Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the data is out there and Data Scientists are not of the shy type...
What data?
Number of convicted criminals
Age of criminal
Sex
Income
Type of crime
Residence area
Profession
FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
161–170 of 393 posts
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#162FYI the neighborhood is Kalorama in DC, where a lot of diplomats and high-level government officials live. Maybe the agents didn't want one of the neighbors to call the director of the FBI to have them chewed out for "making the neighborhood look bad", which is not an impossible thing to happen there considering who the neighbors are. I imagine if you're an FBI field agent, the last thing you want for your career is…
It’s worth noting that some of the residents of Kalorama include Barack and Michelle Obama, Rex Tillerson, Hillary Clinton, Jared Kushner, and Jeff Bezos.
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, no ... Abou in arabic means "father of ...", so it's in a possessive construct. It needs the other word to make sense. The "ou" is just an approximation, other spellings include Abo, Abu, Aboo, Bou, Ba ... Whole of North Africa is filled to the brim with Abou-xyz family names, even first names (Abu Madyan "Boumedienne" in Algeria for example) and also many many such names in the other parts of the arab world.
Yes, Abu X is a kunya[0]. It could mean that your child’s name is X, or X could be something more abstract and figurative like a nickname. The “ou” spelling of و is French style and would usually indicate a French speaking country or an former French colony. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunya_(Arabic)
Tarek Abou-Khatwa, my guess on that name (i didnt even read the article, lol) is Morocco? wdyt?
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#164FYI the neighborhood is Kalorama in DC, where a lot of diplomats and high-level government officials live. Maybe the agents didn't want one of the neighbors to call the director of the FBI to have them chewed out for "making the neighborhood look bad", which is not an impossible thing to happen there considering who the neighbors are. I imagine if you're an FBI field agent, the last thing you want for your career is…
It’s worth noting that some of the residents of Kalorama include Barack and Michelle Obama, Rex Tillerson, Hillary Clinton, Jared Kushner, and Jeff Bezos.
Nice, but even Bad Guys live in nice neighborhoods!
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#165> "I can tell you that is not protocol. The problem is there are two justice systems: 1 for poor people and minorities and 1 for rich people and generally white people. You see it when you are one of the few black agents. Everyone is not equal." Was " Tarek Abou-Khatwa " not a minority? [The surname " Abou " appears to be most commonly associated with either Niger or Egypt]( https://forebears.io/surnames/abou ), whil…
They say "1 [justice system] for poor people and minorities; and 1 for rich people and generally white people". In this case, this may have been about a rich person who happens not to be white (though they may well be - you're assuming a name implies a particular ethnicity, which is likely but not 100% certain).
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#166Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#167Fought Experiment: Lets say law enforcement was given the task to examine the affairs of 100, randomly selected, poor/medium income households and 100, randomly selected, very wealthy households. Statistically, where would they find the most amount of criminal activity? Has any similar research been done, and would you care to share the data?
What do you mean by "find the most amount of criminal activity"? Is this about criminal activity that can be easily found? Is it about criminal activity that happens in the household? Would tax evasion qualify as criminal activity? How about minor building code violations? Labor law violations?
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not from the USA, does the FBI usually throw in grenades when arresting people for insurance fraud? If not, then perhaps other lower-quality social-media websites such as Reddit/Twitter might be more receptive to your comments?
Maybe not "usually" but regularly enough that it's worth mentioning.
I have never heard of an assault type entrance with flash bangs and such for anything unrelated to drug or violent crimes.
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#169Fought Experiment: Lets say law enforcement was given the task to examine the affairs of 100, randomly selected, poor/medium income households and 100, randomly selected, very wealthy households. Statistically, where would they find the most amount of criminal activity? Has any similar research been done, and would you care to share the data?
What do you mean by "find the most amount of criminal activity"? Is this about criminal activity that can be easily found? Is it about criminal activity that happens in the household? Would tax evasion qualify as criminal activity? How about minor building code violations? Labor law violations?
Anything the law considers criminal activity. From stealing a car to setting up a secret Cayman Islands Trust fund to avoid taxes.
Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'
#170Fought Experiment: Lets say law enforcement was given the task to examine the affairs of 100, randomly selected, poor/medium income households and 100, randomly selected, very wealthy households. Statistically, where would they find the most amount of criminal activity? Has any similar research been done, and would you care to share the data?
Assuming for a second that the question was asked with legitimate intent: That's the line of reasoning that gets a lot of innocent people treated very very badly based on their socioeconomic status, color of their skin, religion, you name it.
Think of it this way: In 1,000,000 people of race blue, the crime rate is 0.01%. So of those million people: 10 are criminals. In 1,000,000 people of race purple, the crime rate is 0.03%. So 30 are criminals.
All kinds of horrible sounding statistics here: purple people are 3x more likely to be criminal. Purple people neighborhoods have 3x more crime. Purple people 3x more likely to be murderer, drug user, etc.
All of that misleads about the situation: for the most part both purple and blue people are law abiding and any given person you talk to is likely not a criminal.
Now there is a second order problem. (The one that the article is referencing). The truth is that among blue and purple the rate of criminals is much higher. Pretend it's +0.3 for each. So 0.04 and 0.06. But the enforcement of laws at each point in the system are subject to discretion of the enforcer. Does the cop pull you over? Does the cop let you off? Does the prosecutor indict? Does the system give you bail?
Because of focus on "where would they find the most amount of criminal activity?" we are now creating a self fulfilling prophecy where laws are selectively more greatly enforced against purple.