more liberal white privilege nonsense

[The Thinker]

None of those are evidence for what I asked. I asked for evidence of bias, not disparity. Do you understand the difference?

Yes. And disparity is evidence of bias when one group is statistically more likely to get a longer sentence than another for the same crime. What evidence would you need to convince you of racial bias?

For example, from one of the studies referenced (found here https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....t_id=1800840):

Right, it's just a coincidence that all over the US blacks are sentenced to longer time in prison. Pure coincidence.

And here's how thinkprogress, the garbage web site you actually linked to, characterizes the study:

Jim Crow! Slavery! Bla bla bla. Pure unadultered deception.

Denial isn't just a river in Africa.

[Darth Executor]

Yes. And disparity is evidence of bias when one group is statistically more likely to get a longer sentence than another for the same crime. What evidence would you need to convince you of racial bias?

...

Right, it's just a coincidence that all over the US blacks are sentenced to longer time in prison. Pure coincidence.

It's not a coincidence, it's a product of black crime rates. What's amazing is how vigorous the left tries to pin black failures on white people. It's almost as if you people don't think blacks have any agency whatsoever and thus cannot be held responsible for anything they do.

Denial isn't just a river in Africa.

Indeed.

[The Thinker]

It's not a coincidence, it's a product of black crime rates. What's amazing is how vigorous the left tries to pin black failures on white people. It's almost as if you people don't think blacks have any agency whatsoever and thus cannot be held responsible for anything they do.

How do black crime rates justify the disparity? Sounds like a total non-sequitor to me.

Make a logical argument making your case.

Indeed.

Then you need to start thinking better.

[Darth Executor]

How do black crime rates justify the disparity? Sounds like a total non-sequitor to me.

Higher crime rate = more likely to go to prison and go to prison for longer, increased anti-crime attitude from authorities, etc.

Then you need to start thinking better.

Bruh I actually quoted directly from the study and directly from your garbage progressive rag. Normal people don't like being lied to, which thinkprogress clearly does to its idiot audience. If at this point you don't understand you are being blatantly lied to or choose to pretend otherwise there's no helping you. "The Thinker" indeed.

[seer]

How do black crime rates justify the disparity? Sounds like a total non-sequitor to me.

Because Thinker, percentage wise Blacks commit more crime than whites and more often. So when sentencing happens past crime activity is taken into consideration, so if they have a record they will get more time. What you need to show is a disparity, for instance, with first time offenders. Does the white kid get a slap on the wrist, while the black kid gets jail time for a bag of dope? You can not quantify these things unless you know the persons criminal record, or lack thereof.

[seer]

Jim Crow! Slavery! Bla bla bla. Pure unadultered deception.

Here is a more accurate article: https://www.city-journal.org/html/cr...ist-13078.html

[The Thinker]

Higher crime rate = more likely to go to prison and go to prison for longer, increased anti-crime attitude from authorities, etc.

Non-sequitor. Higher black crime rates would answer why there are more black people in prison, but it would not justify why black people are sentences longer for the same crimes that white people commit.

Bruh I actually quoted directly from the study and directly from your garbage progressive rag. Normal people don't like being lied to, which thinkprogress clearly does to its idiot audience. If at this point you don't understand you are being blatantly lied to or choose to pretend otherwise there's no helping you. "The Thinker" indeed.

And you never showed why it was garbage. You literally just asserted it was. And you never showed any evidence to back up your claim that "black people receive longer sentences because they are more likely to be sentenced by black people."

And you don't appear to have a coherent story. You first said:

"black people receive longer sentences because they are more likely to be sentenced by black people"

then you said:

"Higher crime rate = more likely to go to prison and go to prison for longer, increased anti-crime attitude from authorities, etc."

So which is it?

[The Thinker]

Here is a more accurate article: https://www.city-journal.org/html/cr...ist-13078.html

Yes, but that doesn't justify why blacks get longer sentences for the same crimes. It only explains why there are more black people in prison per capita, which is due to high crimes rates, which no one denies.

[seer]

Yes, but that doesn't justify why blacks get longer sentences for the same crimes. It only explains why there are more black people in prison per capita, which is due to high crimes rates, which no one denies.

No Thinker, repeat offenders usually get more time. If you have a black kid with a long record he would get more time than an Asian kid with no record. Then you have to take the severity of the past crimes into considerations. Were they low level non-violent crimes or violent crimes? All these things play in..

[Darth Executor]

Non-sequitor. Higher black crime rates would answer why there are more black people in prison, but it would not justify why black people are sentences longer for the same crimes that white people commit.

I literally explain that in the post you are quoting.

And you never showed why it was garbage.

Yes I do. They quote a study that explicitly states they only detect a difference in incarceration length and rate, and that the bias could still be in favor of blacks. The study only detects a difference between whites and blacks, it was not designed to detect which one is actually favored (it's possible for blacks to be incarcerated longer for the same crime, and actually deserve to be incarcerated even more based on the details of the crime, for example). Just because two people are charged and sentenced for theft does not mean the extenuating circumstances are the same. Some stuff (like criminal record) can probably be gathered from statistics, but other stuff (like how they behave in court, which does affect sentencing) cannot.

And you don't appear to have a coherent story. You first said:

"black people receive longer sentences because they are more likely to be sentenced by black people"

then you said:

"Higher crime rate = more likely to go to prison and go to prison for longer, increased anti-crime attitude from authorities, etc."

So which is it?

That's because I am trying to explain to an idiot (you) why there are plenty of alternative hypotheses that fit the data you claim shows "bias against black people". Any/all of these could be true. There's no reason why there has to be only one reason. All I know is that "bias against black people" is by far the most unlikely one since the American government systematically discriminates in favor of black people and there's nothing about law in general that suggests it should deviate from this pattern.

[Jedidiah]

No Thinker, repeat offenders usually get more time. If you have a black kid with a long record he would get more time than an Asian kid with no record. Then you have to take the severity of the past crimes into considerations. Were they low level non-violent crimes or violent crimes? All these things play in..

This is the second time this has been put forward but the so-called Thinker has ignored it and gone one to fight against a weaker argument.

[The Thinker]

I literally explain that in the post you are quoting.

You don't. Nothing about your answer justified the racial bias.

Yes I do. They quote a study that explicitly states they only detect a difference in incarceration length and rate, and that the bias could still be in favor of blacks. The study only detects a difference between whites and blacks, it was not designed to detect which one is actually favored (it's possible for blacks to be incarcerated longer for the same crime, and actually deserve to be incarcerated even more based on the details of the crime, for example). Just because two people are charged and sentenced for theft does not mean the extenuating circumstances are the same. Some stuff (like criminal record) can probably be gathered from statistics, but other stuff (like how they behave in court, which does affect sentencing) cannot.

Here's another study: http://www.sentencingproject.org/pub...ustice-system/all after accounting for relevant legal differences such as crime severity and criminal history."

That's because I am trying to explain to an idiot (you) why there are plenty of alternative hypotheses that fit the data you claim shows "bias against black people". Any/all of these could be true. There's no reason why there has to be only one reason. All I know is that "bias against black people" is by far the most unlikely one since the American government systematically discriminates in favor of black people and there's nothing about law in general that suggests it should deviate from this pattern.

Sure there is. What you're taking is favoritism for blacks in things like affirmative action, and then assuming that the same beneficial policy would be implemented in the criminal justice system. There's no logic behind that whatsoever. You never justified the claim that "black people receive longer sentences because they are more likely to be sentenced by black people".

Zero evidence. Nada. And your second claim is perfectly compatible with a racist policy to sentence blacks to prison/jail for longer periods for the same crimes. So literally nothing you've offered is a defense of your position.

[The Thinker]

This is the second time this has been put forward but the so-called Thinker has ignored it and gone one to fight against a weaker argument.

See my comment above. There are studies showing that's not the case.

[seer]

all after accounting for relevant legal differences such as crime severity and criminal history."

Perhaps you can quote the part on criminal history, I could not find it. This is important, we need to know if they are merely taking in past arrests as opposed to the actual charges of those arrests. If not we are comparing apple and oranges.

[shunyadragon]

edit: I should add that from what I remember the difference was quite small. indeed, even the most liberal of studies don't show much of a disparity after adjusting for other variables in the first place, so the entire topic requires liberals to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Sources!?