His higher encounter with policing isn't because of racism (for the most part), it's because policing is based on hot spots. There's no point in having equal amount of policing in neighborhoods that have drastically different crime rates. Suburb in my city was ranked one of the safest places to live like 5 years ago meanwhile the murder rate in the actual city is higher than NYC. Should both of these places have equal amount of policing proportional to population or should policing be targeted to where the issues are?

The reason why Jamal encounters police 10x because he lives in a neighborhood where violent crime is 10x therefore responsive policing puts more cops in there to respond, rightfully so. Supply-demand dynamics work in many industries to find the right balance.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 25 2020 01:16pm

Um, it absolutely does. That's a fact. We learn this in high school statistics when we cover sampling. Do you not see how this creates a positive feedback loop?

It doesn't raise it, it reveals it. Perps don't commit more crimes because there's more cops around that's a really inverted and illogical perspective.

It doesn't raise the true crime rate, but it results in higher recorded crime rates. In science we call this an artifact

And you have to account for it when you are interpreting the data.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Aug 25 2020 01:21pm

About two months ago, when the George Floyd thing was still fresh, several of PaRD's lefties (I think it was thor and skinned) made an argument along the lines of:
"The threat of violence by oppressed minorities is necessary for the majority society to acknowledge their plight instead of ignoring it. The threat of violence adds urgency to their demands and forces politics to actually do something about the issue. Peaceful protest alone just isnt cutting it."

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 25 2020 01:26pm

No.

The causation is not higher police officers, higher police offers is the effect of higher crime rates which police departments monitor to watch where, when and how much limited resources they will deploy.

The crime mapping comes first, then the deployment. The crime mapping is not an artifact nor is it caused by policing being there in higher amounts.

Not all crimes are caught, that's the point Thor and I are making. They aren't COMMITTING more crimes...they are being CAUGHT more and that skews the data. Do you understand how that creates a positive feedback loop? Skewed data leads to skewed policies which lead to more skewed data.

It is incorrect to assume that crime mapping is unaffected by police presence.

What crimes are caught is dependent on how many police resources there are in the area. Not entirely but increased police presence will increase the number of crimes that are caught all else being equal

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Aug 25 2020 01:32pm

See, I'd disagree with that. If it's in the news, that shows a certain level of urgency IMO.

You're off on how this actually works tho.

City A has seen a 25% increase in reported violent crime on it's west side within xyz block range. City A decides to deploy more resources (officers) to xyz block based on this data. Police officers being there before hand have no bearing on that violent crime stat. Like cop data analysts don't magically create murders within that block range to somehow justify racist targeting. They just look at the numbers and say okay we had 15 murders here 2 years ago now we have 25% increase we have to respond.

Not sure what mythical feedback loop you're talking about.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 25 2020 01:37pm