a stupid take. There is no reason why outcomes in the criminal justice system should be statistically worse for blacks all else being equal. The available studies indicate that when all else is equal (as best as we can determine), there is a very significant difference. That isn't ok, and it isn't ok to just shrug your shoulders and say "the problem is too hard to solve." 

[GringoSalado 1652]

4 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

This is a stupid take. There is no reason why outcomes in the criminal justice system should be statistically worse for blacks all else being equal. The available studies indicate that when all else is equal (as best as we can determine), there is a very significant difference. That isn't ok, and it isn't ok to just shrug your shoulders and say "the problem is too hard to solve." 

That's not what I said. Nothing will be perfectly equitable, therefore it is racist.