Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (828112)	1/7/2015 2:29:37 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575804

Don't be ridiculous. Pipeline is everywhere. Nobody gives a damn.

To: tejek who wrote (828112)	1/7/2015 10:44:33 AM
From: locogringo	Respond to of 1575804

The real racial bias: Cops more willing to shoot whites than blacks, research finds‘Counter-bias’ rooted in concerns over social and legal consequences By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Monday, January 5, 2015 It’s widely assumed that white police officers are more likely to shoot black suspects as a result of racial bias, but recent research suggests the opposite is true. An innovative study published in the Journal of Experimental Criminology found that participants in realistic simulations felt more threatened by black suspects yet took longer to pull the trigger on black men than on white or Hispanic men. “This behavioral ‘counter-bias’ might be rooted in people’s concerns about the social and legal consequences of shooting a member of a historically oppressed racial or ethnic group,” said the paper, which went practically unnoticed when it was published online on May 22, but took on new significance in the wake of a series of high-profile police-involved shootings involving black victims over the summer. PHOTOS: Awesome rifles: The best and the baddest The results back up what one of the researchers, University of Missouri-St. Louis professor David Klinger, has found after independently interviewing more than 300 police officers: While they don’t want to shoot anybody, they really don’t want to shoot black suspects. “Across these 300 interviews, I have multiple officers telling me that they didn’t shoot only because the suspect was black or the suspect was a woman, or something that would not be consistent with this narrative of cops out there running and gunning,” said Mr. Klinger, a former cop and author of “Into the Kill Zone: A Cop’s Eye View of Deadly Force” (2006). “When it comes to the issue of race, I’ve never had a single officer tell me, ‘I didn’t shoot a guy because he was white.’ I’ve had multiple officers tell me, ‘I didn’t shoot a guy because he was black,’ ” Mr. Klinger said. “And this is 10, even 20 years ago. Officers are alert to the fact that if they shoot a black individual, the odds of social outcry are far greater than if they shoot a white individual.” PHOTOS: Hand cannons: The world's most powerful handguns In fact, he said, officers involved in shootings have told him that they were actually relieved that the person they shot was white, not black. “The second things is, I’ve had multiple officers tell me they were worried in the wake of a shooting because they shot a black person, and I’ve had multiple officers tell me that they were glad that the person they shot was white,” Mr. Klinger said. “Because then they knew they weren’t going to have to be subject to the racial harangue.” The interviews, which he conducted for a book he’s planning to finish this year, run directly counter to the prevailing view pushed by social justice groups, politicians and others: that shooting victims such as 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson were victims at least in part of racial discrimination against blacks among cops. “Police officers — at least the ones I interviewed — are very sensitive to the race issue, but not in the way this popular narrative is running, i.e., cops are out there trying to find young black men who don’t have guns so they can shoot them down like dogs in the street,” Mr. Klinger said. “That just isn’t anything I’ve found in any of the research that I’ve done.” The study, “Racial and ethnic bias in decisions to shoot seen through a stronger lens: experimental results from high-fidelity laboratory simulations,” was conducted by Mr. Klinger and Washington State University assistant research professor Lois James and criminal justice and criminology professor Bryan Vila. For their research, the authors used a pioneering WSU simulation involving full-size, high-definition video instead of photos and handguns modified to shoot infrared beams instead of the “shoot” buttons typically used in deadly-force studies. About a third of the scenarios in the study were “no shoot” situations in which perpetrators of different races held cellphones or wallets, while the rest were “shoot” situations in which suspects were armed with knives or guns. The study found that the 48 participants waited longest before firing on black suspects in “shoot” scenarios, even though the participants exhibited “stronger threat responses” when facing black suspects than with white or Hispanic suspects. Eighty-five percent of the participants were white, and none was a police officer. At the same time, a 2013 study led by Ms. James using active police, military and the general public found the same phenomenon: All three groups took longer to shoot black suspects, and participants were also more likely to fire on unarmed whites and Hispanics than blacks. Story Continues ?

To: tejek who wrote (828112)	1/7/2015 12:24:47 PM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Recommended By PKRBKR TideGlider Respond to of 1575804

The SF-LA hi speed train is an "unnecessary accessory that will go thru some very pristine and environmentally beautiful land." No need to thank me for the help.

To: tejek who wrote (828112)	1/7/2015 12:26:16 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575804

KXL will be built by private industry, the train no real people will ride will cost billions of tax dollars. No surprise which liberals like.

To: tejek who wrote (828112)	1/7/2015 12:46:43 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575804

So, what about that, teddy? I think Brumar makes a good point. Will the ugly assed train (a huge above-ground right-of-way) not be at least as unsightly as the XL Pipeline which goes through the middle of nowhere and is UNDERGROUND for most of its "traversal"? What about those who don't want an unsightly, noisy, train that has the potential for derailment and damaging entire neighborhoods along the way?