• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hate Crimes Have Apparently Spiked in Counties That Held Trump 2016 Rallies

Bullseye said:
This was a really good and informative post until you had to throw out the insults and demeaning language and other bull****. I'd suggest you stick to posting facts and YOUR OWN viewpoints instead of your obsessive need to insult and demean everyone who thinks differently from you. You are constantly wrong, turn threads into food fights, and embarrass yourself.
Click to expand...

If you had been following along, you would have noticed that there are a whole lot of posters who are essentially taking the position that "X" is not happening because "Y" is not the reason for it.

Quite frankly, until you admit that "X" IS happening you are never going to work out WHY it is happening.

As with the dysfunctional state of relations between "liberals" and "conservatives", it's a whole lot more fun to toss the blame squarely on the other side than it is to work out WHY it exists and then settle down to actually solving the problem.

Besides, if you work out WHY a problem exists, you might have to admit that some of the "fault" for the problem lies on "My Guys" as well as on "The Other Guys" and THAT is painful.
 
Barnacle said:
If everything is so settled, then why is the report talking everywhere about "alleged" hate crimes?

Were they proven hate crimes or is it just the number of "alleged" hate crimes that haven not been confirmed yet, while 0.011% have been confirmed as hoax?
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the only "confirmed" __[fill in the blank]__ crimes are those for which convictions have been obtained or which an approved judicial process (such as a coroner's inquest) has confirmed as such.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
They are, indeed, interesting.

On the other hand, there IS a bit of a disparity in the rates at which people are charged with offences AND that disparity appears to be directly related to "race", so I can't draw any more conclusions from the fact that the "charging rate" for "Blacks" is higher than their demographic share of the population and I also can't draw any more conclusions from the fact that the "charging rate" for "Whites" is lower than their demographic share of the population than I could from the original article.

(And, of course, if (please note the conditional) the police officer is a "White racist" then the police officer is less likely to charge a "White" person with committing a "racist" act than they are to charge a "non-White" with committing a "racist" act. And vice versa.)
Click to expand...
Sure that could explain some of the numbers, though this whole 'charging rate' stuff is far more overhyped than what is reality.
I mean, could you draw the conclusion that "supporting Donald Trump turns people into racists" or the conclusion that "being racist makes people support Donald Trump" from the data in the original article? I can't. After all "simultaneity" does not equal "causality" any more in your data than it does in the data in the original article.
Click to expand...
I can't either. Nor did I try to. I just noted some interesting stats like you did.
I suspect that the only safe conclusion that can be drawn from the data which we actually have is that "hate crime" are becoming more prevalent.
Click to expand...
Or we could alternately conclude that perhaps the definition is becoming more broad and more places are beginning to make such a thing as 'hate crime', resulting in the 'increase'. Much like how Autism numbers 'skyrocketed' as better and broader definitions and diagnosing standards got into place. Autism didn't magically become more prevalent, it just became more recognized and reported where in the olden days it was 'Oh Billy's just a quiet kid who has fits all the time if you touch him' or 'Sally's a bit queer in the head', etc..

Maybe people should be asking themselves WHY this is happening rather than attempting to blame it all on __[fill in the blank with identifier that does NOT conform with the group belonged to]__.
Click to expand...

I agree, people shouldn't be trying to blame it on Trump rallies, etc.. People should be blaming it on the person who committed the crime.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
If you had been following along, you would have noticed that there are a whole lot of posters who are essentially taking the position that "X" is not happening because "Y" is not the reason for it.

Quite frankly, until you admit that "X" IS happening you are never going to work out WHY it is happening.

As with the dysfunctional state of relations between "liberals" and "conservatives", it's a whole lot more fun to toss the blame squarely on the other side than it is to work out WHY it exists and then settle down to actually solving the problem.

Besides, if you work out WHY a problem exists, you might have to admit that some of the "fault" for the problem lies on "My Guys" as well as on "The Other Guys" and THAT is painful.
Click to expand...
Wow! What a beautiful demonstrated of self-deluded justification! Just for fun could you give us an illustration where you admitted that "some of the fault lies on 'My Guys'"?
 
Gondwanaland said:
I agree, people shouldn't be trying to blame it on Trump rallies, etc.. People should be blaming it on the person who committed the crime.
Click to expand...

Rather than "blame" wouldn't it be better to start looking for "cause"?
 
Bullseye said:
Wow! What a beautiful demonstrated of self-deluded justification! Just for fun could you give us an illustration where you admitted that "some of the fault lies on 'My Guys'"?
Click to expand...

Well, you might want to take a look at how I describe the Republicans and the Democrats as "The MORE Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" and "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" for a bit of a clue.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Well, you might want to take a look at how I describe the Republicans and the Democrats as "The MORE Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" and "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" for a bit of a clue.
Click to expand...
I might, but it looks like just more laughable mumbo-jumbo,
 
Bullseye said:
I might, but it looks like just more laughable mumbo-jumbo,
Click to expand...

Statistics can be inflated or deflated depending on who is gathering. Single events can be sensationalized to make the problem look greater then it is. Just like the republicans do with illegal immigrants and the democrats do with racism. I can neither proof or disproof this statistic. What I do know is last year I spent time in 18 different states and this year alone I spent time in 8 states. I talk to and get to know many different people of all types of different backgrounds. I haven’t noticed a raise in racism or illegal immigrants myself. I will not judge an individual based on what someone else says about them. I want even judge an individual based on what they say about themselves. I try to form my own opinion based on my own experience. So answer me this who here has personal seen a raise in hate crimes or even personal knows of a hate crime being committed. Not one you saw on social media or the news. But personal seen or knows someone effected by a hate crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bullseye said:
I might, but it looks like just more laughable mumbo-jumbo,
Click to expand...

Quite right. I was pretty sure that you belonged to the "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts." school of thought.
 
Babykat said:
Statistics can be inflated or deflated depending on who is gathering. Single events can be sensationalized to make the problem look greater then it is. Just like the republicans do with illegal immigrants and the democrats do with racism. I can neither proof or disproof this statistic. What I do know is last year I spent time in 18 different states and this year alone I spent time in 8 states. I talk to and get to know many different people of all types of different backgrounds. I haven’t noticed a raise in racism or illegal immigrants myself. I will not judge an individual based on what someone else says about them. I want even judge an individual based on what they say about themselves. I try to form my own opinion based on my own experience. So answer me this who here has personal seen a raise in hate crimes or even personal knows of a hate crime being committed. Not one you saw on social media or the news. But personal seen or knows someone effected by a hate crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

On the basis of your position, I can state confidently that there hasn't been a single murder in all of North AMerica in the past 75 years because I have never witnessed one and I have never met anyone who has witnessed one.

Now isn't that a silly thing to say?

If "Group X" uses "Method Y" to collect "Statistic Z" then a lot can be learned by the CHANGE in "Statistic Z" (even if "Statistic Z" is not 100% accurate) between different sets of data provided that "Method Y" is not changed.

In the referenced report, neither "Group X" nor "Method Y" were changed, so regardless of the "magnitude exactness" of "Statistic Z" there is evidence that there IS a change in "Statistic Z" - and that the change is NOT in the direction of a decrease in the prevalence of (in this specific case) REPORTED "hate crimes". Whether that change has come about because people are more open (and persistent) in reporting them or because more of them are happening, the report does not, and cannot, say. However, it isn't unrealistic to conclude that people are becoming more AWARE of the existence of "hate crimes" and that could possibly be a positive sign PROVIDED that it isn't simply dismissed (as some appear to want to do).
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Quite right. I was pretty sure that you belonged to the "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts." school of thought.
Click to expand...

Try using a few facts and see what happens. Liberal lies, even those told over and over do not take on the aura of truth.
 
Hate crime hoaxes are way up, too.
 
I would think hate crimes would spike in areas where Trump didn't have a rally.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
On the basis of your position, I can state confidently that there hasn't been a single murder in all of North AMerica in the past 75 years because I have never witnessed one and I have never met anyone who has witnessed one.

Now isn't that a silly thing to say?

If "Group X" uses "Method Y" to collect "Statistic Z" then a lot can be learned by the CHANGE in "Statistic Z" (even if "Statistic Z" is not 100% accurate) between different sets of data provided that "Method Y" is not changed.

In the referenced report, neither "Group X" nor "Method Y" were changed, so regardless of the "magnitude exactness" of "Statistic Z" there is evidence that there IS a change in "Statistic Z" - and that the change is NOT in the direction of a decrease in the prevalence of (in this specific case) REPORTED "hate crimes". Whether that change has come about because people are more open (and persistent) in reporting them or because more of them are happening, the report does not, and cannot, say. However, it isn't unrealistic to conclude that people are becoming more AWARE of the existence of "hate crimes" and that could possibly be a positive sign PROVIDED that it isn't simply dismissed (as some appear to want to do).
Click to expand...

So if you take the population of The United States 325,145,963 and divid it by the number of reported hate crimes of 7,175 that means 1 out of 45,317 people would be involved in a hate crime. If you take the average that 1 person influences 200 other people’s lives. That means 1 out of 227 people would be personal aware of a hate crime that had be committed. That’s the average person. If you consider the fact that I’m personally influenced by well over a 1,000 people. That means I have a 1 out of 45 percent chance of being aware of a hate crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jmotivator said:
Here is a list of 21 nationally reported hate crimes that ended up being hoaxes during the Trump presidency... can you name a time where there has been this many hate crime hoaxes?
Click to expand...

"...between 2016 and 2018, fewer than 50 reports were found to be false ..."

Delete the 8 of the 21 that you listed which were NOT during Mr. Trump's presidency and you are left with 13, or slightly less than one per month.

Take the 50 from 2016 to 2018, and ducts those 13, you are left with 37, or slightly more than 3 per month.

That means that the number of hate crime hoaxes has only increased if you are dumb enough to believe that 1 is more than 3.

In your opinion, have hate crime hoaxes increased?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
"...between 2016 and 2018, fewer than 50 reports were found to be false ..."

Delete the 8 of the 21 that you listed which were NOT during Mr. Trump's presidency and you are left with 13, or slightly less than one per month.

Take the 50 from 2016 to 2018, and ducts those 13, you are left with 37, or slightly more than 3 per month.

That means that the number of hate crime hoaxes has only increased if you are dumb enough to believe that 1 is more than 3.

In your opinion, have hate crime hoaxes increased?
Click to expand...

Saying what the total number is is not a trend. :roll:

What was it in the 3 years before?

Also, how many of the actual hate crimes were attacking Trump supporters? Saying "hate crimes have increased" doesn't make the point you might want to make if it is the progressives who have lost their mind.
 
jmotivator said:
Saying what the total number is is not a trend. :roll:
Click to expand...

Quite right. On the other hand I never said that there was a "trend" only that the total numbers had increased.

jmotivator said:
What was it in the 3 years before?
Click to expand...

Good question, why don't you take your turn at doing the research and tell me?

jmotivator said:
Also, how many of the actual hate crimes were attacking Trump supporters? Saying "hate crimes have increased" doesn't make the point you might want to make if it is the progressives who have lost their mind.
Click to expand...

Quite frankly I don't give a damn WHO the victims of "hate crimes" are. Unlike some people I do not make a distinction between "GOOD hate crimes" and "BAD hate crimes". I acknowledge that you do make such a distinction, but, as far as I am concerned, "A hate crime is a hate crime is a hate crime." (to incorrectly paraphrase Gertrude Stein).

To extend your "distinction" to its ultimate, the "Holocaust" consisted of "hate crimes" ONLY if you happened to be Jewish because, if you were German, the acts were "acceptable". I'm not willing to take even the tiniest tentative first small step down that road. Are you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom