4 ms·

A police force headed by a minority means nothing if the racism before that person joined is still there and he or she does not do anything to help change. It's

A police force headed by a minority means nothing if the racism before that person joined is still there and he or she does not do anything to help change. It's like getting a Black president and saying racism and lynching was abolished by voting this person in office. The statistics show that the murders of unarmed people of color at the hands of police officers is disproportionately higher than that of the white people. And the is specifically true for back men. Out of every 100K black people 8 of the men of that population will die, unarmed, at the hands of the police force that happen to be white. These statistics enable the "seeing" process. Sources for the statistics are given in the article. You are free to calculate your own conclusions.

sfj 6y ago
> These statistics enable the "seeing" process. I'd argue, you aren't really "seeing" the whole picture without also knowing that blacks in the USA are 13% of the population, yet commit 52% of the crimes.
- andarleen 6y ago
  Great, now let's look into why they commit so much crime - perhaps because they have been marginalised for generations, depicted as criminals, denied education, pushed towards the edge of society? Your statement is like saying Jews in Germany didn't contribute tax, while they were "living" in concentration camps. It is time for the US to pull out of the middle ages and become a modern country. A society belongs to everyone, regardless of "race", "religion", and so on.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- icebraining 6y ago
  Do they? How do we know?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- andarleen 6y ago
  I am not sure why you deleted your comment - I know the HN commentariat will downvote anything contrary to its liking, but this is a forum for debating issues. I managed to read it quickly, and while I disagree with it, I welcome it. I welcome it because I can input my opinion and maybe shed some light on why i think you are wrong. You posted about raw numbers of whites in poverty vs blacks in poverty. By raw numbers you are right, there are more white people living in poverty. But there are more white people overall. "According to 2018 US Census Data, the highest poverty rate by race is found among Native Americans (25.4%), with Blacks (20.8%) having the second highest poverty rate, and Hispanics (of any race) having the third highest poverty rate (17.6%). Whites had a poverty rate of 10.1%, while Asians had a poverty rate at 10.1%." - that means the likelihood of black people and native americans being poor is higher than that of whites. You also implied I think all whites are racists. If I would have than it would have been racist towards white people. I think whitepeople as a people are not racist, but there is a solid number of white people being racist. This doesn't make all of them racist, just like some criminals from the black community doesn't make all black people racist. Scholarships are meant to try and help members of that group gain education. White people are more likely to be able to attend university. Doesn't mean there are no white people who can't afford education. The issue is not that blacks are getting scholarships, the issue is that education is too expensive and only a few afford it. You finished your comment with "no shit" to my statement that society belongs to everyone. You are right, but some disagree with you. I remember personally speaking to a white american back when the new orleans floods happened, and he point blank told me "it's the ni* who get fu". I remember a friend who went on a trip to NY with his white lawyer friends stating that smoking weed while driving is fine, because the police will only stop the "ni". I also remember images of LA, SF, NY, and their ghettos where there are mainly black people. As I said, I welcome debate. That's the only way we can get to the bottom of what is going on.
- pjc50 6y ago
  What constitutes a crime is largely decided by the police, who can create this statistic by disproportionately stopping and searching black people.
kypro 6y ago
> The statistics show that the murders of unarmed people of color at the hands of police officers is disproportionately higher than that of the white people. The statistics show all kinds of things. It would show the same for men vs women, young vs old, it would even show the same poor urban areas vs rich suburbs. It's unfortunate, but also clear that certain demographics simply present a higher threat. Perhaps the police should be blind to age, race, neighbourhood and gender, but in reality that's not going to happen. It's a survival instinct we all have and if you pretend you feel less threatened when a group of young men walk pass you in a rough area compared to an elderly couple in the suburbs, then you're lying. What you really need to be asking is whether these stats are a product of the increased threat young black men pose to the police or whether this is simply straight up racism. But the fact these statistics are not comparable to other minority ethnic groups living in the US, nor to black women, you have to question if racism is the best explanation of the data. Indeed if it is racism, it seems to be a very unusual type of racism which has prejudice specifically for young, male, poor, and of course, black individuals.

sfj 6y ago

> These statistics enable the "seeing" process. I'd argue, you aren't really "seeing" the whole picture without also knowing that blacks in the USA are 13% of the population, yet commit 52% of the crimes.

andarleen 6y ago
Great, now let's look into why they commit so much crime - perhaps because they have been marginalised for generations, depicted as criminals, denied education, pushed towards the edge of society? Your statement is like saying Jews in Germany didn't contribute tax, while they were "living" in concentration camps. It is time for the US to pull out of the middle ages and become a modern country. A society belongs to everyone, regardless of "race", "religion", and so on.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
icebraining 6y ago
Do they? How do we know?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
andarleen 6y ago
I am not sure why you deleted your comment - I know the HN commentariat will downvote anything contrary to its liking, but this is a forum for debating issues. I managed to read it quickly, and while I disagree with it, I welcome it. I welcome it because I can input my opinion and maybe shed some light on why i think you are wrong. You posted about raw numbers of whites in poverty vs blacks in poverty. By raw numbers you are right, there are more white people living in poverty. But there are more white people overall. "According to 2018 US Census Data, the highest poverty rate by race is found among Native Americans (25.4%), with Blacks (20.8%) having the second highest poverty rate, and Hispanics (of any race) having the third highest poverty rate (17.6%). Whites had a poverty rate of 10.1%, while Asians had a poverty rate at 10.1%." - that means the likelihood of black people and native americans being poor is higher than that of whites. You also implied I think all whites are racists. If I would have than it would have been racist towards white people. I think whitepeople as a people are not racist, but there is a solid number of white people being racist. This doesn't make all of them racist, just like some criminals from the black community doesn't make all black people racist. Scholarships are meant to try and help members of that group gain education. White people are more likely to be able to attend university. Doesn't mean there are no white people who can't afford education. The issue is not that blacks are getting scholarships, the issue is that education is too expensive and only a few afford it. You finished your comment with "no shit" to my statement that society belongs to everyone. You are right, but some disagree with you. I remember personally speaking to a white american back when the new orleans floods happened, and he point blank told me "it's the ni* who get fu". I remember a friend who went on a trip to NY with his white lawyer friends stating that smoking weed while driving is fine, because the police will only stop the "ni". I also remember images of LA, SF, NY, and their ghettos where there are mainly black people. As I said, I welcome debate. That's the only way we can get to the bottom of what is going on.
pjc50 6y ago
What constitutes a crime is largely decided by the police, who can create this statistic by disproportionately stopping and searching black people.

kypro 6y ago

> The statistics show that the murders of unarmed people of color at the hands of police officers is disproportionately higher than that of the white people. The statistics show all kinds of things. It would show the same for men vs women, young vs old, it would even show the same poor urban areas vs rich suburbs. It's unfortunate, but also clear that certain demographics simply present a higher threat. Perhaps the police should be blind to age, race, neighbourhood and gender, but in reality that's not going to happen. It's a survival instinct we all have and if you pretend you feel less threatened when a group of young men walk pass you in a rough area compared to an elderly couple in the suburbs, then you're lying. What you really need to be asking is whether these stats are a product of the increased threat young black men pose to the police or whether this is simply straight up racism. But the fact these statistics are not comparable to other minority ethnic groups living in the US, nor to black women, you have to question if racism is the best explanation of the data. Indeed if it is racism, it seems to be a very unusual type of racism which has prejudice specifically for young, male, poor, and of course, black individuals.