The other crime wave in Chicago

[baron]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Oh, I'm making a very serious point. A point that has been held dear by researchers and scientists over the years and one to which I do not believe you adhere or, possibly, might not even be aware of.

Unless you actually name it, it's difficult to say.

Originally Posted by 3point14

And, just out of interest, how do you identify a post as a 'drive by' less than 10 minutes after it was made? That's some mighty prognostication you have going on there.

I that case I retract my statement. What I thought was a jibe is just you building up to providing on-topic debate and evidence to back it up.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by baron

Unless you actually name it, it's difficult to say.



I that case I retract my statement. What I thought was a jibe is just you building up to providing on-topic debate and evidence to back it up.

What, during your research, did you look for to demonstrate to yourself that your underlying assumptions are wrong?

What evidence would you have to see to be convinced that your initial position was inaccurate?

Did you set about trying to prove or disprove your assumptions?

[baron]

Originally Posted by 3point14

What, during your research, did you look for to demonstrate to yourself that your underlying assumptions are wrong?

What evidence would you have to see to be convinced that your initial position was inaccurate?

Did you set about trying to prove or disprove your assumptions?

Why are you arguing against my methodology as opposed to presenting evidence? It's a well-worn tactic and doesn't really wash any more. But since you ask, here's a funny fact. I began to research the topic in some depth due to discussions on this very forum. I had posted an argument broadly opposite to that I'm making today and did some extra research in order to prove my point and rebut someone else's. What I actually found was that it was my viewpoint that was flawed, hence I changed it.

Is this the kind of thing you're meaning?

[3point14]

Originally Posted by baron

Why are you arguing against my methodology as opposed to presenting evidence?

Because, when asked for evidence, you said this:

Originally Posted by baron

Don't be ridiculous. Do you think I've written an academic paper and am waiting for someone on a forum to pop up so I can post it? I've read a number of books and articles on the topic and that's my conclusion. Don't like it? Tough luck.

Which struck me as lacking both in evidence and apparent rigor in your research. Of course, because you haven't presented your research, I can't really argue with it.

Quote:

It's a well-worn tactic and doesn't really wash any more.

It's not a 'tactic'. Analysis of methodology is essential to understanding the reliability of any research.

"Here are my numbers", holds no water. "Here are my numbers and this is how and where I got them from" does.

Quote:

But since you ask, here's a funny fact. I began to research the topic in some depth due to discussions on this very forum. I had posted an argument broadly opposite to that I'm making today and did some extra research in order to prove my point and rebut someone else's. What I actually found was that it was my viewpoint that was flawed, hence I changed it.

Is this the kind of thing you're meaning?

Yes, it is. Again, I haven't seen your research so I have no idea how you have accounted for your bias, in either direction.

[baron]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Because, when asked for evidence, you said this:
Which struck me as lacking both in evidence and apparent rigor in your research. Of course, because you haven't presented your research, I can't really argue with it.

Well no, what actually happened is that in the middle of a discussion I was told, "Show your analysis," as if I could upload a PDF to illustrate some five or ten years' thinking on the matter. If someone demanded the same of you during a discussion would you be willing or able to schlep out a written account of how you came to hold your opinion? I think not.

Originally Posted by 3point14

It's not a 'tactic'. Analysis of methodology is essential to understanding the reliability of any research.

"Here are my numbers", holds no water. "Here are my numbers and this is how and where I got them from" does.

If I cite numbers then I either post where I got them, or if somebody asks I'll be happy to provide a link. That's a bit different from presenting an analysis of how you came to hold a certain opinion.

You think racism is bad? Show your analysis! It's nothing more than a derailment and a delaying tactic.

Originally Posted by 3point14

Yes, it is. Again, I haven't seen your research so I have no idea how you have accounted for your bias, in either direction.

You don't need to see my research, but the fact you equate bias with opinion says a lot.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by baron

You don't need to see my research, but the fact you equate bias with opinion says a lot.

Opinion can be a sort of bias, but that's sort of not the point.

You will, whether you know it or not, have a bias. This will, unless you carefully control for it, heavily influence what you believe to be your unbiased research.

I'm afraid I suspect that your research over how ever long it has been has simply been you seeking out things that confirm your bias (known or unknown) and ignoring (consciously or unconsciously) evidence that doesn't.

Of course, I can't prove this either way, I haven't seen what it is that's caused you to arrive at your conclusion, but, without strict controls for bias, I wouldn't trust anyone's (including my own) ad hoc research that ends up simply confirming the initial, unresearched opinion.

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by baron

That article is a load of unsupported blather. Asians do OK because they experience a different flavour of racism, and the racism blacks experience is worse. Oh please. I won't even mention the Jews because who knows what kind of blog post I'll get in return.

Refusing to acknowledge simple facts won't get you far.

(And there's also the fact that the great majority of Asian families immigrated to the US (at least) very recently, with wealth intact, while quite a few parts of the US still actively work to drain wealth from black families in particular, via prison labor, divestment from neighborhoods, asset forfeitures, and in towns like Ferguson, heavy fines. Oddly, when we look to groups that show up without wealth, particularly Vienamese and Laotians, they end up faring worse than black Americans, not better, in income, education, and other measures)

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by Baylor

I'm confused what happens when an Asian points out racial differences in crime statistics. Does that make him an Asian supremacist or a white supremacist? I've given up trying to figure out skeptic logic.

Depends on why they bring it up, same as anyone else.

It's pretty common for a white person to only bring up so-called "black on black crime" in order to either state that black people are genetically inferior to white people, or to shift the discussion from another topic, such as police brutality, and very often in defense of whatever violence is under discussion - here's a great example from Rudy Guiliani. When it comes time to clean up lead exposure, it's "there's no money for that!", when people are marching, mentoring kids, and the like, they're nowhere to be found - only to whine about how black people "never talk about crime".

An asian person who does the same thing can still be presumed to be a racist of some sort - as can anyone else regardless of skin color.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Which struck me as lacking both in evidence and apparent rigor in your research.

Speaking of which.

Originally Posted by 3point14

My suspicion is that wherever the report is of 'black men' or 'black youths' the word 'black' can nearly always be replaced with the word 'poor'.

I suspect it's just easier to identify people by race rather than identifying them by the actual reason they're acting as they are.


Young men with money and prospects don't tent to rampage the streets.

Young men with no money and no prospects, well, what do they have to lose?

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by catsmate

Ah facts.

Calm down, calm down. Think these things through. Don't get too excited before reading the entire thread. The argument was that white skeptics on this forum were exposed to more lead as infants than the young black youths of today did. The paper he cited supported this so you can relax now.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Depends on why they bring it up, same as anyone else.

It's pretty common for a white person to only bring up so-called "black on black crime" in order to either state that black people are genetically inferior to white people, or to shift the discussion from another topic, such as police brutality, and very often in defense of whatever violence is under discussion - here's a great example from Rudy Guiliani. When it comes time to clean up lead exposure, it's "there's no money for that!", when people are marching, mentoring kids, and the like, they're nowhere to be found - only to whine about how black people "never talk about crime".

An asian person who does the same thing can still be presumed to be a racist of some sort - as can anyone else regardless of skin color.

Is Thomas Sowell racist?

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Opinion can be a sort of bias, but that's sort of not the point.

No kidding. A White American working at Popeye's chicken in Baltimore will have a different opinion on black people than a Englishman living a 97% white town.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by catsmate

2. London is not a country. Yet.

Blacks in the UK prison population are over-represented slightly less but still similar to the US prison population.

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Originally Posted by Mumbles

so-called "black on black crime"

So called black on black crime?

It is interesting to see you and other racism-fetishists give such short shrift to such a rampant and widespread problem. Black on black violence is one of the main problems facing the black community and it is being ignored by people like you who would rather talk about isolated incidents that fit your feel-good racism narrative.

If you were as concerned about the real world problems the community faces as you are with Internet posturing your focus would be much different.

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by Baylor

Is Thomas Sowell racist?

He traffics in the same stereotypes and wildly simplistic thinking when it comes to black communities as any white racist, he never seems to be around when people are putting in any actual anti-violence work, he frequently recommends crappy thinkers like Heather MacDonald, so yes.

(I'm nice - a lot of people just straight-up call him a coon)

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Refusing to acknowledge simple facts won't get you far.

(And there's also the fact that the great majority of Asian families immigrated to the US (at least) very recently, with wealth intact, while quite a few parts of the US still actively work to drain wealth from black families in particular, via prison labor, divestment from neighborhoods, asset forfeitures, and in towns like Ferguson, heavy fines. Oddly, when we look to groups that show up without wealth, particularly Vienamese and Laotians, they end up faring worse than black Americans, not better, in income, education, and other measures)

Yup, that data was linked to in the article I linked to. How can that be? Didn't baron say the article was unsupported?

Well, it was supported. As far as we can tell it is true. Coming here with money and support networks intact leads to better outcomes than without them. That some are systemically and generationally denied access to these is a huge problem.

[baron]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Yup, that data was linked to in the article I linked to. How can that be? Didn't baron say the article was unsupported?

Well, it was supported. As far as we can tell it is true. Coming here with money and support networks intact leads to better outcomes than without them. That some are systemically and generationally denied access to these is a huge problem.

It's an opinion piece. The only support it has is a few other people who have the same opinion. It basically revolves around OK, Asians experience racism but a different racism, and not all Asians excel because look at the Bhutanese (who, the article omits to mention, comprise 0.006% of the US population).

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by baron

It's an opinion piece. The only support it has is a few other people who have the same opinion. It basically revolves around OK, Asians experience racism but a different racism, and not all Asians excel because look at the Bhutanese (who, the article omits to mention, comprise 0.006% of the US population).

You act like we haven't heard these exact stereotypes being perpetuated incessantly - the truth is that many people apply them even at the absolutely worst time (see: Maher blathering about how he was expecting Barack Obama to be :"gangsta", the "thug" stereotype being applied to "Jesus Walks" rapper Kanye West, or to Richard Sherman).

Compare to the "Tiger Mom" myth, or the "Asians are hard, obedient workers" crap.

[baron]

Originally Posted by Mumbles

You act like we haven't heard these exact stereotypes being perpetuated incessantly - the truth is that many people apply them even at the absolutely worst time (see: Maher blathering about how he was expecting Barack Obama to be :"gangsta", the "thug" stereotype being applied to "Jesus Walks" rapper Kanye West, or to Richard Sherman).

Compare to the "Tiger Mom" myth, or the "Asians are hard, obedient workers" crap.

I don't know what any of that means, but you appear to be concentrating on individual cases rather than group trends. Different peoples have different cultures and these cultural attitudes vary in multiple ways, resulting in disparate outcomes. This is not controversial until it throws up data the listener would rather not consider, and in response they say things like, "You act like we haven't heard these exact stereotypes being perpetuated incessantly."

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by baron

It's an opinion piece. The only support it has is a few other people who have the same opinion. It basically revolves around OK, Asians experience racism but a different racism, and not all Asians excel because look at the Bhutanese (who, the article omits to mention, comprise 0.006% of the US population).

It was an opinion piece that supported it's arguments with facts, facts that were not red-herrings like you're citing here.

You deny good evidence. You think that it being an opinion piece means something. Your posts are opinion pieces as well, and with far less support.

[The Big Dog]

In Chicago.

Chicago police on Monday said 21 people were arrested Saturday around the River North and Magnificent Mile neighborhoods in the first “mob” activity of 2019. The high arrest count is the result of a new, less-tolerant approach by police assigned to handle "large group" incidents in the downtown area.

I am sure that we will shortly hear the ministers and community activists dealing the race cards.

Fortunately, a good guy with a gun was able to stop some of the bullying abuse:

Man pulls out a gun to stop an attack

Welcome to spring in the City!

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by The Big Dog

In Chicago.

Chicago police on Monday said 21 people were arrested Saturday around the River North and Magnificent Mile neighborhoods in the first “mob” activity of 2019. The high arrest count is the result of a new, less-tolerant approach by police assigned to handle "large group" incidents in the downtown area.

I am sure that we will shortly hear the ministers and community activists dealing the race cards.

Fortunately, a good guy with a gun was able to stop some of the bullying abuse:

Man pulls out a gun to stop an attack

Welcome to spring in the City!

Just saw that the good guy with a gun was a security guard that McDonalds had to hire due to the violence.

Good for him.

/I am certain that I have seen the one with the long hair in the Loop on numerous occasions.

[The Big Dog]

Update to the above link:

Quote:

UPDATE APRIL 9, 2:40PM — Chicago police this afternoon offered new information about the incident: The security guard, a suburban policeman, was on-duty for the McDonald's restaurant Saturday afternoon. He was leading the two men out of the restaurant when one of them struck the guard on the head with a glass bottle, police said. A struggle ensued and was captured on video.

Good guy with a gun!

Still find it a bit odd that the folks in the restaurant did not start saying "Oh no" until after the guy who was being beaten by two guns pulled his gun....

[Venom]

Why are conservatives obsessed with Chicago. What's the punchline?

Because so called black-on-black crime [crime] occurs at a high rate?

Are black spokesmen we see on TV a lot supposed to put in end to it by themselves before calling out U.S. conservatives?

Obama being from there is perhaps a plus.

[The Big Dog]

Originally Posted by Venom

Why are conservatives obsessed with Chicago. What's the punchline?

Because so called black-on-black crime [crime] occurs at a high rate?

Are black spokesmen we see on TV a lot supposed to put in end to it by themselves before calling out U.S. conservatives?

Obama being from there is perhaps a plus.

Bit baffled what this possibly has to do with the thread....

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by Venom

Why are conservatives obsessed with Chicago. What's the punchline?

TBD, blessed be his name, lives in Chicago. I don't know if that is the whole story, but that was his story.

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

TBD, blessed be his name, lives in Chicago. I don't know if that is the whole story, but that was his story.

That doesn't explain every other conservative ranting about it, though. The fact that Obama lived there, and thus was supposed to lower crime as a congressman, is a part of their nonsense.

The other is that it's the largest US city with a somewhat high murder rate, and thus posts a large number of murders in absolute numbers. Cities like Baltimore, St. Louis, and New Orleans have much higher murder rats, but they all have much smaller populations. It's worth noting that all of the above also have well known problems with policing - while Chigaco certainly has some severe problems (here's the latest "controversy"), they aren't outright collapsing like Baltimore's PD, they weren't involved in an outright attack on an entire neighborhood like St. Louis, and they aren't quite as legendary as New Orleans PD.

[dann]

Seems to be exaggerated use of violence when arresting a student:

Quote:

The officers stand on either side of Dnigma as she talks to another student and gives her a hug. After that student walks away less than a minute later, Dnigma starts moving away from the stairwell. At that point, without physical provocation, an officer grabs Dnigma and pushes her down a set of stairs as she struggles. The other officer quickly follows and students gather around.

[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by dann

Seems to be exaggerated use of violence when arresting a student:

Indeed, and they initially wanted to charge the student with assaulting an officer or some such, and were "outraged" when the DA (yes, the same one everyone's screaming about in the Smollett case) refused to do so. Naturally, people who see this, and of course the girl that was basically attacked without cause, will distrust the cops after watching a girl get choked, tossed down a flight of stairs, tased, etc. for no apparent reason.

Regardless, I can think of only one other major reason why Chicago is relatively bad compared to NYC in particular - NYC had an aggressive lead abatement program, and lead has been linked to poor impulse control and higher levels of violence in mammals. Again, despite what Dolt 45 is doing today, the US should seriously look into lead abatement as a nationwide effort to lower violence in cities.

[kellyb]

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Indeed, and they initially wanted to charge the student with assaulting an officer or some such, and were "outraged" when the DA (yes, the same one everyone's screaming about in the Smollett case) refused to do so. Naturally, people who see this, and of course the girl that was basically attacked without cause, will distrust the cops after watching a girl get choked, tossed down a flight of stairs, tased, etc. for no apparent reason.

Regardless, I can think of only one other major reason why Chicago is relatively bad compared to NYC in particular - NYC had an aggressive lead abatement program, and lead has been linked to poor impulse control and higher levels of violence in mammals. Again, despite what Dolt 45 is doing today, the US should seriously look into lead abatement as a nationwide effort to lower violence in cities.

I'm in Memphis, which routinely scores #1 on homicide rates. I used to think it was the lead, at least in part, but no longer do, after looking into the CDC data. The most lead poisoned people today in the US are only a teeny tiny bit poisoned compared to virtually everyone who grew up in the 60's and 70's. It's been a while since I looked at it, but it's by something of a factor of 10 to one, if I remember correctly. I think lead levels are marker of socioeconomic status, and it's the poverty that's screwing with people's minds.

I see kids growing up in homes with lead pipes and peeling lead paint, and if their mothers and other family members are gentle and attentive, they mysteriously don't have the aggression problems the kids from the messed up, dramatic families do.

I'm still in favor of lead abatement! It's never good, and it might be taking a couple of IQ points off everyone, or giving a small subset of the population a mild predisposition to emotional difficulties, or something like that, but I truly don't feel it's the cause of the violence. I also think there's a danger in people thinking kids from the inner city are all "brain damaged" (and thus hopeless) and ignoring the socioeconomic causes of violence.

[carlitos]

One of the Chicago TV stations filmed a guy being attacked by 3 teens on the bridge to the lakefront bike path, which is apparently a thing that is happening lately. I look for much hysteria to come from this. It's right on my running / biking route, so I will be sure to add a samurai sword to my pack for this weekend.

Bonus - It's at the 47th street walkover, so about a mile from Obama / Rezko's old house!

[carlitos]

Originally Posted by kellyb

I'm still in favor of lead abatement! It's never good, and it might be taking a couple of IQ points off everyone, or giving a small subset of the population a mild predisposition to emotional difficulties, or something like that, but I truly don't feel it's the cause of the violence. I also think there's a danger in people thinking kids from the inner city are all "brain damaged" (and thus hopeless) and ignoring the socioeconomic causes of violence.

I'll second this. One of the reasons I didn't vote for William Daley in the last election was his accepting huge donations from the Plumbers Union. The clout of this union made Chicago the last city to ban lead piping. Here they are in 1986 saying that lead pipe is still the best.

[William Parcher]

What is this gun? I was looking for Smollett news and found this instead. An AK-47 pistol? Modified for automatic?

There is a photo and you can enlarge it.

http://www.cwbchicago.com/2019/04/fe...chine-gun.html

[AJM8125]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jen2m-pmbmI