Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby shafnutz05 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:39 am

Troy Loney wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:True...that being said.

In the 15 months prior to Trayvon Martin being shot, there were eight burglaries committed in that same neighborhood. All of these burglaries were committed by young black men. Zimmerman was aware of this fact.

So assuming that GZ decided to keep a close eye on TM because of his skin color, there was an abnormally high amount of burglaries in recent memory, all committed by young men of color. We can argue the merits of racial profiling all day, but that was likely Zimmerman's reasoning for following TM, not any sort of inherent racism.


Wait...are you arguing for racial profiling?


No, and I thought I made that clear. My point was, I don't believe Zimmerman followed TM because of some sort of inherent racism or hatred against black people. I believe he followed TM because of the rampant string of burglaries in his neighborhood, and his knowledge that they were all committed by young black men.

I do not personally support racial profiling, but I am able to understand GZ's mindset in following TM that evening. The burglaries occurred in his neighborhood.
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 57,988
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Troy Loney on Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:40 am

So it's not profiling if you deem it justified?

ok, all I was curious about.
Troy Loney
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,965
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby BurghersAndDogsSports on Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:42 am

King Sid the Great 87 wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:
Factorial wrote:
A Tampa Bay Times analysis of almost 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at Will” laws — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

Questions of race have surrounded Florida’s controversial “Kill at Will” law since George Zimmerman killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in February. The law made national headlines because it was part of a system of laws that helped keep Zimmerman out of jail for more than a month.

The study found that regardless of what race the killer was, if the victim was black they were more likely to walk free.


http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/06/ ... d_law.html



1) The difference between 59% and 73% isn't as remarkable or as significant as I think you want it to be. Those numbers are relatively close.

2) As to some of the "fuzziness" shmenguin mentioned, do we know the circumstances of all of these cases? As to the person that was shot in every single one of those scenarios, where were they and how much of a threat did they pose to the person that fired the gun?

The fact they are trying to play up this study is a joke. As I stated before, 14% is not enough of a statistical difference to be proof that "black and brown" men are victimized to a large extent over white people. Further, without knowing the details of every single one of those cases, this study is meaningless.


What's your null hypothesis and at what level of alpha did you test this to conclude that 14% is not statistically significant?


Im not speaking for anyone but here is my breakdown to answer your question:

200 TOTAL OVERALL cases is not enough to determine a statistical advantage when you do not factor in circumstances and further breakdown the numbers. Of those 200, how many where white killing black, and black killing white? (For example: That 200 could become say 100, and if its an equal amount of each you have a difference of 7 cases, 7 cases without knowing anything about them including if the person shot was murdered).

Furthermore, the entire study only accounts for "Stand Your Ground" laws, not if the person murdered. Just "fought back against in some way". How many people got off because they shot an intruder in the leg as a warning shot? Big difference there.

If you read up on the cases the differences also lists weapon: things like a gun or a chair (yes, read the study a chair is one of the weapons as is a bat
and even "NONE". Yes someone used stand your ground for most likely punching someone)

Its a crap study, and before listing 73% vs. 59% there are so few cases they should actually list how many of each we are talking about, then breakdown how many were murders or fist fights (or chairs) and breakdown the numbers that way.

I would bet that the numbers for each (murder, gun, fight, chair) when looked at directly and compared there are very few statistical difference. As well as we would need to look at those individually anyways - have more blacks killed whites and used this law? Is the difference in numbers because less whites have killed and more have used this law in a bar fight?

Terrible, awful, disgusting and slanted study.
BurghersAndDogsSports
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 2,117
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby shafnutz05 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:45 am

Troy Loney wrote:So it's not profiling if you deem it justified?

ok, all I was curious about.


If Zimmerman paid extra attention to TM because he knew that there were eight burglaries in his neighborhood in the last 15 months all committed by black men, then yes, that is the technical definition of profiling. I'm not sure what argument you are trying to make there?

My only point was, while I don't favor racial profiling, it is difficult for me to condemn Zimmerman if Martin's skin color contributed in some part to him being watched more closely. If there was a similar rash of crimes in my neighborhood that I live in now, with similar demographic characteristics, I am not going to sit here and say I wouldn't be much more vigilant/suspicious if I saw someone of TM's skin color walking through my neighborhood at night.

I certainly won't lie and say it wouldn't affect my mindset at all.
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 57,988
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby BurghersAndDogsSports on Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:06 am

BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:
King Sid the Great 87 wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:
Factorial wrote:
A Tampa Bay Times analysis of almost 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at Will” laws — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

Questions of race have surrounded Florida’s controversial “Kill at Will” law since George Zimmerman killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in February. The law made national headlines because it was part of a system of laws that helped keep Zimmerman out of jail for more than a month.

The study found that regardless of what race the killer was, if the victim was black they were more likely to walk free.


http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/06/ ... d_law.html



1) The difference between 59% and 73% isn't as remarkable or as significant as I think you want it to be. Those numbers are relatively close.

2) As to some of the "fuzziness" shmenguin mentioned, do we know the circumstances of all of these cases? As to the person that was shot in every single one of those scenarios, where were they and how much of a threat did they pose to the person that fired the gun?

The fact they are trying to play up this study is a joke. As I stated before, 14% is not enough of a statistical difference to be proof that "black and brown" men are victimized to a large extent over white people. Further, without knowing the details of every single one of those cases, this study is meaningless.


What's your null hypothesis and at what level of alpha did you test this to conclude that 14% is not statistically significant?


Im not speaking for anyone but here is my breakdown to answer your question:

200 TOTAL OVERALL cases is not enough to determine a statistical advantage when you do not factor in circumstances and further breakdown the numbers. Of those 200, how many where white killing black, and black killing white? (For example: That 200 could become say 100, and if its an equal amount of each you have a difference of 7 cases, 7 cases without knowing anything about them including if the person shot was murdered).

Furthermore, the entire study only accounts for "Stand Your Ground" laws, not if the person murdered. Just "fought back against in some way". How many people got off because they shot an intruder in the leg as a warning shot? Big difference there.

If you read up on the cases the differences also lists weapon: things like a gun or a chair (yes, read the study a chair is one of the weapons as is a bat
and even "NONE". Yes someone used stand your ground for most likely punching someone)

Its a crap study, and before listing 73% vs. 59% there are so few cases they should actually list how many of each we are talking about, then breakdown how many were murders or fist fights (or chairs) and breakdown the numbers that way.

I would bet that the numbers for each (murder, gun, fight, chair) when looked at directly and compared there are very few statistical difference. As well as we would need to look at those individually anyways - have more blacks killed whites and used this law? Is the difference in numbers because less whites have killed and more have used this law in a bar fight?

Terrible, awful, disgusting and slanted study.



Sorry all I read the article completely wrong. It stated how many were killed siting a study of 200 TOTAL cases.

Point then being then how many cases are we actually talking about if they used a study quoting only 200 total cases??? I honestly got confused because of those 200 there are more than quite a few non murders including domestic disputes and bar fights. This article has to be based on a handful of cases, I would have to click into each one to see if they were white on black but now I am even more perplexed at the numbers.

Still think you have to look at circumstances but even without that how many are we talking about?
Last edited by BurghersAndDogsSports on Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
BurghersAndDogsSports
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 2,117
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:42 am
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby shoeshine boy on Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:11 am

tifosi77 wrote:
That's pretty much how I feel about this (minus the personal animus, of course). As I looked at the evidence, I didn't find GZs story very credible, nor did I believe his actions to be entirely pure of heart. So you have a man who admits to taking another human life in questionable circumstances suffering no legal consequence of that action.



this actually has yet to be seen. some folks are looking into charging GZ with violating TM's civil rights, much they way the cops in the Rodney King case were charged and convicted. a reach, imo but some folks just don't lose well.
shoeshine boy
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,416
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:44 am
Location: me, 3 years Super League

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Froggy on Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:18 am

I think that stat is even more irresponsible when compared to unsolved murders of white people.

First of all, what do white people have to do with this case? Shouldn't they compare stats vs hispanics?

Secondly, and this is more based on my experience from living in Baltimore for 15 years, the black murders in Baltimore were usually gang related, and involved black people killing other black people, and being protected by other black people. Again, it might be different in Florida, but the picture being painted here is that there is an epidemic of white people going around and murdering black people and getting away with it.

this might sound culturally insensitive, but it's based on fact. and i'm not saying that Martin was in a gang, or anything... just pointing out how lumping specific instances in with largely irrelevant statistical groups is an extremely dubious way to look at things.
Froggy
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,850
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:40 pm
Location: http://DrunkInAGraveyard.com

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 9:36 am

count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,457
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Pitt87 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:01 am

shafnutz05 wrote:
Troy Loney wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:True...that being said.

In the 15 months prior to Trayvon Martin being shot, there were eight burglaries committed in that same neighborhood. All of these burglaries were committed by young black men. Zimmerman was aware of this fact.

So assuming that GZ decided to keep a close eye on TM because of his skin color, there was an abnormally high amount of burglaries in recent memory, all committed by young men of color. We can argue the merits of racial profiling all day, but that was likely Zimmerman's reasoning for following TM, not any sort of inherent racism.


Wait...are you arguing for racial profiling?


No, and I thought I made that clear. My point was, I don't believe Zimmerman followed TM because of some sort of inherent racism or hatred against black people. I believe he followed TM because of the rampant string of burglaries in his neighborhood, and his knowledge that they were all committed by young black men.

I do not personally support racial profiling, but I am able to understand GZ's mindset in following TM that evening. The burglaries occurred in his neighborhood.


I don't even think he followed him because he's black. If you listen to the 911 tape, he had to think about answering about his race, IIRC. I think he followed him because he was walking around with his hood up and he assumed he was trying to conceal himself.

IMO, the judge nullified the jury in this case by handing down the instructions as she did once deliberations started. This was about a man leaving his home armed, following someone he did not know to be armed, and engaging an unarmed person with a gun. Had he not had a gun, not only does TM not die, but GZ probably is too scared to leave his car. That would indicate to me that he had some intention of using that gun, even if just to scare someone.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,284
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby ExPatriatePen on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:15 am

If Zimmerman were black, this case doesn't even get heard and no one pays attention.

Isn't that the very definition of racism?
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Froggy on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:20 am

ExPatriatePen wrote:If Zimmerman were black, this case doesn't even get heard and no one pays attention.

Isn't that the very definition of racism?

if you are implying that it is racist towards non-blacks that people only seem to care when they kill people, then yes. it is racist
Froggy
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,850
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:40 pm
Location: http://DrunkInAGraveyard.com

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Firebird on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:21 am

Troy Loney wrote:So it's not profiling if you deem it justified?

ok, all I was curious about.


Not profiling, but feel free to keep digging yourself a deeper hole
Firebird
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 2,768
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:12 pm

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:24 am

Troy Loney wrote:So it's not profiling if you deem it justified?

ok, all I was curious about.


if there were 3 burglaries in my neighborhood in the past year by people wearing a purple shirt and green hat, if I see a guy wearing a purple shirt and a green hat, I'm going to keep an eye on him.
count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,457
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Troy Loney on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:30 am

count2infinity wrote:
Troy Loney wrote:So it's not profiling if you deem it justified?

ok, all I was curious about.


if there were 3 burglaries in my neighborhood in the past year by people wearing a purple shirt and green hat, if I see a guy wearing a purple shirt and a green hat, I'm going to keep an eye on him.


So again, as long as you can justify racial profiling in your head...it's fine?

This isn't in relation to ZM case, that was a general question made based on a prior post.
Troy Loney
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,965
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby pfim on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:31 am

ExPatriatePen wrote:If Zimmerman were black, this case doesn't even get heard and no one pays attention.

Isn't that the very definition of racism?


The coverage is based on the race angle. I don't know that Zimmerman's actions had anything to do with race.

A kid was walking through his own neighborhood, followed by a vigilante with a gun and is now dead. I think that is lost in all this noise, and this decision is unjust.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:32 am

i didn't know purple shirt and green hat was a racial thing. I'll be more careful about profiling one eyed, one horned, flying purple people eaters in the future.
count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,457
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Troy Loney on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:33 am

count2infinity wrote:i didn't know purple shirt and green hat was a racial thing. I'll be more careful about profiling one eyed, one horned, flying purple people eaters in the future.


Then what on earth is your point?
Troy Loney
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,965
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:39 am

I'm saying there's a difference between racial profiling and profiling. I imagine racial profiling as looking at someone based on just their skin color and having an opinion based simply on skin color and nothing else. Profiling would be based on other observations you make about a person, not necessarily based on race. What they're wearing, what they're doing, what has happened in the past in that area. If you're in LA and see a group late at night wearing blue bandannas you're going to have notions about those people are you not? Regardless or race.

edit: And I'd be willing to bet if you were lost in a city late at night and needed directions, those are not the guys you would stop and ask. so yes, sometimes profiling is okay if that's your definition of profiling.
Last edited by count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,457
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Idoit40fans on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:42 am

I don't accept that premise. When I go to LA, I leave before late night.
Idoit40fans
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 53,612
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: I'm sorry you feel that way

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:43 am

Idoit40fans wrote:I don't accept that premise. When I go to LA, I leave before late night.


why is that, you profiling jerk?
count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,457
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby newarenanow on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:43 am

I think anyone with a straight bill cap is a trouble maker regardless of skin color.

NAN = old.
newarenanow
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 41,661
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:56 pm

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby count2infinity on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:44 am

newarenanow wrote:I think anyone with a straight bill cap is a trouble maker regardless of skin color.

NAN = old.


those darn flatbrimmers. I can't remember what thread I brought that up in. I should find it. lol
count2infinity
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,457
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: #isitoctoberyet??? Lololololololol

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby Idoit40fans on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:46 am

count2infinity wrote:
Idoit40fans wrote:I don't accept that premise. When I go to LA, I leave before late night.


why is that, you profiling jerk?


I'm staying in orange county, so depending on traffic, I have between a 90 minute and 4 hour drive. :pop:
Idoit40fans
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 53,612
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: I'm sorry you feel that way

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby pittsoccer33 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:51 am

I don't understand why there is a problem with profiling.

Look at all these school shootings - they're all committed by middle class white boys. If someone wearing a mask shoots up a high school and gets away, I'd want the majority of my resources looking for white men fitting the height and weight description and any other identifiers in the area.

When the Boston Marathon was attacked there was a lot of talk in the media about the danger of profiling. If I was in charge of sifting through all the pictures and videos taken I would establish that the most likely culprits would be college aged men (since men under 30 have been the primary perpetrators of all the attacks, succesfull or otherwise)- either "skin head" McVey types, hippie anarchist types, or "dark skinned/middle eastern looking" ones. I would focus more of my resources on looking for people fitting those descriptions, but each agent would be assigned a different profile - white mothers with strollers, middle aged black men, etc. Everyone would be looking at different kinds of people for inconsistencies. It would be poor detective work to immediately rule any one group out.

But if you have a description of a suspect you shouldn't throw that out because it doesn't jive with some ideology. When the East End Flasher was running around Pittsburgh exposing himself at elementary schools in Point Breeze, Squirrel Hill, etc they weren't looking for a young black/hispanic/asian/indian/middle eastern/women/older white man. They were looking for someone who fit the description - a 20something skinny white guy. If you saw a 20something skinny white guy hanging around an elementary school that would be suspicious.

Where Zimmerman really screwed that up is when he thought a criminal would be out at 7pm. I don't think most home invasions take place just after sundown. A real cop would have been much more vigilant of that.
pittsoccer33
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,521
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:06 pm

Re: Shooting Reignites Racial Questions

Postby shafnutz05 on Mon Jul 15, 2013 10:52 am

Troy Loney wrote:
count2infinity wrote:
Troy Loney wrote:So it's not profiling if you deem it justified?

ok, all I was curious about.


if there were 3 burglaries in my neighborhood in the past year by people wearing a purple shirt and green hat, if I see a guy wearing a purple shirt and a green hat, I'm going to keep an eye on him.


So again, as long as you can justify racial profiling in your head...it's fine?

This isn't in relation to ZM case, that was a general question made based on a prior post.


Understanding why someone like Zimmerman paid extra attention to Martin =/= justifying racial profiling. Just imagine for a second you are living in a neighborhood, and there have been a string of violent crimes committed by young black men within several blocks of your home. I would imagine 90% of us would be extra wary and suspicious of young black men traveling through our neighborhood at night, knowing this very recent history of crime.

Is that the definition of "profiling"? If so, I suspect that a vast majority of us are guilty of it from time to time, and that doesn't make you a bad person.

You do understand that there is a difference between that, and a police department having a written policy authorizing more thorough stop and frisks for black men?
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 57,988
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

PreviousNext

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Grunthy and 11 guests


e-mail