- Moderator
- #481
Wait...cutting to the quick...are you saying red states are not corrupt?Something else to consider. 9 vs 19.
Blacks make up 13% of our population.
Am I the only one who sees a problem here?
Funny deal is statistics.. The smaller the set of numbers, the less likely you're find ANY WAY to make them statistically significant.. When you're dealing with -- oh maybe -- 20 million police encounters every year -- these results are in the noise... AND not controlled for influences OTHER than race. Like the TYPE of encounter that caused the death.
Don't try this at home.. Works on BIGGER sets of numbers fine..
And, a disproportionate number of those poor people happen to be minorities. I totally agree it is a problem..bit this part might shock you. It is as much a problem in red as in blue.
Those SYSTEMIC issues i mentioned are largely economic and disproportionately affect the poor. But "poor and rural" doesn't present as much of a problem, because the "customer interface" to justice is a handful of people.. People UNDERSTAND the accommodations that can and should be made.. The larger you go -- the more economic disparity affects your experience with the law and the courts.. The problems come in when cities SKIMP on things like number of judges, courthouse employees handling citizen forms, etc.. And when in a BIG city, their FINES become a NEEDED SOURCE OF REVENUE... Ferguson derived almost TWICE the state Average for income from fines.. It's entire budget DEPENDED on it.. Which is a really perverse incentive...
WHY? Because the govt wasn't TAILORED for a community with lower property values and a higher percentage of people on the economic brink.. I've personally SEEN in Tenn where less affluent cities dont TRY to administer policing and justice the way it's done in bigger metros.. And the experience is FAR less traumatic to the poorer in the community...
So unless the "red state" is SYSTEMATICALLY CORRUPT like Louisiana (sorry saints)