General US Politics Discussion

[Raavi]

27 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Not just cops, mayors, prosecutors, and judges.  The entire inner city systems of almost every U.S. state with large minority centers is and has been dominated by minorities because the right to vote tends to elect people that look like the community.  This has been well established since the 1990s in even the most "racist" areas in the country.    Another beauty of the system you claim to know so much about. 

Here is a nice link containing a lengthy list of studies proving racial bias in virtually every stage of the criminal justice system. But I'm sure you'll just say these are all moot because there are some minorities in positions of powers.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/18/theres-overwhelming-evidence-that-the-criminal-justice-system-is-racist-heres-the-proof/

 

27 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

 Just for the record, you are claiming, policies such as stop and frisk are racist.  Yet, if you look at the numbers that supposedly prove police are racist because they stop young minority men, it turns out that 85% lead to nothing more than a brief encounter with a douche bag.  No charges, no nothing.  If you call that racist

Holy hell this is some of the most convoluted logic I have come across. Stop and frisk disproportionately (to a ridiculously transparent degree) targets minorities, harassing them with invasive frisking basically willy nilly, is not racist because only a small percentage cases results in charges. If only you could appreciate how insane that sounds. Of course only a small percentage of cases leads to charges because it is a police tactic that just basically targets any random black kid in a certain neighbourhood they see for a frisk search. All you have proved with your argument is that stop-and-frisk is in fact a very ineffective policing tactic.

 

27 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

American lawyers have been on forefront of these movements which have essentially weeded out any remnants of racism in the systems outside of bigger cities.  But do go one with the talking points, youre are shooting fish in a barrel here.  

So the US has successfully eradicated racism. I am sure the minorities serving disproportionate sentences in US prisons right now will be very happy to hear that.

 

27 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

As long as you don't mind the prosecutor and the judge being married everything was fine.

Audibly clears throat

 

https://www.postandcourier.com/news/this-sc-judge-is-married-to-the-sheriff-ethical-complaints/article_9fa37d24-160a-11ea-a329-33e456b034c8.html

https://www.postandcourier.com/news/despite-ethics-probe-sc-magistrate-will-remain-chester-s-chief/article_3d527f9c-2d9f-11ea-be16-f7e6239a3a90.html

[sivispacem]

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

You think I am concerned with logic as this point. 

Is this a statement or a question? Not sure why you wouldn't be concerned with logic in a subforum explicitly titled "debates and discussion" but if you want to totally ignore the bulk of my post then it's your prerogative.

 

That said, it does rather reinforce the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

The guy literally pretended that the U.S. has not influenced European government systems.

It's indisputable fact. No single fundamental element of the US system of governance did not preexist in Europe. Which is probably why you're repeating yourself ad nauseum rather than providing specific examples to furnish your claims.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I am not surprised...arguing felons should vote, but also that no one should vote. 

I really hope your reading comprehension skills are better in your day job than they are on here.

[CosmicBuffalo]

1 hour ago, Raavi said:

Here is a nice link containing a lengthy list of studies proving racial bias in virtually every stage of the criminal justice system. But I'm sure you'll just say these are all moot because there are some minorities in positions of powers.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/18/theres-overwhelming-evidence-that-the-criminal-justice-system-is-racist-heres-the-proof/

 

Holy hell this is some of the most convoluted logic I have come across. Stop and frisk disproportionately (to a ridiculously transparent degree) targets minorities, harassing them with invasive frisking basically willy nilly, is not racist because only a small percentage cases results in charges. If only you could appreciate how insane that sounds. Of course only a small percentage of cases leads to charges because it is a police tactic that just basically targets any random black kid in a certain neighbourhood they see for a frisk search. All you have proved with your argument is that stop-and-frisk is in fact a very ineffective policing tactic.

 

So the US has successfully eradicated racism. I am sure the minorities serving disproportionate sentences in US prisons right now will be very happy to hear that.

I do not buy the arguments of organizations that claim to study so called acts of racism when they full well ignore the fact that almost all major cities with large minority population have large percentages of minority leaders such as prosecutors, judges, mayors, chiefs of police.  Their arguments are meant to sow a political agenda.  

 

Did Stop and Frisk also reduce crime?  It actually did...you are quick to label everything as racist because you, sir, harbor racist/prejudicial sentiments proven by your assertion that allowing felons to vote will get more democrats elected.  Then you cite some person, who you probably agree with nothing on, yet act as if this person speaks for everyone in the country who disagrees with you.  There are two states that believe the ideas you are spouting.  Many of the states have taken a look at your pet issue, including FL(back to FL, your favorite) and specifically excluded murderers.  Probably mad about that as well. 

 

The point is even if police are racist, they know the system will not tolerate their racist ass, so they are forced to let people go on their way.  A system of preventing crime such as stop and frisk, which I do not agree with by the way, is no different than your idea that most felons are going to vote democrat.  Although its much more reprehensible because it has real world effects.  Its prejudicial but is it racist, no.  The system is preventing anything other than brief detentions.  And as stated, you are never satisfied and neither are the types of people that would study and try to prove that police are racist.  Full well knowing, the criminal justice systems are dominated by minorities in large urban centers.  That's why 85% of stops resulted in nothing more than an encounter with some prejudicial dbag.  The system as stated is not racist as whole.  Maybe some police are but you have several steps to go after the police and hardly anyone involved the U.S. justice system is racist after the first line.  Most if not all of the first line, has not been racist for decades.    

 

1 hour ago, sivispacem said:

 

 

 

It's indisputable fact. No single fundamental element of the US system of governance did not preexist in Europe. Which is probably why you're repeating yourself ad nauseum rather than providing specific examples to furnish your claims.

 

 

Almost every single modern European country had an absolute monarchy at the time of our founding.  Where the king was a dictator.  So, no..even the Dutch oven guy...they still have a king, I hope he sends his grievance to his royal highness, and tell him to kiss my rebel...and some of you people have the nerve to call Americans inbred, talk about backwards archaic thinking.

[Raavi]

7 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I do not buy the arguments of organizations that claim to study so called acts of racism when they full well ignore the fact that almost all major cities with large minority population have large percentages of minority leaders such as prosecutors, judges, mayors, chiefs of police. 

It's almost like having black cops and judges doesn't magically fix systemic racism. Who'da thunk. Take a look at some of the links on that list, you might even learn something.

 

7 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Did Stop and Frisk also reduce crime?  It actually did...

 

Makes wild claim proceeds to fail to substantiate with a source. Let me help you out, a number of studies have been conducted that found stop and frisk as such did not reduce substantially reduce crime. The biggest crime reduction was found was 2%. What actually reduced crime during the time of stop and frisk was the increased police presence.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27310252

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Do-Stop%2C-Question%2C-and-Frisk-Practices-Deter-Crime-Weisburd-Wooditch/138544443a8c8e7ea2c4c4dbeb976b2385f5cd0d

 

19 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

There are two states that believe the ideas you are spouting.  Many of the states have taken a look at your pet issue, including FL(back to FL, your favorite) and specifically excluded murderers.  Probably mad about that as well. 

What is it with you and bringing up murderers every single time. We are not talking about murderers, we are talking about racially disparate policing and systemic racism in the criminal justice system. Do try to keep up.

 

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

16 minutes ago, Raavi said:

It's almost like having black cops and judges doesn't magically fix systemic racism. Who'da thunk. Take a look at some of the links on that list, you might even learn something.

 

 

 

 

Your assertions rely on front lines policing tactics that are based on spur of the moment facts and circumstances...trying to boil down these situations to statistics seems inherently flawed.  Maybe you do not understand the role of a prosecutor, a judge, or any other person after the police, they have huge impacts on how cases resolve and are handled.  Thats not my fault. Educate yourself.  One of these so called studies claimed police use more disrespectful language with minorities..if you are buying this garbage hook line and sinker, that also your own fault.  There are plenty of studies that claim stop and frisk was effective...including one by the nypd, I am sure you are ready to gulp that one down as well.  I am not mad about the murders, but I know you are.

Edited February 25, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

Just now, CosmicBuffalo said:

Your assertions rely on front lines policing tactics that are based on spur of the moment facts and circumstances...trying to boil down these situations to statistics seems inherently flawed.  Maybe you do not understand the role of a prosecutor, a judge, or any other person after the police, they have huge impacts on how cases resolve and are handled.  Thats not my fault. Educate yourself.

Swing and miss, chief. I have given you examples of racial disparities in practically every single stage of the criminal process. From stop-and-frisk,(police), to racial bias in plea deals (prosecution) to sentencing disparities for minorities (judge). An additional lengthy list of reports and studies proving racial biases in the various stages of the criminal process you will find in the article linked a few posts above.

[CosmicBuffalo]

3 minutes ago, Raavi said:

Swing and miss, chief. I have given you examples of racial disparities in practically every single stage of the criminal process. From stop-and-frisk,(police), to racial bias in plea deals (prosecution) to sentencing disparities for minorities (judge). An additional lengthy list of reports and studies proving racial biases in the various stages of the criminal process you will find in the article linked a few posts above.

Going going gone, the pleas bargains and sentences are based on criminal history...if you repeatedly commit and are arrested for crimes...news flash, you get a harsher sentence. 

Edited February 25, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

3 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Going going gone, the pleas bargains and sentences are based on criminal history...if you repeatedly commit and are arrested for crimes...news flash, you get a harsher sentence. 

 

Instead of being an unpaid cheerleader for the criminal justice as it stands and blindly parroting platitudes about how everything is perfect try doing some independent research perhaps reading a study or two sometime. You might even learn a thing or two. 

 

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3036726

[sivispacem]

35 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Almost every single modern European country had an absolute monarchy at the time of our founding.

Most absolute monarchies ended in the 17th century. By 1789 the concept of divine right was dead and buried in most of Europe. Conversely, the US was fundamentally an aristocratic system until all states abolished property requirements for voting which didn't happen until 1856.

 

Again, name one single aspect of the US political system which did not preexist within Europe.

 

57 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

and some of you people have the nerve to call Americans inbred

Not sure they did, though you're hardly doing a great job of representing the nation's intellectual prowess.

 

57 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

talk about backwards archaic thinking.

You are ilovebender AICMFP

[CosmicBuffalo]

1 minute ago, Raavi said:

 

Instead of being an unpaid cheerleader for the criminal justice as it stands and blindly parroting platitudes about how everything is perfect try doing some independent research perhaps reading a study or two sometime. You might even learn a thing or two. 

 

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3036726

If you think I cannot cite study after study, supposedly proving, the justice is system is not racist, you are wrong.  I am going off my experience mostly. 

 

2 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Most absolute monarchies ended in the 17th century. By 1789 the concept of divine right was dead and buried in most of Europe.

 

Again, name one single aspect of the US political system which did not preexist within Europe.

Really...most of Europe has monarchs today...you need to get rid of those people before you toss any more stones at the U.S. 

[sivispacem]

3 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Really...most of Europe has monarchs today

Less than one third of European countries have a monarchy, and that's including microstates such as Andorra and Vatican City. Which you'd know if you had the first clue what you were on about.

 

Most of these states are also far more politically free than the US.

 

3 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

If you think I cannot cite study after study

Then why don't you?

 

I'd be surprised if you could given that you can't even babe one aspect of US government that is or was unique.

[CosmicBuffalo]

Just now, sivispacem said:

Less than one third of European countries have a monarchy, and that's including microstates such as Andorra and Vatican City.

 

Which you'd know if you had the first clue what you were on about.

1/3rd too many.

[Raavi]

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

If you think I cannot cite study after study, supposedly proving, the justice is system is not racist, you are wrong.  I am going off my experience mostly. 

Your experience is what we call anecdote. Which doesn't hold up to any real academic scrutiny. So better get to citing.

[sivispacem]

1 minute ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

1/3rd too many.

So you think this flippant drivel somehow disguises or deflects from your consistent, unapologetic factual incompetency?

[Raavi]

Just now, CosmicBuffalo said:

1/3rd too many.

Having a monarch with purely ceremonial status and a prime minister that is beholden to the confidence of parliament, as opposed to having a president that has cemented himself with the help of his cronies and republican sycophants to be above the law.

 

I know what I'd pick. 

[CosmicBuffalo]

1 hour ago, Raavi said:

Having a monarch with purely ceremonial status and a prime minister that is beholden to the confidence of parliament, as opposed to having a president that has cemented himself with the help of his cronies and republican sycophants to be above the law.

 

I know what I'd pick. 

A monarch is better than elected president...I think I will stick with will of the people as opposed to having a 90 year old person as our most known and arguably more influential leader. 

 

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3226952/sampson_racialethnicdisparities.pdf?sequence=2

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886913000470?via%3Dihub

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/bench/race.html

 

Shall I go on?  I mean this is a bit more tricky because the academia so wants the justice system to be racist to justify the wacky ideas of murderers voting, in the name of tolerance though.

 

Go ahead and try to say all these studies actually go against my point that seem like a common tactic here for any thoughts that are against the oh so wonderful Europeans.

 

Where is that Dutch Oven breather?  He is probably bowing down to his king sending his tax money to cover the royal turd checker.  He knows his government is fair....who cares if the prosecutor and the judge are married?  He read all the footnotes...so he is informed.  He is probably waving his white flag right now like his grandad.

 

 

[sivispacem]

52 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I mean this is a bit more tricky because the academia so wants the justice system to be racist 

So...the academic community is conspiring to falsify systemic analysis and study of racism within the criminal justice system now?

 

Or maybe they're just reflecting reality, and your assertions, based on anecdote, are inaccurate meaningless twaddle.

 

52 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Go ahead and try to say all these studies actually go against my point 

The first one does, quite clearly.

The second looks to be paywalled, so I can't read it.

The the third isn't a study of any kind but several contrasting opinion pieces.

 

52 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

He is probably waving his white flag right now like his grandad.

Instead of stupid ad hominems, why don't you come back with some actual rebuttals? You could start with citing aspects of the US political system which aren't European in origin.

[CosmicBuffalo]

3 hours ago, Raavi said:

Audibly clears throat

 

https://www.postandcourier.com/news/this-sc-judge-is-married-to-the-sheriff-ethical-complaints/article_9fa37d24-160a-11ea-a329-33e456b034c8.html

https://www.postandcourier.com/news/despite-ethics-probe-sc-magistrate-will-remain-chester-s-chief/article_3d527f9c-2d9f-11ea-be16-f7e6239a3a90.html

The arrangement was highly unusual. Underwood was a sitting judge, sworn to remain impartial from those who brought matters before her. She was also the wife of the sheriff, Alex “Big A” Underwood. Intermingling those two roles had recently brought her a yearlong suspension from the bench; the state’s judicial watchdog found that she failed to disqualify herself in more than 100 cases brought by her husband’s department.

 

Should have been disbarred.  The sheriff is not the same thing as prosecutor....talk about whiffs. 

9 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

So...the academic community is conspiring to falsify systemic analysis and study of racism within the criminal justice system now?

 

Or maybe they're just reflecting reality, and your assertions, based on anecdote, are inaccurate meaningless twaddle.

 

The first one does, quite clearly.

The second looks to be paywalled, so I can't read it.

The the third isn't a study of any kind but two contrasting opinion pieces.

 

Instead of stupid ad hominems, why don't you come back with some actual rebuttals? You could start with citing aspects of the US political system which aren't European in origin.

I have not attacked you with personal insults.  I really think your views are not compatible with the U.S. and that why you have such a problem.  You should keep your opinions about it limited.   You have defended monarchs, stated you are in favor of technocracy in response to my assertion that you would probably be glad to see voting removed from people, crapped on juries because you do not believe normal people can understand laws, and you think the US incarceration system is based on protecting society...I mean do I need to go on? It seems like you hate people, but yet are not for the death penalty, so at least you have that going for you I guess.  And youre still bogged down in logical reasoning arguments.  Which I gave up on long ago, due the behavior in here.  I will crap all over your systems if need be.  I have no problem doing it.  I stated from the beginning I view them as inferior.

Edited February 25, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[sivispacem]

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I have not attacked you with personal insults

You have other posters, though.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

You should keep your opinions about it limited.

Given you've persistently misrepresented my views, made numerous glaring factual errors and remain completely unwilling to address the overwhelming majority of my points, I recommend you deal with your own inconsistencies and failures before you suggest what others should and shouldn't do with their opinions.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I mean do I need to go on?

Feel free to continue listing things you mistakenly believe I've said; all it actually does is highlight hiw poor your reading comprehension is.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

And youre still bogged down in logical reasoning arguments.  Which I gave up on long ago

At least you willingly concede there's no logic in your arguments. Saves me from having to spend time poking holes in them when I can just dismiss them outright.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

I will crap all over your systems if need be. 

You're going to have to try much harder than you have so far, given the only place you've actually crapped so far is your own hand.

[CosmicBuffalo]

3 hours ago, sivispacem said:

 

You're going to have to try much harder than you have so far, given the only place you've actually crapped so far is your own hand.

This is the most amusing thing you said.

[Raavi]

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3226952/sampson_racialethnicdisparities.pdf?sequence=2

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886913000470?via%3Dihub

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/bench/race.html

First study, I can cite you countless examples from academia that directly run counter to what you *think* it says. Both on the macro as well as the micro level of criminal justice.

 

https://5harad.com/papers/100M-stops.pdf

https://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/51-2/51arizlrev305.pdf

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2018/12/06/community-supervision-marked-by-racial-and-gender-disparities

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/653045

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9125.12047

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1985377

 

There is a lot more where that came from. 

 

Second article has to be some kind of bad joke right? It uses the racist argument of black people having lower average IQs to explain away racial disparities. Which has widely. been debunked as being racist horsesh*t. It is also authored by a hack who wrote gems such as "Conservative Criminology: A Call to Restore Balance to the Social Sciences". That's some garbage-tier citations you are offering there, buddy.

 

Third article is of 0 academic value and is ironically more supportive of my treatise than yours.

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Shall I go on?  I mean this is a bit more tricky because the academia so wants the justice system to be racist 

Oh yes big bad academia with their evil peer reviewed studies. The horror. 

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Go ahead and try to say all these studies actually go against my point that seem like a common tactic here for any thoughts that are against the oh so wonderful Europeans.

Reading them before citing them might help. 

 

3 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

 He read all the footnotes...so he is informed.  

Of course. Why do you think we even footnote to begin with? 

[Eutyphro]

Arguing with someone who utterly disregards facts, transparently opposes logic and deduction, and just wants to say "Murrica is the best hurt durr" is a massive waste of time, but it says something great about you all that you're genuinely hearing him out. He's still not provided a single aspect of US governance which Europe implemented, after making the claim that European governance is affected by the US dozens of times, and being asked for any specific example of this about three times on this page. What's the point if someone has the tactics, which I already called out several pages ago, of repeating the same falsehoods over and over again? That's not a debate or discussion but concentrated stupidity. The fact that he ridicules the practice of studying footnotes is telling.

Edited February 25, 2020 by Eutyphro

[Ned Bingham]

19 hours ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Right...I made a simplistic point to a complete butt hurt individual.  Take it and run it with it though. 

Butt hurt ? Are you suggesting that the chap is a catamite ? 

 

Anyways, keep it up, the people here do like a good argument, though these arguments do tend to degenerate into tortured interlinked threads, feeding upon themselves.

[gooeyhole]

Hope boomers don't take the Sanders is a Castroite revolutionary bait seriously, God that was cringe.

[Tchuck]

May cost him Florida in the end, but as long as he lands other states...

[CosmicBuffalo]

On 2/24/2020 at 10:56 PM, Raavi said:

First study, I can cite you countless examples from academia that directly run counter to what you *think* it says. Both on the macro as well as the micro level of criminal justice.

 

https://5harad.com/papers/100M-stops.pdf

https://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/51-2/51arizlrev305.pdf

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2018/12/06/community-supervision-marked-by-racial-and-gender-disparities

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/653045

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9125.12047

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1985377

 

There is a lot more where that came from. 

 

Second article has to be some kind of bad joke right? It uses the racist argument of black people having lower average IQs to explain away racial disparities. Which has widely. been debunked as being racist horsesh*t. It is also authored by a hack who wrote gems such as "Conservative Criminology: A Call to Restore Balance to the Social Sciences". That's some garbage-tier citations you are offering there, buddy.

 

Third article is of 0 academic value and is ironically more supportive of my treatise than yours. (No, only one professional, believes that racist motivations underlie the racial disparities...the other three doubt it, and believe there problem is much more complex than this simple minded explanation)

 

Oh yes big bad academia with their evil peer reviewed studies. The horror. (Unless its goes against your point, then that's racist as well)

 

Reading them before citing them might help. 

 

Of course. Why do you think we even footnote to begin with? 

I am sure he read everything...when I cited some junk easy explanation of the us criminal justice that straight out pointed that the primary role of the justice system is to punish people...he wrote that the article I cited contradicted my view...when I quoted the article directly, pointing out that another goal is rehabilitation, he wrote that he never disputed that punishment was goal and also claimed that I some how rejected rehabilitation as goal when I never did...fail.  Then we got off in world politics, which has nothing to do with anything other than opinion, he biased towards what he knows, I am biased to what I know.

 

So, you do not like scientific studies that contradict your opinion?  You are not just going to gobble them down and take them as gospel...the wa po guy you cited, had 9 different studies that claimed there are other explanation for outcomes of racial disparity, rather than, as you claim to believe, inherent racist individuals at each level of the justice system...these two are not mentioned, maybe you should email him and let him know.  He claims to be as opened and tolerant as you.  I actually looked through one article..its flaming b.s. Aside from police interactions, which are done be average intelligence people, lawyers and judges are above average and many have high level intelligence and all are highly educated, which reduces racist ideology.  Even most police these days requires some college if not a college degree to work the street. Anyways, one study alleged that bonds are higher for blacks because judges are racially biased, but openly admitted that minority judges are racially biased as well..cant make that crap up.

 

So, to conclude, a guy that thinks the U.S. justice is system is primarily concerned about rehabilitation of criminals, believes voting is an absolute right, defends monarchy as form of government, craps on juries as too incompetent to understand law, claims to understand federal appellate law, believes the entire criminal justice is racist, and thinks murderers should be able to vote is somehow entitled enough to believe his opinions on U.S. political and criminal justice are relevant or matter at all is just sad.

Edited February 26, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

54 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

So, you do not like scientific studies that contradict your opinion?

1209 studies establish that vaccines don't cause autism. 7 studies say that vaccines do cause autism. Which do you take as true?

 

54 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

 I actually looked through one article..its flaming b.s.

Yes this is exactly how refutations in legal academia look like. Let me help you out. Firstly, it might help if you would actually cite the article you are referring to. Secondly, you may also want to point out what in the article is erroneous and why. 

 

54 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

lawyers and judges are above average and many have high level intelligence and all are highly educated, which reduces racist ideology. 

You really do not understand what systemic racism even means, do you?

 

Also just for fun: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/white-collar-and-criminal-law/lawyers-racism-requires-new-murder-trial-full-9th-cir-says

 

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

16 minutes ago, Raavi said:

1209 studies establish that vaccines don't cause autism. 7 studies say that vaccines do cause autism. Which do you take as true? (Nice shift, most of the studies are simply pointly out bad outcomes and then trying to connect the outcomes to a cause, racism, when the problems are complex and to reduce the cause to such a opinionated and divisive cause is nothing more than political bias, which is why one study that refutes your opinion...is racist.)

 

Yes this is exactly how refutations in legal academia look like. Let me help you out. Firstly, it might help if you would actually cite the article you are referring to. Secondly, you may also want to point out what in the article is erroneous and why. (Why? you are not going to be convinced or change your mind, I mean its only one source right?)

 

You really do not understand what systemic racism even means, do you? (Racial disparities in outcomes are a problem, but the problem is more complex than saying the individuals in the criminal justice system including Judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and all other applicable positions are inherently racist..talk about simple minded) 

 

Also just for fun: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/white-collar-and-criminal-law/lawyers-racism-requires-new-murder-trial-full-9th-cir-says

(Give the guy a new trial, absolutely, hopefully, the jury acquits him and sues the state)

 

https://university.pretrial.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=202d2e68-415c-3402-9efa-c61c9a8e9eef&forceDialog=0

"First, we find that both white and black bail judges are racially biased against black defendants, a finding that is inconsistent with most models of racial animus."   

Edited February 26, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo

[Raavi]

22 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Nice shift, most of the studies are simply pointly out bad outcomes and then trying to connect the outcomes to a cause, racism, when the problems are complex and to reduce the cause to such a opinionated and divisive cause is nothing more than political bias

So for the myriad studies that establish racial disparities on every level of the criminal process. All these studies are biased? Please humor me and point out, study by study where exactly the political bias is. Is it in the methodology? Is it in the empirical data? Is it in the statistical data available for public perusal? Is it in the peer review process?

 

22 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

which is why one study that refutes your opinion...is racist.

Its entire premise is based on a widely debunked racist talking point parroted by the likes of David Duke. It posits that gross racial disparities in US criminal justice can be explained away because black people have lower IQs. That you still subscribe to it and use it to support your argument, knowing it is predicated on racist garbage is pretty sad.

 

22 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

Why? you are not going to be convinced or change your mind, I mean its only one source right?

I have offered you countless peer reviewed studies yet you fall back on your own anecdotal experiences and confirmation bias not to have your rose-coloured view of the US criminal justice system shaken. 

 

22 minutes ago, CosmicBuffalo said:

but the problem is more complex than saying the individuals in the criminal justice system including Judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and all other applicable positions are inherently racist..talk about simple minded

Thanks for reaffirming you do not understand what systemic racism actually means. I would say do some research yourself, but you apparently eschew academia because of it mythical biases so you're essentially lost cause.

 

[CosmicBuffalo]

17 minutes ago, Raavi said:

So for the myriad studies that establish racial disparities on every level of the criminal process. All these studies are biased? Please humor me and point out, study by study where exactly the political bias is. Is it in the methodology? Is it in the empirical data? Is it in the statistical data available for public perusal? Is it in the peer review process?  (If you think academia in social sciences does not have bias, check out that conclusion from the article ...if all this data has been assembled, why not just target each individual judge/prosecutor for removal..because they are racist, I bet if most of these so called studies were scrutinized they would fall flat on their fase, in a removal proceeding..because, there would probably be 100s if not thousand of examples for each individual Judge or prosecutor where they have treated minorities either fairly or more lenient than whites in similar situations.)

 

Its entire premise is based on a widely debunked racist talking point parroted by the likes of David Duke. It posits that gross racial disparities in US criminal justice can be explained away because black people have lower IQs. That you still subscribe to it and use it to support your argument, knowing it is predicated on racist garbage is pretty sad. (same could be said about 90% of the studies you are claiming, trying to say if I scrutinized these people there would not be some wackos in their midst)

 

I have offered you countless peer reviewed studies yet you fall back on your own anecdotal experiences and confirmation bias not to have your rose-coloured view of the US criminal justice system shaken. ( so have I and you not ready to buy them hook line and sinker?)

 

Thanks for reaffirming you do not understand what systemic racism actually means. I would say do some research yourself, but you apparently eschew academia because of it mythical biases so you're essentially lost cause. (Every case in the legal system turns on its facts, and its going to be hard to determine whether or not there is institutional racism based off raw data.  There are far more likely causes for these outcomes such a financial means, education levels, and many other social issues, you are wasting your time and I am mine, but at least its fun)

 

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by CosmicBuffalo