Social science research has found that protests around the country have been overwhelmingly peaceful and biased media portrayals mislead us.

[B. Kidd]

More disinformation. Nobody has complained about the peaceful exercise of citizens' Constitutional rights. People are complaining about the violence and looting. Two very separate issues that liberals are trying to combine to minimize the damage. How sad.

Cagey!
Ain't they?

 

[Correll]

Completely unbiased, non-politicized, emotionally detached, empirical social science research has determined that peaceful protestors around the country should be commended for the extreme non-violent restraint they have shown when assaulted by the police. The biased right wing corporate news media has been spinning a "false narrative" that blames the violence committed on the part of law enforcement on the protestors themselves. They are literally blaming the victims.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/16/this-summers-black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelming-peaceful-our-research-finds/

"Given that protesters were objecting to extrajudicial police killings of Black citizens, protesters displayed an extraordinary level of nonviolent discipline, particularly for a campaign involving hundreds of documented incidents of apparent police brutality. The protests were extraordinarily nonviolent, and extraordinarily nondestructive, given the unprecedented size of the movement’s participation and geographic scope."

"How the news media frame protests influences how the public perceives them. Ambiguous framings — such as those describing “clashes” between protesters and police — can convey false information about which side is violent."

In many instances, police reportedly began or escalated the violence, but some observers nevertheless blame the protesters. The claim that the protests are violent — even when the police started the violence — can help local, state and federal forces justify intentionally beating, gassing or kettling the people marching, or reinforces politicians’ calls for “law and order.”


Here is the empirical data that backs up their claims.


"In short, our data suggest that 96.3 percent of events involved no property damage or police injuries, and in 97.7 percent of events, no injuries were reported among participants, bystanders or police."


Earlier this year, social science researchers challenged the assumption that protests involving enormous crowds of individuals densely packed into a relatively small area contribute to the spread of the coronavirus. When social scientists dug beneath the surface, they discovered that the cause of the disproportionate spread of the virus in densely packed urban areas was actually a totally unrelated factor linked to racism and various forms of systemic oppression against marginalized groups. This simply goes to show that correlation in no way, shape, or form ever so much as suggests causation unless the data was compiled by an educated scholar of the humanities with no political bias whatsoever.

Research Determines Protests Did Not Cause Spike In Coronavirus Cases

Surprisingly, research suggests that protests actually may have led to increased social distancing.

www.forbes.com

"In fact, they determined that, based on cellphone data, “cities which had protests saw an increase in social distancing behavior for the overall population relative to cities that did not,” leading to “modest evidence of a small longer-run case growth decline.”

Don't let appearances fool you. The peaceful protests around the country should not be a cause for concern and they actually slow the spread of the coronavirus as a result of an increase in social distancing.

View attachment 406105

View attachment 406107

View attachment 406116

2 billion in property damage and about a dozen dead.

Yup, peaceful

Some individuals are claiming that the police are the source of most of the violence. Portland has significantly reduced police funding and are convinced that if they cut spending even more, the city will safe. The problem in Portland is that the roving mobs roaming the streets aren't being given enough freedom.

Can you imagine if the Antifa candidate wins the mayor's office? How bad can it get?

 

[Ken Mac]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

 

[Ken Mac]

Completely unbiased, non-politicized, emotionally detached, empirical social science research has determined that peaceful protestors around the country should be commended for the extreme non-violent restraint they have shown when assaulted by the police. The biased right wing corporate news media has been spinning a "false narrative" that blames the violence committed on the part of law enforcement on the protestors themselves. They are literally blaming the victims.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/16/this-summers-black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelming-peaceful-our-research-finds/

"Given that protesters were objecting to extrajudicial police killings of Black citizens, protesters displayed an extraordinary level of nonviolent discipline, particularly for a campaign involving hundreds of documented incidents of apparent police brutality. The protests were extraordinarily nonviolent, and extraordinarily nondestructive, given the unprecedented size of the movement’s participation and geographic scope."

"How the news media frame protests influences how the public perceives them. Ambiguous framings — such as those describing “clashes” between protesters and police — can convey false information about which side is violent."

In many instances, police reportedly began or escalated the violence, but some observers nevertheless blame the protesters. The claim that the protests are violent — even when the police started the violence — can help local, state and federal forces justify intentionally beating, gassing or kettling the people marching, or reinforces politicians’ calls for “law and order.”


Here is the empirical data that backs up their claims.


"In short, our data suggest that 96.3 percent of events involved no property damage or police injuries, and in 97.7 percent of events, no injuries were reported among participants, bystanders or police."


Earlier this year, social science researchers challenged the assumption that protests involving enormous crowds of individuals densely packed into a relatively small area contribute to the spread of the coronavirus. When social scientists dug beneath the surface, they discovered that the cause of the disproportionate spread of the virus in densely packed urban areas was actually a totally unrelated factor linked to racism and various forms of systemic oppression against marginalized groups. This simply goes to show that correlation in no way, shape, or form ever so much as suggests causation unless the data was compiled by an educated scholar of the humanities with no political bias whatsoever.

Research Determines Protests Did Not Cause Spike In Coronavirus Cases

Surprisingly, research suggests that protests actually may have led to increased social distancing.

www.forbes.com

"In fact, they determined that, based on cellphone data, “cities which had protests saw an increase in social distancing behavior for the overall population relative to cities that did not,” leading to “modest evidence of a small longer-run case growth decline.”

Don't let appearances fool you. The peaceful protests around the country should not be a cause for concern and they actually slow the spread of the coronavirus as a result of an increase in social distancing.

View attachment 406105

View attachment 406107

View attachment 406116

2 billion in property damage and about a dozen dead.

Yup, peaceful

Some individuals are claiming that the police are the source of most of the violence. Portland has significantly reduced police funding and are convinced that if they cut spending even more, the city will safe. The problem in Portland is that the roving mobs roaming the streets aren't being given enough freedom.

AS they protest with the intent of oppression.

 

[RandomPoster]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

 

[Ken Mac]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

There is a large number of people who have been involved in Burn, Loot, Murder. A number too large in my estimation, which defeats the message of the protests to begin with. One unpeaceful protest is too many. This kind of thing leads to a larger new generation which doesn't believe in law and order. That's problematic.

You obviously don't value people's rights nor the hard work necessary to build a business. You just don't give a shit about any of that. How would you like your business burned down? How would you like to be attacked by a mob for expressing your views? Better yet, how would you like to die for expressing your views which is your right? This doesn't lead to freedom. It leads to Anarchy and loss of freedom and ultimately a Totalitarian government will take hold. A free society has to have established laws in order to protect the rights of everyone. You don't seem to give a shit.

That's your right - I support your right to express your views. I just don't agree with you.

 

[Correll]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

Excellent point. I will be stealing that one.

 

[Ken Mac]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

Excellent point. I will be stealing that one.

This is why anything you post I just skip. Equating anything to "Nazi" means you've lost the argument. I'm also guessing you didn't read my rebuttal. Because I addressed it and all I hear are "crickets".

 

[Correll]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

Excellent point. I will be stealing that one.

This is why anything you post I just skip. Equating anything to "Nazi" means you've lost the argument. I'm also guessing you didn't read my rebuttal. Because I addressed it and all I hear are "crickets".

Someone here is confused.

The "fact" that "97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews" does not mean that Nazis should not be defined as anti-Semitic.


As a group, they killed MILLIONS of Jews and even though a relatively small number were personally involved in the actual murder of jews, does not mean that the group as a whole was not supportive of and thus correctly defined BY THE ACTIONS of the actual mass murderers and genociders.


Normally I agree that mentioning NAZIS is an automatic loss, but here, the humor of the "97%" I think earns it a pass on the Godwin Rule.


If the other poster was seriously and literally arguing that Nazis were anti-semitic, I will withdraw my compliment to his post but I will still be using that point, because it is a good point.


A minorities actions can define a larger group, if the larger group supports or even just allows it.

 

[RandomPoster]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

There is a large number of people who have been involved in Burn, Loot, Murder. A number too large in my estimation, which defeats the message of the protests to begin with. One unpeaceful protest is too many. This kind of thing leads to a larger new generation which doesn't believe in law and order. That's problematic.

You obviously don't value people's rights nor the hard work necessary to build a business. You just don't give a shit about any of that. How would you like your business burned down? How would you like to be attacked by a mob for expressing your views? Better yet, how would you like to die for expressing your views which is your right? This doesn't lead to freedom. It leads to Anarchy and loss of freedom and ultimately a Totalitarian government will take hold. A free society has to have established laws in order to protect the rights of everyone. You don't seem to give a shit.

That's your right - I support your right to express your views. I just don't agree with you.

Again, you sidestep empirical data. Here's another example. 99% of the members of the KKK have never actually participated in any lynchings. How long can an ignorant public continue to ignore such matters?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

One can be guilty of the actions of others if the person supports , encourages or otherwise enables the behavior.

 

[badbob85037]

Completely unbiased, non-politicized, emotionally detached, empirical social science research has determined that peaceful protestors around the country should be commended for the extreme non-violent restraint they have shown when assaulted by the police. The biased right wing corporate news media has been spinning a "false narrative" that blames the violence committed on the part of law enforcement on the protestors themselves. They are literally blaming the victims.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/16/this-summers-black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelming-peaceful-our-research-finds/

"Given that protesters were objecting to extrajudicial police killings of Black citizens, protesters displayed an extraordinary level of nonviolent discipline, particularly for a campaign involving hundreds of documented incidents of apparent police brutality. The protests were extraordinarily nonviolent, and extraordinarily nondestructive, given the unprecedented size of the movement’s participation and geographic scope."

"How the news media frame protests influences how the public perceives them. Ambiguous framings — such as those describing “clashes” between protesters and police — can convey false information about which side is violent."

In many instances, police reportedly began or escalated the violence, but some observers nevertheless blame the protesters. The claim that the protests are violent — even when the police started the violence — can help local, state and federal forces justify intentionally beating, gassing or kettling the people marching, or reinforces politicians’ calls for “law and order.”


Here is the empirical data that backs up their claims.


"In short, our data suggest that 96.3 percent of events involved no property damage or police injuries, and in 97.7 percent of events, no injuries were reported among participants, bystanders or police."


Earlier this year, social science researchers challenged the assumption that protests involving enormous crowds of individuals densely packed into a relatively small area contribute to the spread of the coronavirus. When social scientists dug beneath the surface, they discovered that the cause of the disproportionate spread of the virus in densely packed urban areas was actually a totally unrelated factor linked to racism and various forms of systemic oppression against marginalized groups. This simply goes to show that correlation in no way, shape, or form ever so much as suggests causation unless the data was compiled by an educated scholar of the humanities with no political bias whatsoever.

Research Determines Protests Did Not Cause Spike In Coronavirus Cases

Surprisingly, research suggests that protests actually may have led to increased social distancing.

www.forbes.com

"In fact, they determined that, based on cellphone data, “cities which had protests saw an increase in social distancing behavior for the overall population relative to cities that did not,” leading to “modest evidence of a small longer-run case growth decline.”

Don't let appearances fool you. The peaceful protests around the country should not be a cause for concern and they actually slow the spread of the coronavirus as a result of an increase in social distancing.

View attachment 406105

View attachment 406107

View attachment 406116

If it were my business being looted or burned or some rioter beating my wife I would have killed everyone of them and been justified doing it. But that scum has some way of knowing who will cower and who will scatter their internal organs all over the street ridding the world of the trash.

 

[Ken Mac]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

There is a large number of people who have been involved in Burn, Loot, Murder. A number too large in my estimation, which defeats the message of the protests to begin with. One unpeaceful protest is too many. This kind of thing leads to a larger new generation which doesn't believe in law and order. That's problematic.

You obviously don't value people's rights nor the hard work necessary to build a business. You just don't give a shit about any of that. How would you like your business burned down? How would you like to be attacked by a mob for expressing your views? Better yet, how would you like to die for expressing your views which is your right? This doesn't lead to freedom. It leads to Anarchy and loss of freedom and ultimately a Totalitarian government will take hold. A free society has to have established laws in order to protect the rights of everyone. You don't seem to give a shit.

That's your right - I support your right to express your views. I just don't agree with you.

Again, you sidestep empirical data. Here's another example. 99% of the members of the KKK have never actually participated in any lynchings. How long can an ignorant public continue to ignore such matters?

Thanks for making my point.

 

[Ken Mac]

The percentage of peaceful protests is meaningless. Nobody gives a shit about that nor should they. It's the number of protests where Burn, Loot, Murder is taking place.

Your OP is a fucking red herring if there ever was one.

How can you say that? The public's ignorance on percentages has led to astounding misconceptions throughout history. For example, 97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews. If this were common knowledge, people's perceptions would likely change and the false narrative regarding Nazis as being anti-semitic would be unmasked.

Excellent point. I will be stealing that one.

This is why anything you post I just skip. Equating anything to "Nazi" means you've lost the argument. I'm also guessing you didn't read my rebuttal. Because I addressed it and all I hear are "crickets".

Someone here is confused.

The "fact" that "97% of Nazis never actually murdered any Jews" does not mean that Nazis should not be defined as anti-Semitic.


As a group, they killed MILLIONS of Jews and even though a relatively small number were personally involved in the actual murder of jews, does not mean that the group as a whole was not supportive of and thus correctly defined BY THE ACTIONS of the actual mass murderers and genociders.


Normally I agree that mentioning NAZIS is an automatic loss, but here, the humor of the "97%" I think earns it a pass on the Godwin Rule.


If the other poster was seriously and literally arguing that Nazis were anti-semitic, I will withdraw my compliment to his post but I will still be using that point, because it is a good point.


A minorities actions can define a larger group, if the larger group supports or even just allows it.

Nowhere in my posts have I equated "peaceful protestors" to "rioters". My response was to "rioters". There should be NO comparison. Using percentages is comparing through categorization. It's comparing one to another. That is meaningless. Thus his response to my post is deflection and meaningless in my estimation.

The number of peaceful protestors is meaningless when discussion of "rioters" is involved. One business burned down/looted or person beaten or dead is one too many. It's trampling the rights of individuals in our country. We should care about that.