Discussion and Debate Community Thread

[sumskilz]

The officer appears to make a split-second judgement regarding Toledo's movements in the context of having witnessed him being armed (could have been a replica gun/BB gun) less than a second previously.

It was a Ruger 9MM semi-automatic pistol, and the kid had residue on his hand from having fired it (although probably not deliberately at anyone). It looks to me like he tossed the gun behind the fence in hopes of hiding the fact that he had it, but because of that, the officer didn't see that it was no longer in his right hand when he started to raise it.

[Cope]

It was a Ruger 9MM semi-automatic pistol, and the kid had residue on his hand from having fired it (although probably not deliberately at anyone). It looks to me like he tossed the gun behind the fence in hopes of hiding the fact that he had it, but because of that, the officer didn't see that it was no longer in his right hand when he started to raise it.

I appreciate the information. I wasn't sure if the weapon was real because I'd seen an image (which I now know was doctored) of it with an orange tip.

[PointOfViewGun]

It was a Ruger 9MM semi-automatic pistol, and the kid had residue on his hand from having fired it (although probably not deliberately at anyone). It looks to me like he tossed the gun behind the fence in hopes of hiding the fact that he had it, but because of that, the officer didn't see that it was no longer in his right hand when he started to raise it.

So, the officer told him to raise his hands up so that he could shoot him up? If the idea is that he shot him thinking that he was raising a gun, after which he told him to raise his hands, after the point which he could have seen he had a gun, you're kinda saying that the officer told him to raise his hands to shoot him.

[sumskilz]

So, the officer told him to raise his hands up so that he could shoot him up? If the idea is that he shot him thinking that he was raising a gun, after which he told him to raise his hands, after the point which he could have seen he had a gun, you're kinda saying that the officer told him to raise his hands to shoot him.

Nah, you seem to be talking some nonsense I don't understand, but to clarify, I think that if the kid had dropped the gun in plain sight before raising his hands, he probably wouldn't have been shot. I think at the point the officer says "Show me your F-ing hands, drop it!", the kid had already tossed the gun, but the officer didn't know it. His right hand is obscured from the officer's perspective until maybe a fraction of a second before the shot.

[PointOfViewGun]

Nah, you seem to be talking some nonsense I don't understand, but to clarify, I think that if the kid had dropped the gun in plain sight before raising his hands, he probably wouldn't have been shot. I think at the point the officer says "Show me your F-ing hands, drop it!", the kid had already tossed the gun, but the officer didn't know it. His right hand is obscured from the officer's perspective until maybe a fraction of a second before the shot.

Nope, the kid turns after the officer tells him to show his hands. Thats after the chance officer had to see if he had a gun or not. If he saw that he had a gun, then told him to raise his hands, and shot him because he thought he was raising a gun, then he told him to raise his hands to shoot him. Simple train of logic. If he didn't think he had a gun, told him to raise his hands, then he had no reason to believe he was raising a gun. Simple again.

[sumskilz]

the kid turns after the officer tells him to show his hands.

Yeah, that's how I see it.

Thats after the chance officer had to see if he had a gun or not.

No, the kid's right hand wasn't visible to the officer yet, it only became visible a fraction of a second before the officer fired. When the officer could have seen his right hand prior to that, he still had the gun.

The rest of your suppositions are ridiculous, because you're not taking into account that this obviously wasn't some carefully thought out plan. The officer even shouted the orders in reverse of what they should have been.

From the CNN article I linked earlier:

The video, according to police, shows a gun in Toledo's right hand as he nears an open area of fence next to an empty lot. Toledo turns to his left, toward the officer, and what police say is the gun disappears behind his right side. Toledo begins to raise his hands as he's facing the officer when the officer fires his weapon.

From the time police said the gun was first visible on body-worn camera footage in Toledo's hand, to the time the officer fired his weapon, was eight tenths of a second. In that period of time, his right arm disappears behind the fence before he begins to raise both hands.

[PointOfViewGun]

Yeah, that's how I see it.
No, the kid's right hand wasn't visible to the officer yet, it only became visible a fraction of a second before the officer fired. When the officer could have seen his right hand prior to that, he still had the gun.
The rest of your suppositions are ridiculous, because you're not taking into account that this obviously wasn't some carefully thought out plan. The officer even shouted the orders in reverse of what they should have been.
From the CNN article I linked earlier:

That doesn't sit well with your earlier description. Based on your earlier description, officer saw the gun on his hand, the kid tossed it, then the kid got shot with the officer not knowing he tossed it. That implies that the gun was visible to the officer before the kid turned. Kids right hand after he turns never leaves sight as he raises it. Your sequence is quite problematic. Either the officer shot without actually seeing a gun or he shot the kid for following a command.

[enoch]

Or for being black.

[Cope]

No, the kid's right hand wasn't visible to the officer yet, it only became visible a fraction of a second before the officer fired. When the officer could have seen his right hand prior to that, he still had the gun.

The rest of your suppositions are ridiculous, because you're not taking into account that this obviously wasn't some carefully thought out plan. The officer even shouted the orders in reverse of what they should have been.

From the CNN article I linked earlier:

The more obvious flaw in the conspiracy is the implication that having one's hands raised is a prerequisite for being shot ("he told him to raise his hands to shoot him").

Regarding the reversed commands, it is possible that the officer only noticed the firearm when instructing Toledo to raise his hands.

[sumskilz]

That doesn't sit well with your earlier description. Based on your earlier description, officer saw the gun on his hand, the kid tossed it, then the kid got shot with the officer not knowing he tossed it. That implies that the gun was visible to the officer before the kid turned.

It is completely consistent with what I said earlier.

[Vanoi]

https://news.yahoo.com/white-minneso...210900358.html

People have been killed by police for doing far far less than this man. This isn't really a surprise though.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...olice-by-race/

Statistically black people are overrepresented when it comes to police related deaths. Around 23% of people shot by police were black. The black population of America is only 13%.

White people are underrepresented when it comes to police related shootings. Only 44% of people killed by police were white. White people make up around 60% of the US population.

It's becoming clear there are some stark differences when it comes to how white and black people interact with police and the results of those actions.

[enoch]

Let's not let reality get in the way of narrative. There is either no racism or everything is racism. That is science.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Empirical analysis doesn’t indicate conclusive evidence of racial disparities in fatal police shootings in the US when controlling for contextual factors.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....48550618775108

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/f...eo16_fryer.pdf

[Vanoi]

Empirical analysis doesn’t indicate conclusive evidence of racial disparities in fatal police shootings in the US when controlling for contextual factors.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....48550618775108

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/f...eo16_fryer.pdf

Your first study only looks at officer related shootings in the span of a single year. Not completely their fault as fatal police shootings weren't even recorded for years but a single year is not enough information regarding a problem that could span years.

Now your second study is definitely interesting. Even it admits black and hispanic people are more than 50% more likely to experience some form of force when interacting with police.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Your first study only looks at officer related shootings in the span of a single year. Not completely their fault as fatal police shootings weren't even recorded for years but a single year is not enough information regarding a problem that could span years.

Now your second study is definitely interesting. Even it admits black and hispanic people are more than 50% more likely to experience some form of force when interacting with police.

If you concede there isn’t conclusive evidence for racial disparity in the police use of deadly force under relevant controls, one wonders why you feel the need to respond with meaningless rhetorical caveats that in no way validate your claim that blacks are statistically over represented victims of police deadly force.

[Cope]

Empirical analysis doesn’t indicate conclusive evidence of racial disparities in fatal police shootings in the US when controlling for contextual factors.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....48550618775108

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/f...eo16_fryer.pdf

The more important statistic is that only one in ten thousand arrests (approx.) results in a civilian fatality*. A clear majority of these fatalities are not unjustified. The excessive criticism that is directed at police is intended to deflect blame and whip up populist (typically racialized) hysteria. This obstructs rational debate about improving criminal justice, the causes of criminality and deprivation in America.

*With thanks to Iskar.

[Vanoi]

If you concede there isn’t conclusive evidence for racial disparity in the police use of deadly force under relevant controls,

Concede? I never made a claim. I simply posted statistics and said that there were differences in how white and black people interact with police. Your second study plain out says that. Thank you.

one wonders why you feel the need to respond with meaningless rhetorical caveats that in no way validate your claim that blacks are statistically over represented victims of police deadly force.

My "claim" is validated. Your own studies don't dispute my statistics that black people represent 23% of people in fatal police shootings in 2020 while only making up around 13% of the population.

It helps to read what I actually said in my post but I know you have trouble with that. Take your time and re-read it.

[PointOfViewGun]

Empirical analysis doesn’t indicate conclusive evidence of racial disparities in fatal police shootings in the US when controlling for contextual factors.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....48550618775108
https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/f...eo16_fryer.pdf

Do you have one for the number of times a person is shot by a cop during the same incident? How about random traffic stops? Also, one on how similar crimes are dealt with by the judicial system please.

[enoch]

Plus those studies come from academia (Yale lel) so can not be trusted. At least according to most of the right leaning posters on here whenever stats get in the way of their narratives.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Concede? I never made a claim. I simply posted statistics and said that there were differences in how white and black people interact with police. Your second study plain out says that. Thank you.


My "claim" is validated. Your own studies don't dispute my statistics that black people represent 23% of people in fatal police shootings in 2020 while only making up around 13% of the population.

It helps to read what I actually said in my post but I know you have trouble with that. Take your time and re-read it.

If you’re retreating from your claim that blacks are statistically over represented as victims of police killings, your further claim to have never made it warrants even less attention. Misrepresenting the conclusions of Fryer’s study won’t help you either. I don’t feel like playing the “I never said what I just said/you didn’t address my post/piss poor debating” game today, especially not two posts into an argument you’re already running from. Carry on.

The more important statistic is that only one in ten thousand arrests (approx.) results in a civilian fatality*.

*With thanks to Iskar.

That does provide some perspective. Consider also that police are equally likely to initiate contact with whites vs blacks. Blacks who had contact by police in the last year and experienced physical force by police during that time represent 3% of total police interactions with the public in 2015.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp15.pdf

A clear majority of these fatalities are not unjustified. The excessive criticism that is directed at police is intended to deflect blame and whip up populist (typically racialized) hysteria. This obstructs rational debate about improving criminal justice, the causes of criminality and deprivation in America.

Of course, the margins are minuscule in the first place, as you point out. Fryer’s study, for example, was able to account for more than half the observed disparity in overall use of force by controlling for factors at the precinct level. It was in the raw data that substantial (50%+) disparities appeared, and even then, not in the use of deadly force. But there’s not much room for facts when hysteria is on order, and that’s the point. As we’ve seen over the last year, any shooting, justified or not, can and has been used a pretext for riots and looting. If the over arching premise of disparate killings by police is facially tenuous, that doesn’t leave much for the rest of the narrative to stand on, even without having to acknowledge that observed disparities by census population do not prove any particular causation on their own.