I googled a bit and I found a hn comment that talked about an article which explains what you say
Basically, they estimate drug use in the population, and they draw a map, and black and white people more or less have the same habits in drugs use. They draw a map of the past arrests by the police for drug crimes and they're skewed towards the black neighborhood. There's a bit more about it since the article dealt with predictive policing and Ai but the gist is what you're saying, and this causes a self reinforcing feedback for the police (which in turn arrests more black people and the loop goes on)
https://rss.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1740-...
Let's be realistic, given two towns, one whose median age is 70 and the other filled with teenage boys sporting new licenses, one of them is going to need to invest more into policing resources than the other, ceteris paribus.
I wouldn't extend that to calling teenage boys "bad." But we did come with higher negative externalities to our communities, particularly when behind a car, than other demos.
Do you have data backing this claim? For example, homicides (that are not a subject for reporting bias) don’t follow a uniform distribution, so I would expect other crimes to also be non-uniform.
Here is a survey of US youths that supports this premise: https://monitoringthefuture.org/data/panel/demographic-subgr...
It appears to show generally more frequent use in men than women, younger than older and until somewhat recently, white than black or hispanic.
The above linked data show self-reported cannabis use within +/- 10% over the relevant pre-legalization period (before 2012), if anything with a slight advantage to whites. Drug arrest and incarceration rates vary by much, much more (factors of 2-6 between whites and blacks). Against that, use rates of 15 vs 13ish vs 12.5ish are as good as uniform , esp. on a survey with all the inherent variability therein (even for one as competent and longstanding as the cited work).
So what's the quibble? That the shares aren't exactly equal? Or that there are other demographic cuts with larger differences (and, y'know, aligned carceral disparities)? Or that cannabis use isn't representative of 'petty crime'?
> Every demographic commits petty crimes and code violations at about the same rate
.. is not actually true, so better not to claim it as part of a strong argument.
I’m not the one who brought up the nitpick in the first place, so you can argue with them instead if you prefer people didn’t do so in the first place.
As I understand it, people went to prison mostly for selling or possessing amounts that are implying selling. Which might explain the difference. Would you go to prison for possessing a single joint back then?
Yes, Harvard Professor Timothy Leary was sentenced to 30 years in prison (!) for having a single partially-smoked joint in his car.
I think there's an ingrained sense of revulsion, in all of us that live in the cultural era that descended from Enlightenment ideals of equality for all, against the idea that there exist observable group-level differences on nearly any metric you could think of, but that doesn't make it any less true.
If you think people of certain ethnic, racial, political, or religious demographics are more likely to download a song without permissions, I'd like to know what demographics you think are the most likely and least likely to do it.
Because I don't know of a single person in my life who has a computer and hasn't done it.
That is not a crime.
Uploading/distributing/broadcasting a song without copyright permission to do so, might conditionally be a crime, if that usage does not fall within "Fair Use" such as for education, journalism or commentary.
Let's stop ceding more power and control to the copyright cartel, and be careful not to repeat their propaganda that misleads people into thinking sharing books or other media needs to always involve a payment to some publishing corporation.
Depends on your jurisdiction.
Because in my jurisdiction, you're wrong. :)
I read it as a scenario / "even if" for the presented thought experiment, not a load-bearing assertion about reality. As in the argument being made works equally well whether either way, and trying to challenge it misses the point.
Crime rates are likely different for different socioeconomic classes for many reasons, but also the socioeconomic class likely determines in part the types of crimes.
For example, poor people are more likely to do petty crime and physical crimes, while rich people tend to do complex frauds involving large sums.
So you cannot compare rates for one particular crime across socioeconomic groups because they will gravitate towards the opportunities that are present to their class.
"All zebras are red"
"Actually, if you look at studies, you can see that horses come in all types of colours. So I would expect zebras to be the same"
"Horses are not zebras, that should be all the proof you need to accept that all zebras are red."
There is very serious bias in which deaths are labelled homicides, and in who is held responsible for them. The idea that homicide stats are bias-free is weirdly pervasive, but absolutely without basis, on either the victimization or (even moreso, since the prior bias also impacts this on top of the direct bias applicable to it) perpetration side.
What? The rates of parking violations and music piracy vary dramatically with age and gender.
If parking violations are an old demographic problem, and music piracy are a young demographic problem for example (even though it is assumed that more things are in the set than just these two) then it could be that they roughly cancel each other out.
I guess one would really need to know what the full set petty crimes and code violations consists of to be sure.
Note that this is commission of offense as opposed to say police activity around offense, which is a different thing, as you note with your jaywalking example.
> Honest statistical reports may even be written highlighting the frequency of lost-key-findings under streetlights.
The fact you note them as honest is so rhetorically powerful that I'm dead certain to reference this concept/phrasing again in the future.
Incoming Leo Sharp. He transported thousands of kilos of drugs in his car for the Sinaloa Cartel during his career. In the United States. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Sharp
Of course, He was white, he was old, he was a United States Veteran. This is just a funny single case.
> Here's an interesting thought about how preferential surveillance can lead to repression even when it's public and not itself acted on:
> 1. Every demographic commits petty crimes and code violations at about the same rate (things like parking violations and music piracy).
> 2. However, people who are being watched will be caught more often.
> 3. The end result is that people in the "wrong" crowd on average are punished more than people in the "right" one at an equal level of misbehavior.
Do this not just to be a descent human being—do this for the sake of your own survival. What will happen when Israel has made every nation hate it more than ever, and the US finally cuts the purse strings?
You are correct to be angry about the amount of people dying in this war. But you should direct your anger to those responsible for both starting the war and for directly endangering those people.
Nobody can force you to self reflect. Nobody can spare you the consequences if you refuse.
> “Look what you made me do” is what you’re saying, but Israel could stop attacking Gaza today and not suffer a single material attack from Gaza for a long time.
> Way, way more Palestinians have died since October than Jews.
Where you advocating for the Jews on October 8th, while the body count from the current conflict was still more Jews than Arabs?
> Israel has no need to keep on its current course. It has made its point and is now making a completely different point—that it is a cruel nation incapable of self restraint.
> Nobody can force you to self reflect. Nobody can spare you the consequences if you refuse.
Obviously, it was horrible for the hostages. I feel bad for them and I’m glad that many have been released.
But Israel’s response shows how insecure they are, how immature and dangerous they are.
Let’s be honest. All you have to do is admit Israel is committing genocide and is wrong to do so and start advocating for more peaceful measures, and by doing so you’ll discount the neonazis. I’m being really blunt here. Because right now your position is so extreme, so unwilling to truly change, that all your doing is making people who hate Jews look correct. Is that what you want?
In light of all that, please self reflect. I’m being your friend, I apologize for how painful this conversation is for you, but you have got to learn because you’re right, the stakes really are high, you are just playing by the wrong rules.
You just want him to concede your point so you feel better. You are not being his friend. Israel is under no definition committing genocide. Please self-reflect and admit this to yourself. Alas your position is too extreme and unwilling to change.
You have terribly disingenuous rhetoric.
Even if you don’t think Israel’s neighbors deserve life, you have to recognize that the entirety of western civilization and the Islamic world both see what Israel is doing as reprehensible.
Now I’m not asking you to say they’re right because they’re the vast majority (that would be subjective), what I’m asking you to agree with is that Israel needs to stop making everyone hate them, because it will be worse for Israel if everyone hates them.
That is an objective fact I hope we can agree on, regardless of the value you place on human life.
1. Every demographic commits petty crimes and code violations at about the same rate (things like parking violations and music piracy).
2. However, people who are being watched will be caught more often.
3. The end result is that people in the "wrong" crowd on average are punished more than people in the "right" one at an equal level of misbehavior.