Holy fuck, is Yale based?

Holy fuck, is Yale based?

Look at the conclusion of this study on racial differences in police use of force.

"As use of force increases from
putting hands on a civilian to striking them with a baton, the overall probability of such an incident occurring decreases dramatically but the racial difference remains roughly constant."

"On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we are unable to detect any racial differences in either the raw data or when accounting for controls"

How will leftists and liberals ever recover from this? They've been BTFO by statistics and facts

Other urls found in this thread:

law.yale.edu/system/files/area/workshop/leo/leo16_fryer.pdf
nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

law.yale.edu/system/files/area/workshop/leo/leo16_fryer.pdf

Here's the study for you guys

Yale's coat of arms, goy.

>implying leftists and liberals care about facts
user, I...

>implying leftists and liberals care about facts
Seriously, saw a post on here from the socialism subreddit saying "not all facts are created equal." Facts and logic are buzzwords for them.

>seeing this photo

Stop, I can only get so erect user

Harvard study that claims the same, in case anyone is collecting DATA

nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

I just find it hilarious that Yale appeals to leftists and liberals when even their own professor is forced to admit in an empirical study that there are no racial differences in use of police force. It BTFO BLM that tries to argue that they're disproportionately affected by police force.

Racial difference remains constant my ass.

Nice. Saved. Thanks based burgerbro.

It's not going to convince core leftists - they're not going to do a 180 on something they derive most of their self-esteem from.

We have to work on the margins. It's like any market really - those on the borderline have a disproportionate influence on the price.

BTW, insofar as leftists reject facts, we have no choice but to engage in force. Pic related.

The funny thing is that I was trying to find as much of a leftist source as possible because I'm in a class where I have to write about "social issues" (it's a GE class) and I found this and was like "perfect."

then I fucking read the conclusion and LOLed.

...

1 step forward 2 steps back, the reality of the racial differences in shootings is that whites are more likely to be shot than blacks in spite of the vast differences in violent crime rates committed across demographics.

They're already sticking their neck out. No way is it smart to drop THAT bombshell on leftists at the same time.


This is one of the reasons lawyers, try to keep their arguments as narrow in scope as possible.

Both of these studies are going to be buried under shit studies performed by shit organizations like SPLC and NAACP that confirm their views. I will say this to college anons, save these in case you need a source to argue this in an essay. They can't call a study by Yale and Harvard fake news. The best they can do is ignore it.

KEK. Holy shit, what type of project?

If the Left cared about statistics they wouldn't be the Left

> אורותמיםים

למה הוא התכוון פה?

Yale is most certainly not based. The fact that they released this finding is remarkable to say the least.
How will liberals deal? The same way they deal with all data. By ignoring it and shouting divisive tropes like (((raecyyysttt))).

It's for a UCLA social studies class that consists of radical leftists that believe Mao and Marx had the right idea.

I took the class because it fulfilled my GE requirements and I figured it'd be easy. For the project, we had to show how minorities are "underprivileged" in our society.

How are you going to fit it in?

Just of the top of my head, I was thinking spew out the typical nonsense they're used to hearing. Then, when their guard is down, remind them that despite this "systemic oppression," the cops don't shoot blacks at a higher rate.

This.

"This model is consistent with racial differences in the average returns to compliant
behaviors, the results of our tests of discrimination based on Knowles, Persico, and Todd (2001) and Anwar and Fang (2006), and the fact that the odds-ratio is large and significant across all intensities of force – even after accounting for a rich set of controls. In the end, however, without randomly assigning race, we have no definitive proof of discrimination."

More juicy quotes from the study.

Basically, if you're compliant with police then there are no racial differences in police use of force. Who would've thought

I'm going to keep my head down, and pretend to be a leftist in class. I literally just repeat leftist buzzwords and phrases in class and try to say the most ridiculous things I can and they eat it up.

"I'm a white male and I'm ashamed of my white patriarchal privilege. Why don't we pay reparations to blacks for what we did to them in the 1800's? I'll pay for it"

"Good for you user"

kek.

No, I can tell you from unpleasant personal experience that Yale is not based. Look up the name Antonio Lasaga. It took a long time for him to be fired. I knew him well. I'm just surprised that they published the study. Stuff like this usually gets round-filed in academia. More unpleasant personal experience involving FMRI studies on blacks vs. non-blacks brains.

Why, just why the fuck would you do that? They're way too dense to get that you're being sarcastic. All you're doing is encouraging them to radicalize even more and make these ideas mainstream.

some people just want to watch the world burn

Fucking Nihilist.

...

Ok, in all seriousness. What am I supposed to do? Try to redpill them? I'd be kicked out of fucking class if I revealed my power level.

It's a very sad day if you have to consider a academic institution based because they tell the truth rather than continue a convenient lie of left wing dogma. We're already too deep in the rabbit hole at this point.

You sit and don't say anything. The biggest eye opener for me was when the professor in one of my classes tried virtue signalling and only two out of the twenty people in class went along with it. The other 18 of us just made that "this is bullshit" eye contact with one another. The best thing you can do is stay silent, because it shows the leftists their subversion isn't working. Look for others who are visibly getting uncomfortable with the rhetoric and try to talk to them one-on-one after class.
Whatever you do, don't fucking go along with it because all it does is make them think they're right.

Just curious, what was the professor saying?

It was an every day event. My "international relations" class become "rant about Drumpf" during and after the election. My favorite was when she used the DJT Jr. comment about the Skittles being comparable to the Syrian refugees as an excuse to bitch about how we need to let them all in and how Trump is a xenophobe blah blah blah.
Then there was the day after he won the election and she just sat there crying about it. About how the people betrayed Hillary and all the women in the country by electing him.
She would take every comment he said on Twitter, rallies, speeches, everwhere and bend them into how the world was ending.

>keeps blaming the ((( )))
>gets defensive when blacks claim systematic abuses
you're a white nigger

The data age will kill egalitarianism.
They're already kvetching about raciss neural networks.

Statistics and facts are used by the white male patriarchy to oppress people of color. You must have a low EQ (Emotional Quotient).

t. jew with nervous hand hovering over the "Shut it down!!" button

>raciss neural networks

RIP Tay.

>implying leftists look at facts/data

You have to insert radical leftist sound ideas that cause inconsistencies in thought. Break their thinking with their own stupid ideas.
A+B=C were C is shitting on the walls

i am taking his new test right now

can someone rephrase "Can't be bothered with other's needs." for me? I don't really understand it and i have to rate if it applies to me or not. thanks