Another state trooper shot and killed
- Thread starter hedgehog
- Start date
Sad! One is too many, but rest assured there is no "War on police". Fewer cops have been killed this year than last. And way fewer than in previous decades etc. (both in total and especially per capita).
The media has invented this narrative.
It's pretty much never safer to be in law enforcement than it is today.
- Mar 19, 2006
- 38,601
- 529
- 113
- 75
you are one of the smartest people here so when you pass along info like this I want to believe it..
In this case please provide the source for this fact..
barring the moonshine and speak easy days along with mobsters shooting feds back in the day it is hard for me to imagine a more hostile time in this country except of course during the Civil Rights Movement when human behavior was maybe at it's all time worst.
being 65 years old next month and a reader of the daily news for the last 20 I can't recall such a hostile time
again...you are nothing but class on this forum in my eyes but I gotta read from at least a trusted source where ya get this from..
I look forward to the read.
Michael
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html (National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund website)
That website shows the number of LEOs who died on duty, per year. It doesn't show the total US population at the time, but if we lost 117 officers in 2014 and 108 in 1956 (I picked a random year with a count lower than 2014), it could still be argued that 2014 was safer for cops just because population has doubled since the 1950s.
--------
As for this year being a War on Police, I found this website: https://www.odmp.org/search/year
Shows 84 so far this year. So I guess we are on pace for about 110-120.
---------
Dug a bit more...
The same site from my first source also has some interesting info: http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/
This chart shows 2014 vs 2015 through today's date. Total police fatalities are up 8%, but fatalities by firearm are down 25%! Traffic-related fatalities are up 31%, which seems to account for the 8% rise.
This only looks at deaths, so I couldn't say whether or not non-lethal assaults have changed. I just did some casual web research, based on some articles I read, so I am totally willing to entertain my sources or numbers being wrong, if shown different evidence!
Hope this helps.
EDIT: You seem to be right on about Prohibition and Civil Rights era being the most dangerous times!
I am of the mind that that RIGHT NOW is the best time in human history to be alive. Maybe it is too optimistic of a viewpoint with all the challenges we face, but humans worldwide live longer, have fewer wars (believe it or not), and generally just lead healthier lives than in any time in the past. The problem is we now have access to every piece of bad news that occurs worldwide. If it bleeds, it leads.
I THINK THE CORRECT STAT TO LOOK AT IS "HOW MANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS HAVE BEEN ASSASSINATED?" .:0008 JUST SAYIN'
My heart goes out to the family of the murdered officer. My wife showed me some articles last week stating that the war on police is something conjured up by the media or some other agenda. I was suprised to see the stats during the civil rights era which was during my teens. Thanks for articles.
- Mar 19, 2006
- 38,601
- 529
- 113
- 75
I THINK THE "BLACK LIVE MATTERS " CREW HAD A MEMBER QUOTING HOW MANY BLACKS ARE KILLED BY POLICEMAN ON AN AVERAGE WEEK WITH NO REGARD AS TO HOW THEY WERE KILLED....IF IT'S A SHOOT OUT, IT'S MORE OF A MATTER OF BETTER SHOTS OR WEAPONS.........STATS ARE FUNNY THINGS. ONE NEEDS TO ONLY REALIZE MOST TEAMS ARE MORE SUCCESSFUL ON 4TH DOWNS THAN 3RD DOWNS. YOU LEAVE OUT HOW MANY YARDS ARE NEEDED AND IT LOOKS LIKE EVERYONE SHOULD GO FOR IT ON 4TH. JUST MY OPINION. I COULD BE WRONG. :shrug:
I BELIEVE THERE IS A QUOTE "LIES, DAMN LIES, AND STATISTICS"
I BELIEVE THERE IS A QUOTE "LIES, DAMN LIES, AND STATISTICS"
Totally agree!! However what else have do have except statistics?
Gut feeling?
I trust my gut feeling and personal anecdotes on small stuff that I can observe in my life.
"Traffic is getting worse on the street I live" Well I can kinda sorta see that with my own eyes and judge for myself over time. Don't NEED any statistics for that (but I wouldn't turn down that info either!).
But if someone then said "traffic is getting worse everywhere? I might be tempted to agree because heck I just noticed heavy traffic on my street AND I see on the news traffic jams being reported all the damn time. But, personally, I still can?t really be sure until I see some cold hard data that shows traffic is getting worse. The amount of cars on the road, the amount of people in each community, the amount of gas being used. Etc etc.
For a country as HUGE as the USA, outside statistics I don't know how else to determine whether something is happening or not.
I sure as hell don't trust anyone in the media to direct me to the most accurate/useful information.
UNFORTUNATELY YOU ARE RIGHT........WHO HAS THE TIME TO DO ALL THE RESEARCH AND EVEN THEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHO TO BELIEVE.....YOU SEE THE "IDIOTS" ON EVERY "PEOPLE ON THE STREET" INTERVIEWS NOT KNOWING WHO THE VP IS, AND THEN WE ARE SUPPOSE TO BELIEVE POLLS.....THE NEW "WAR" STAT IN BASEBALL IS AN EXAMPLE HOW CONFUSING AND USELESS STATS CAN BE.
Now would probably be the wrong time to tell you I love the new stats in baseball. :facepalm::mj07::mj07:
NO PROBLEM. JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S A "GOOD LUCK" CHARM TYPE STAT.......NOT CALCULATED IN "WAR", BUT THE PIRATES HAVE A FAR SUPERIOR RECORD WHEN RODRIGUEZ FINISHES GAMES THAN WHEN ALVAREZ DOES. DOES THAT MEAN NO MATTER WHAT THE SCORE, ALVAREZ SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT IN THE 7TH INNING SO THE PIRATES HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF WINNING?....I'M FINE WITH THE OTHER STATS BUT THE "WAR" HAS TOO MANY OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED....JUST MY OPINION
- Apr 15, 2001
- 4,135
- 63
- 0
Most here
Most here
Would laugh at me for saying this. But can you explain this again?
Pretend I am only 20, 25 even :0008
Most here
Would laugh at me for saying this. But can you explain this again?
Pretend I am only 20, 25 even :0008
My interpretation of WAR is different. My understanding is that WAR is a handy guideline as to how many extra wins a player provides over any average freely available talent.
So if the typical average shortstop is X. How much *better* than X is Brandon Crawford, or some other all star shortstop. A 2.1 WAR suggests that everything that players does over the course of the year is likely to result in 2.1 more wins than the average replacement. It is an attempt at giving a player a rolled up, season long, value.
The formula to determine a players WAR is super complex, involving dozens of other statistics, some of which are hotly contesting, even within the 'advanced-stats' community. It's super interesting.
It does *not* suggest a course of action in making 'in-game' decisions. So it would never/should never be used to make a decision who pitches a certain inning in one particular game.
- Apr 15, 2001
- 4,135
- 63
- 0
Now this I understand
Now this I understand
Wish he could have made it this easy.
Thank you :0008
Now this I understand
Wish he could have made it this easy.
Thank you :0008
- Apr 15, 2001
- 4,135
- 63
- 0
