Jon Stewart?

[jerryskids 6,710]

4 minutes ago, torridjoe said:

You’re the one who can’t handle a simple question. Carry on that privilege. 

My simple question came first:  anything to support your conclusion?  I provided my thoughts:

Quote

Like I said, the ubiquitous existence of police forces in jurisdictions of all shapes, sizes, political leanings, education, wealth, culture, would be my support of police being a net positive.

That's a tangible fact.  Respond to this before I entertain your "subject to whiteness" amorphous tripe.   

[torridjoe 48]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

My simple question came first:  anything to support your conclusion?  I provided my thoughts:

That's a tangible fact.  Respond to this before I entertain your "subject to whiteness" amorphous tripe.   

Wouldn’t your evidence be much more suggestive that I’m correct, than you are? Which is Occam going to like better—that they’re there because they’re successful at their publicly stated mission? Or that they’re there because it’s an effective control measure? 

[torridjoe 48]

3 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

My simple question came first:  anything to support your conclusion?  I provided my thoughts:

That's a tangible fact.  Respond to this before I entertain your "subject to whiteness" amorphous tripe.   

But don’t get it twisted…we’re talking about AMERICAN policing here, specifically. The ones trained by IDF so you know they’re gonna be racist, brutal and stupid. 

[jerryskids 6,710]

1 minute ago, torridjoe said:

Wouldn’t your evidence be much more suggestive that I’m correct, than you are? Which is Occam going to like better—that they’re there because they’re successful at their publicly stated mission? Or that they’re there because it’s an effective control measure? 

Occam would say that they are there, ubiquitous, in all of those situations, because they are a net positive to the societies they represent.  Your interpretation, for all of those constituents, is inane.

[jerryskids 6,710]

2 minutes ago, torridjoe said:

But don’t get it twisted…we’re talking about AMERICAN policing here, specifically. The ones trained by IDF so you know they’re gonna be racist, brutal and stupid. 

I provided data in the Fani thread showing you are significantly wrong about the level of racism.  It's not the same as this ridiculous, baseless claim that police in the US are a net negative, but feel free to respond with something tangible.  Or not.  You are all about Marxist feelz.

[torridjoe 48]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Occam would say that they are there, ubiquitous, in all of those situations, because they are a net positive to the societies they represent.  Your interpretation, for all of those constituents, is inane.

Now THAT would run counter to reality. They’re a net positive to the particular people and groups they seek to benefit. Everyone else can get . 

Maybe you’re just one of those people it was built to protect so you don’t notice and don’t care. Now THAT is Occam. 

[torridjoe 48]

Just now, jerryskids said:

I provided data in the Fani thread showing you are significantly wrong about the level of racism.  It's not the same as this ridiculous, baseless claim that police in the US are a net negative, but feel free to respond with something tangible.  Or not.  You are all about Marxist feelz.

No you really didn’t. You also don’t know what Marxism is clearly. You’re just flailing to deny that cops protect your mediocrity and allow you to survive despite not being able to hack on a level playing field. 

[torridjoe 48]

@jerryskids without looking what’s the largest theft crime in the US based on incidents and damage?

[jerryskids 6,710]

1 minute ago, torridjoe said:

No you really didn’t. You also don’t know what Marxism is clearly. You’re just flailing to deny that cops protect your mediocrity and allow you to survive despite not being able to hack on a level playing field. 

Again with the mediocrity!    And yes, I really did.  Respond to that study or I'm done with you, Marxist child.

[torridjoe 48]

Just now, jerryskids said:

Again with the mediocrity!    And yes, I really did.  Respond to that study or I'm done with you, Marxist child.

If I did how would you understand it if you can’t even understand the word Marxism? 

Again with the mediocrity because that’s all it is. Insecure fear. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,236]

4 minutes ago, torridjoe said:

No you really didn’t. You also don’t know what Marxism is clearly. You’re just flailing to deny that cops protect your mediocrity and allow you to survive despite not being able to hack on a level playing field. 

Ha! Cops and the law are what protect you and your Antifa buddies. 

[torridjoe 48]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Ha! Cops and the law are what protect you and your Antifa buddies. 

When and from whom? They actually train cops to target them, here, it was revealed but it’s obvious by practice already. 

Cops do protect me way more than other folks, you got that right. 

[jerryskids 6,710]

1 minute ago, torridjoe said:

If I did how would you understand it if you can’t even understand the word Marxism? 

Again with the mediocrity because that’s all it is. Insecure fear. 

You've got a big-ass "weak, mediocre, fear" hammer and you are flailing around looking for nails.

I understand the word Marxism fine, but enough of your strawman.  Support your inane assertions with... anything.  I've presented the fact that all communities, including predominantly black communities, have police forces.  Therefore, police are a net positive.

I'm almost done, you are insufferably obtuse.

[torridjoe 48]

15 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I provided data in the Fani thread showing you are significantly wrong about the level of racism.  It's not the same as this ridiculous, baseless claim that police in the US are a net negative, but feel free to respond with something tangible.  Or not.  You are all about Marxist feelz.

Jesus Christ you mean the Fryer paper? That found Blacks and Hispanics faced 50% higher non lethal force interactions than whites? 

Regardless of that omission from your analysis, an economics professor is certainly not the last word in criminal demography. The DOJ itself strongly counters the claim that lethal use of force is equal in US policing. 

[torridjoe 48]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

You've got a big-ass "weak, mediocre, fear" hammer and you are flailing around looking for nails.

I understand the word Marxism fine, but enough of your strawman.  Support your inane assertions with... anything.  I've presented the fact that all communities, including predominantly black communities, have police forces.  Therefore, police are a net positive.

I'm almost done, you are insufferably obtuse.

Nah, it’s limited (for instance) to the folks claiming there’s no racism in US policing when that’s a laughably unsupportable position. Your claim doesn’t even pass the first test, the premise is faulty. Black communities suffer far MORE policing, not because it’s successful but because that’s what it’s designed to do. 

[torridjoe 48]

8 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

You've got a big-ass "weak, mediocre, fear" hammer and you are flailing around looking for nails.

I understand the word Marxism fine, but enough of your strawman.  Support your inane assertions with... anything.  I've presented the fact that all communities, including predominantly black communities, have police forces.  Therefore, police are a net positive.

I'm almost done, you are insufferably obtuse.

If you understood what Marxism was you’d never call me one. Antipapist, antifascist, anti Marxist. Read up on the Iron Front. 

[jerryskids 6,710]

Just now, torridjoe said:

Jesus Christ you mean the Fryer paper? That found Blacks and Hispanics faced 50% higher non lethal force interactions than whites? 

Regardless of that omission from your analysis, an economics professor is certainly not the last word in criminal demography. The DOJ itself strongly counters the claim that lethal use of force is equal in US policing. 

So after all of this, you hadn't even read that?  And you want me to think you are engaging in intelligent discussion?  Sad, and duly noted. 

Yes, it concluded that, along with this immediately after:

Quote

Adding controls that account for important context and civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities.

So some amount of context and civilian behavior accounts for that.

And there was no difference in lethal force.  So the "cops are shooting blacks" tripe is just that.  HTH

And from that, how do you conclude that police are a net negative?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,010]

37 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

So after all of this, you hadn't even read that?  And you want me to think you are engaging in intelligent discussion?  Sad, and duly noted. 

Yes, it concluded that, along with this immediately after:

So some amount of context and civilian behavior accounts for that.

And there was no difference in lethal force.  So the "cops are shooting blacks" tripe is just that.  HTH

And from that, how do you conclude that police are a net negative?

He ain't the brightest bulb in the Commie shed, that's for sure.  But if you read his posts he sure likes to toot his own horn and proclaim he's the smartest thing since sliced bread which, of course, is an insult to slice bread.

He's nothing more than a clone of the other 10 or so far left idiots that make stuff up and spout leftist talking points all day long.

[Hawkeye21 2,390]

Pretty solid material from Stewart here.

https://x.com/Travis_4_Trump/status/1801093113194127668