Re:Don't shoot, I'm disabled
by belorn on Tuesday October 09, 2018 @09:51AM
(#18175952)
> Well first off, if you doubt it's true, all you need to do to disprove it is to provide a single example of white males being the subject of more risk than any other group by population, in any metric, that isn't genetic or similar.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than black females.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than white females.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than any female of any skin color.
> It's just that in every category of risk, it's less dangerous if you're a white male.
False. The largest prediction for high risk for being shot by the police is social econimic status. Second largest predictor is being male. Third largest is african american skin color. Poor black male has the highest risk, and rich white female the lowest risk. White male as an demographic has higher risk than the average (50%) in the US population because the trait "male" is a larger predictor to risk of being shot by the police than the trait "white".
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than black females.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than white females.
White men are subject to more risk of being shot by police than any female of any skin color.
> It's just that in every category of risk, it's less dangerous if you're a white male.
False. The largest prediction for high risk for being shot by the police is social econimic status. Second largest predictor is being male. Third largest is african american skin color. Poor black male has the highest risk, and rich white female the lowest risk. White male as an demographic has higher risk than the average (50%) in the US population because the trait "male" is a larger predictor to risk of being shot by the police than the trait "white".