e:
@Angilion - I have just seen your reply, I will reply once I return later this evening. But again, you've misunderstood the original post and it's throwing you off. I had no need to answer your question and, once you correctly understand my post, you'll know why.
You managed to find 9 examples from a period of over 10 years and you presented that as convincing evidence that the police in the USA shoot dead more innocent people than all other homicides by gun in the USA that aren't gang-related.
As I said, a sample of examples do not equate to complete statistics. I think this one is going to be a stickler so I'll bow out on this point.
What you meant by "you" is irrelevant. It was you, you personally, who assumed that almost all homicides by gun in the USA are gang related. It was also you, you personally, who called that an ignorant assumption.
No, I don't see how it's irrelevant considering your initial response or even in the context of conversation - words are chosen specifically. My reply was in response to the high 15,000 deaths you told me about, my reply was an extreme scenario response to show how my original question/assumption was wildly inaccurate.
Let me explain, please
You stated 15,000 people die of shootings per year, I've said police were responsible for 1,000 reported deaths. In response to the high 15,000 figure I posited:
Going on your other statistic of 15,000 homicides by shooting per year - wow, yeh ok that is a high figure and even if you ignorantly assume 14,000 of those to be gang related you'd still need to have at least 501 innocents killed by police for that 1000pa figure.
I'll repeat my question, which you ignored: How do you arrive at the claim of "at least 501 innocents killed by the police" per year?
As I said, i ignored your question as I thought my reply was sufficient for you to understand, but let me explain for you:
My original question you replied to:
"
Just think if you removed all the gang related homicides by gun from the statistics and compared the remaining against the number of innocents killed by law enforcement by gun which figure do you think would trump?"
In response to the high figure, I said if 15,000 people die from shooting, and the police only kill (in the extreme assumption) the full 1,000pa figure, also the remaining 14,000 were all omitted as gang related (another extreme assumption) you'd still need at least 501 of those police homicides to be shootings of innocents to trump the oh... I see where I ****** up, that would be against the remaining police deaths which doesn't make sense at all - it should have been the full 1,000 police deaths against the 15,000, so at least 999 deaths of the 15,000 non-gang related. My bad. Oh well, that was a waste of all our time.
It's impossible that you genuinely think that race hasn't been mentioned anywhere in connection with people being killed by police in the USA.
I didn't mention race, my question mentioned gang related homicides. You brought it up whilst accusing me of fashionable racism
I said nothing about my views. It's you who's claiming that almost all homicides by gun in the USA are gang related. It's you who's claiming that police in the USA kill 9 innocent people every 10 years and at least 501 innocent people per year and at least 501 innocent people per year by shooting them. It's you who's assuming that at least most of the people killed by police in the USA are innocent. And it's you who won't say why you think that. One possible explanation is that you're deciding people's guilt or innocence by what you consider to be their race. That is one of the central tenets of this whole movement
You really read a lot into it man.
