Live data from Hacker News

You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

cato.org

121–130 of 197 posts

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#121
post #80
post #45

And you are five times more likely to be killed at a railroad crossing then by a police officer.[1] Headlines like these are obviously created for sensationalism , and while you will be hard pressed to find someone with a bigger animus towards the current USCJS then I, I think we should all be on the lookout for hyperbole, no matter what underlying meme it may be promoting. [1] http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol…

This extensively documented site ( http://www.killedbypolice.net/kbp2013.html ) suggests that 768 people were killed by police in 2013, compared to the 784 people murdered by trains. If my math is correct, 784/768 is not five. Additionally, that site's statistics are only for may-december, so the actual number is probably around 50% higher.

I was, of course, using the "155" number that the OP used in his analysis, so we are both correct.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#122
post #5

This is ignoring black swan events. There is no chance that police officers will kill 10 million people tomorrow, but there is a non-zero chance that terrorists will.

If we are going to sing that song: if somebody is going to kill 10 million people tomorrow is, necessarily, somebody with nuclear or biological weapons. As a non-American I would feel a lot safe if you just dismantle yours.

American has used nuclear weapons twice in history. Fearing American nukes is ridiculous and not based on any rational thought.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#123
post #105

Your source does not support your claim. The only thing worse than people who spew lies are people who do so with footnotes that imply that you're not lying. American police officers are out of control. That's not a "meme" that's being "promoted" it's an actual fact that some authoritarian assholes (read: you) are attempting to discredit and hide. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Criminals are out of control. Don't fight with a cop, don't resist arrest, you don't get shot. Pretty simple solution. Perhaps, to be fair, we ought to discuss violence committed by illegal aliens. We don't have that discussion on HN. Perhaps our outrage ought to be directed at the criminals and misfits that seem to think running from cops, fighting with cops or insulting cops is somehow smart. I know far more victim…

The answer to hyperbolic statements in a forum like HN shouldn't be.... more hyperbolic statements. The GP's statements might not be grounded in facts or statistics, but neither are yours.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#124
Cyber-terrorism is the new terrorism is the new communism is the new facism and so on. The military industrial complex works to serve itself, and it will invent or even create and support enemies if those enemies can be used against the public to push a bigger budget. (See Operation Gladio A and B)

The thing to realize though is that the threat is from hard to find potentially non-nationstate actors, and the threat is somewhat real, but it is hard to detect and creates a constant state of fear... which is great if you want to capitalize on that fear. To a certain extent it worked for a better good by bringing tons of money into America which along with the UK and Israel is one of the top arms suppliers to the world. (a great intro book on this subject is the updated The Shadow World: Inside the Global Arms Trade.)

My problem is that this model of fear and money has been taken to the extreme is now eroding freedoms at home, and bankrupting us. Many republicans will rant and rave about the budget, but if you ask about cutting waste, fraud, and abuse (WFA) in DoD/Pentagon they hardly ever admit such WFA exists (even though everyone actually familiar with it knows how excessive it is, especially at the Pentagon.)

The other problem is that secretly, unbeknownst to you or the general public, in the smokey closed door places in the Beltway, the strategic thinkers have been saying we are returning to a neo-cold war, and to the tripolar world, and thats the real reason for our expansionism... used a measure of containment against our future enemies, (Russia and China) in the upcoming resource wars. Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya/Syria/Somalia/Georgia/Ukraine/The Stans, all make sense if you look at it from this perspective. Don't get me started on the petroldollar and world finance schemes.

I don't know enough to quite disagree with that justification, but my problem is that if that's the real reason, the public deserves to know, but our reps and the military brass have all just held that close to their chest and we are hemorrhaging money that gets wasted and it all ends up in VA and NY, and our constitution is being undermined, while our media is captured and corruption is rampant in all three branches of government, and the surveillance state grows so the intel agencies are more and more powerful against their own people and less and less useful abroad...

All this spells disaster in my opinion.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#125
post #2

A frank discussion of where our national priorities are versus where they should be would include the data point in the article. We spend trillions killing Muslims across the ocean for the privilege of "safety" at home, where we are killed by the police in greater frequency than the Muslims ever did.

We are also killed more frequently by illegal aliens. Let's put our troops on the border rather than Afghanistan.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#126
post #80
post #45

And you are five times more likely to be killed at a railroad crossing then by a police officer.[1] Headlines like these are obviously created for sensationalism , and while you will be hard pressed to find someone with a bigger animus towards the current USCJS then I, I think we should all be on the lookout for hyperbole, no matter what underlying meme it may be promoting. [1] http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol…

This extensively documented site ( http://www.killedbypolice.net/kbp2013.html ) suggests that 768 people were killed by police in 2013, compared to the 784 people murdered by trains. If my math is correct, 784/768 is not five. Additionally, that site's statistics are only for may-december, so the actual number is probably around 50% higher.

[deleted]

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are going to sing that song: if somebody is going to kill 10 million people tomorrow is, necessarily, somebody with nuclear or biological weapons. As a non-American I would feel a lot safe if you just dismantle yours.

American has used nuclear weapons twice in history. Fearing American nukes is ridiculous and not based on any rational thought.

In my opinion, fearing nukes, in general, is pretty rational.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#128
post #69

You can also significantly adjust your odds of being killed by police by choosing behavior unlikely to attract lethal force. The core issue with terrorism is you have no such choice, the terrorist making the decision to kill people doing absolutely nothing to warrant lethal force. ETA: I didn't say "make your odds 0%", I said "significantly adjust". Sure you could be shot for no reason, and a few are, but nearly all…

> You can also significantly adjust your odds of being killed by police by choosing behavior unlikely to attract lethal force. Well this is the part that it's dispute, particularly regarding people of color.

People of color have the same ability to not conduct criminal activities or resist arrest or attack police officers as everyone else. Yet, why does a higher percentage choose to do so? Why is South Chicago less safe than the Appalachian per capita?

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#129

> You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist I hate to say this and defend those people but that statistical observation is due to the fact that security, intelligence and law enforcement officers are doing their job in foiling most of the terrorist plots and averting disasters.* However, if terrorists were given free rein, the casualties number on their side would much much high…

If that were true, we'd be seeing non bullshit terrorist convictions. I'm not a big fan of paying for snake oil.

Re: You're Eight Times More Likely to Be Killed by a Police Officer Than a Terrorist

#130
post #45

And you are five times more likely to be killed at a railroad crossing then by a police officer.[1] Headlines like these are obviously created for sensationalism , and while you will be hard pressed to find someone with a bigger animus towards the current USCJS then I, I think we should all be on the lookout for hyperbole, no matter what underlying meme it may be promoting. [1] http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol…

> Headlines like these are obviously created for sensationalism

It isn't. Depending on whose numbers you use, the statistic is either actually true or sufficiently close that disputing the difference is pedantry.

The reason the headline is shocking is that people expect there to be relatively few police shootings yet, if the GWoT rhetoric is to be believed, rather a serious problem with terrorism. The fact that the problem of police shootings is larger than the problem of terrorism is a strong, concise, true statement that somewhere along the lines we have our priorities inverted.

In particular, it implies that "fighting terrorism" with more and stronger law enforcement is highly counterproductive.

Post reply on HN