Race and Crime

Which doesn't mean racism. Simple!

I never said that it wasn't racism. I just said that there's no evidence that it IS racism. It MIGHT be!

 

I linked the report is for all to read.

 

You're back to post 1308.

 

The report does not contain enough detail to make a fully informed conclusion.

 

Sure. It's not like your criticism is specific on what you supposedly is missing, as if you're the expert on such research.

 

Which is your post. Again, disparity between races doesn't mean racism. Simple! It MIGHT be racism, but there's no evidence that it IS racism. I think that we can end the debate now! It looks like you've had enough of being destroyed!

 

You seem to misunderstand what "proved" means.

 

What are you talking about? "Proved" simply means linking to any source which agrees with you!

 

Isn't your claim that the "disparity" is the disparity of sentencing?

Again, why would I explain how it's not racism when I never made that claim? I said that it MIGHT be racism!

 

You seem to not understand that when people are treated different by the authorities and the only difference the authorities can find when looking at the why they are treated different is the color of the skin, than I do believe it's righteous to call it's systemic racism. When you do not agree, but refuse to formulate why it's not... then it's just an unfounded bogus opinion.

And when I ask to motive your opinion, and you're ignoring it... then you're stuck with an unfounded bogus opinion. That's where you are at now.

 

The only disparity is skin color according to the source.

So you agree it's systemic racism. Got it.

 

It's the "only difference" part that needs to be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Some people respond differently to being caught at something they should not be doing. The response can have a significant influence on the people in a position to decide next steps. You would need to know a very close degree of detail about each moment of each case to reach a certain conclusion about "only difference." Could be racism, could be other things.

 

It has been proven.. since the article talks about specifically similar situations. If there would be some kind of a difference, it wouldn't be a similar situation. Duh.

 

You are determined to reach a certain conclusion, so you refuse to consider any other possibilities.

 

The article clearly states that black people are treated differently in a similar situated situation. And your idea is that they could be treated different because they could "respond differently". While responding differently is putting themselves in a situation that's NOT similar anymore by default. So you go back and think about a hypothetical situation that would explain it.

 

Once again, lacking sufficient data.

 

The page I linked to even contains a link to the full report. The full report has all kinds of graphs and 60 footnotes.
So your claim the report doesn't contain enough data is not founded, while you're not an export on the matter anyways.
It's a unfounded opinion. Does it look like I care about that?

 

You are clearly determined to accept one conclusion only.

 

You tried to come up with a different conclusion and it failed.
You than tried to disqualify the source by saying there is not enough data.... and failed.
And so now you're back to a that personal attack again, which isn't debunking my source.

That's all what you got going.
And so my source stands and I proved systemic racism.

 

No, I did not.

 

Okay, so there is no disparity in sentencing between black and white people?

When exactly did I say that? I said that it MIGHT be racism!

 

I didn't conclude anything other than that you are close-mindedly affixed to your predetermined conclusion.

 

And you're a broken record and are back to my reply of post 1349.

 

Are you pot or kettle?