THE ‘INNOCENT’ PHILANDO CASTILE NARRATIVE COMPLETELY FALLS APART

[bearkat42]

while you provide a valid argument and sound facts, you know the usual suspects are going to ignore that and call you a racist/klan and present nothing more than ad hominem attacks while jerking each other off simply for not agreeing with them.

 

[NLXSK1]

Black men and women are treated differently in the hands of law enforcement. They are more likely to be touched, handcuffed, pushed to the ground or pepper-sprayed by a police officer, even after accounting for how, where and when they encounter the police...

But Roland G. Fryer Jr., the African-American author of the study and a professor of economics at Harvard - which examined more than 1,000 shootings in 10 major police departments, in Texas, Florida and California, was "surprised" to find that when it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias.

So what? People are arrested for their actions, not their skin color. To use Hillary Clinton's favorite ph

 

[testiclees]

So what? People are arrested for their actions, not their skin color. To use Hillary Clinton's favorite ph

As always you are dumb as fuck.

I'm gonna guess Hillary's pH is neutral to base. Those ladies with the battery acid type pH well...ive learned my lesson

 

[see4]

The cop was scared, and overreacted. He didn't stop the guy thinking "here's my chance to kill a black guy". Nor did he slyly smile when he pulled his gun and shot the guy. He was just plain scared. And he overreacted and killed a guy who was probably trying to comply.

So why was the cop scared?

So was the gentlemen in Dallas who shot the cops. He was scared.

 

[UncleBuck]

when it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias.

factually incorrect.

 

[.Pinworm.]

 

[bu$hleaguer]

View attachment 3730721

I love the examiner!!!

 

[choomer]

while you provide a valid argument and sound facts, you know the usual suspects are going to ignore that and call you a racist/klan and present nothing more than ad hominem attacks while jerking each other off simply for not agreeing with them.

True 'nuff.
But it makes no difference to me whether they do or do not as they've proven they will ignore anything outside their favorite narrative and use personal attack in an attempt of a, "LALALALALALALA, I can't hear you!" type defense as you state.

If just because I reply to Bucky or his sycophants to point out their non-existent reasoning skills and they think it helps their penis (or lack thereof) grow when they calls me a racist, it ain't no concern to me.
But other smarter members do cool their heels here from time to time and they can both read and reason, so I'll let them make the call

factually incorrect.

According to THIS, as published by Roland G. Fryer Jr., the African-American author of the study and a professor of economics, sounds like something you should argue with Harvard about.

Doesn't it chap your rectum for it to be passing so much hot air so often?

EDIT - Hmmmmm, I posted my last 3 replies last night in rapid succession and saw them post, yet only 2 still survive today. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[choomer]

<picture of nameless abstract>

Well that's cute, but it only links to photofucket for the picture you took of this and doesn't cite it's origin.

The info I posted was much the same I suppose, but it's bonafides are listed towards the bottom of my post as to who/where it comes from.

Here's it's abtract:

An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force Roland G. Fryer, Jr
NBER Working Paper No. 22399 July 2016
JEL No. J01,K0

ABSTRACT
This paper explores racial differences in police use of force. On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions with police. Adding controls that account for important context and civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities. On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.
We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings.

Roland G. Fryer, Jr
Department of Economics
Harvard University
Littauer Center 208
Cambridge, MA 02138
and NBER
[email protected]

 

[StevieBevie]

View attachment 3730721

Sounds like a disease...

 

[StevieBevie]

True 'nuff.
But it makes no difference to me whether they do or do not as they've proven they will ignore anything outside their favorite narrative and use personal attack in an attempt of a, "LALALALALALALA, I can't hear you!" type defense as you state.

If just because I reply to Bucky or his sycophants to point out their non-existent reasoning skills and they think it helps their penis (or lack thereof) grow when they calls me a racist, it ain't no concern to me.
But other smarter members do cool their heels here from time to time and they can both read and reason, so I'll let them make the call

According to THIS, as published by Roland G. Fryer Jr., the African-American author of the study and a professor of economics, sounds like something you should argue with Harvard about.
Doesn't it chap your rectum for it to be passing so much hot air so often?

your a racist too?

 

[StevieBevie]

Well that's cute, but it only links to photofucket for the picture you took of this and doesn't cite it's origin.

The info I posted was much the same I suppose, but it's bonafides are listed towards the bottom of my post as to who/where it comes from.

Here's it's abtract:

An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force Roland G. Fryer, Jr
NBER Working Paper No. 22399 July 2016
JEL No. J01,K0

ABSTRACT
This paper explores racial differences in police use of force. On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions with police. Adding controls that account for important context and civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities. On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.
We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings.

Roland G. Fryer, Jr
Department of Economics
Harvard University
Littauer Center 208
Cambridge, MA 02138
and NBER
[email protected]

Interesting someone from Harvard siting no differences. If ever there was a University that would find a difference it would be a school like Harvard.

 

[choomer]

your a racist too?

You know you have to ask Bucky the racial barometer that question to <edit>know which answer you'll get<edit> .

Interesting someone from Harvard siting no differences. If ever there was a University that would find a difference it would be a school like Harvard.

Can you cite that Harvard hired a racist <in your definition> african-american economics professor?

I bet Bucky can.

 

[StevieBevie]

You know you have to ask Bucky the racial barometer that question to <edit>know which answer you'll get<edit> .

Can you cite that Harvard hired a racist <in your definition> african-american economics professor?

I bet Bucky can.

I can't site anything, just found it interesting.

 

[.Pinworm.]

You know you have to ask Bucky the racial barometer that question to <edit>know which answer you'll get<edit> .

Can you cite that Harvard hired a racist <in your definition> african-american economics professor?

I bet Bucky can.

Still working at walmart, Dr. Kynes?

 

[choomer]

Still working at walmart, Dr. Kynes?

Good to know know the sycophants back-channel (of all different types) w/ Bucky.

Enjoy being led astray yet again by your pied piper.

 

[StevieBevie]

 

[StevieBevie]

Good to know know the sycophants back-channel (of all different types) w/ Bucky.

Enjoy being led astray yet again by your pied piper.

Bucky, oh you mean Andrew...

 

[UncleBuck]

Bucky, oh you mean Andrew...

tell me more about how you idolize MLK then pal around with racists like choomer.

 

[OddBall1st]

True 'nuff.
But it makes no difference to me whether they do or do not as they've proven they will ignore anything outside their favorite narrative and use personal attack in an attempt of a, "LALALALALALALA, I can't hear you!" type defense as you state.

If just because I reply to Bucky or his sycophants to point out their non-existent reasoning skills and they think it helps their penis (or lack thereof) grow when they calls me a racist, it ain't no concern to me.
But other smarter members do cool their heels here from time to time and they can both read and reason, so I'll let them make the call

According to THIS, as published by Roland G. Fryer Jr., the African-American author of the study and a professor of economics, sounds like something you should argue with Harvard about.

Doesn't it chap your rectum for it to be passing so much hot air so often?

EDIT - Hmmmmm, I posted my last 3 replies last night in rapid succession and saw them post, yet only 2 still survive today. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Buck has this sites software.