Current Events > CNN response on why teachers shouldn't be armed: they'll use guns more on blacks

(+) Yeah! (+)

and latinos. And there it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8R-7WVQNq0
---

Trump is coming for your guns
---

Arming teachers is a terrible idea

They kind of got it right lol but I don't know why they had to bring in race instead of just saying teachers will misread a situation and use a gun when they shouldn't...
---

I_Stay_Noided posted...

Arming teachers is a terrible idea

---

oh that definitely will happen.

black students are already given disproportionately heavy punishments, both in the criminal justice system and in schools. will be worse when you involve guns.

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

They kind of got it right lol but I don't know why they had to bring in race instead of just saying teachers will misread a situation and use a gun when they shouldn't...

Because the news gets more ratings when they pull this. Our tragedy is their payday.
---

but they arent wrong tbh

Some trained COPS panic when an unarmed black man is acting aggressively. You think every gun bearing teacher is gonna be appropriately judicious?
---

It's absolutely true; you're just upset that they didn't dance around the subject.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWun_uHWkAEDCNN.jpg:large

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/the-absurdity-of-armed-educators/553961/
---

I'm so glad I'm not in America. It's crazy.
---

Lol, cnn being racist as always and the delusionals eat it up.
---

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Lol, cnn being racist as always and the delusionals eat it up.

CNN has been race baiting for years now. Hell, Van Jones called the election results a "Whitelash"
---

Meanwhile, at MSNBC.

Lawrence: A bullet fired from an AR-15 travels 3x faster than one from a handgun.

And yet the president and the NRA think giving teachers guns will stop a school shooter

https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/967043934601072640

---

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Lol, cnn being racist as always and the delusionals eat it up.

How is that racist? It's true they get worse punishments.
---

Webmaster4531 posted...

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Lol, cnn being racist as always and the delusionals eat it up.

How is that racist? It's true they get worse punishments.

This time statistics are racist, apparently.
---

Antifar posted...

Webmaster4531 posted...

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Lol, cnn being racist as always and the delusionals eat it up.

How is that racist? It's true they get worse punishments.

This time statistics are racist, apparently.

Lol, not in the mood to tackle that, maybe here in a few hours when Im home and feeling good.

Doesnt this board say Admiral is racist when all he does is provide stats and facts.....chew on that until I feel like coming back.
---

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Doesnt this board say Admiral is racist when all he does is provide stats and facts

That is not all he does
---

I imagine the president has seen The Substitute a few times.
---

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Antifar posted...

Webmaster4531 posted...

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Lol, cnn being racist as always and the delusionals eat it up.

How is that racist? It's true they get worse punishments.

This time statistics are racist, apparently.

Lol, not in the mood to tackle that, maybe here in a few hours when Im home and feeling good.

Doesnt this board say Admiral is racist when all he does is provide stats and facts.....chew on that until I feel like coming back.

Well in this instance it's to save lives. Admirals motive to post facts is he thinks black people are inferior.
---

I would sooner believe the tabloids at the supermarket check out lane over CNN.
---

Do you guys have a disagreement with the claim being made, or just the outlet it came from?
---

I think the claim could be true - I'm not disputing that, but we need all facts to be accepted, too. CNN's reputation is shit, and I don't blame one for automatically assuming it's race baiting BS - because their recent history has shown this to be, at the very least, somewhat true. So yeah broken clock is right 2 times a day ;)

(plus I'm not crazy about arming teachers anywhoo)
---

Fam_Fam posted...

oh that definitely will happen.

black students are already given disproportionately heavy punishments, both in the criminal justice system and in schools. will be worse when you involve guns.

The teachers are intended to stop active shooters with their firearms. Do you think teachers are going start shooting black kids for lesser offenses than that? Do you think if a black kid got into a fist fight with another student that the teacher would open fire on them, whereas a white kid would need to start shooting people before the teacher would use their firearm?
---

Antifar posted...

Do you guys have a disagreement with the claim being made, or just the outlet it came from?

Do you really need someone to actively point out how stupid a claim it is?
---

I_Stay_Noided posted...

Arming teachers is a terrible idea

---

Yikes

Having different standards for different races of students is terrible

But that in no way shape or form suggests that equates to an increased likelihood of a teacher killing a child because of their race if they had guns

C'mon now...

And I think arming teachers is stupid

s0nicfan posted...

Antifar posted...

Do you guys have a disagreement with the claim being made, or just the outlet it came from?

Do you really need someone to actively point out how stupid a claim it is?

Given the statistics on racial disparities in the use of force, security, and punishment in schools...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/education/black-students-face-more-harsh-discipline-data-shows.html
http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/racial-disproportionality-in-school-discipline-implicit-bias-is-heavily-implicated/
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/09/when-school-feels-like-prison/499556/
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/01/25/black-students-more-likely-to-be-arrested.html
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-children-corporal-punishment_us_56a975e7e4b0d82286d4eb61

Yes, I do think the burden of proof is on those who claim such disparities wouldn't carry over to gun usage. Do you have reason to believe this beyond just dismissing the idea as self-evidently stupid?
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

oh that definitely will happen.

black students are already given disproportionately heavy punishments, both in the criminal justice system and in schools. will be worse when you involve guns.

The teachers are intended to stop active shooters with their firearms. Do you think teachers are going start shooting black kids for lesser offenses than that? Do you think if a black kid got into a fist fight with another student that the teacher would open fire on them, whereas a white kid would need to start shooting people before the teacher would use their firearm?

cops who have training shoot unarmed black men, so why not teachers who don't sign up for that kind of work?

Antifar posted...

Yes, I do think the burden of proof is on those who claim such disparities wouldn't carry over to gun usage. Do you have reason to believe this beyond just dismissing the idea as self-evidently stupid?

Because statistics referencing the use of punishment in schools have nothing to do with gun violence. It's not even a logical leap. There's no correlative evidence that your studies would connect in any way to the use of firearms outside of your personal intuition.

And if you want to cite studies, we can reference the fact that police statistically are more likely to rough up a black criminal versus a white one, but less likely to shoot and kill a black criminal versus a white one. If you want to extrapolate based on actual gun data, there's no reason to think teachers would be lighting up black kids. You're just fear mongering and race baiting.
---

Spooking posted...

This. CNN has gone off the deep end. We should really consider them a joke "news" organization much like The Onion at this point.

You understand that satire doesn't just mean saying things that aren't true right?
---

s0nicfan posted...

And if you want to cite studies, we can reference the fact that police statistically are more likely to rough up a black criminal versus a white one, but less likely to shoot and kill a black criminal versus a white one. If you want to extrapolate based on actual gun data, there's no reason to think teachers would be lighting up black kids. You're just fear mongering and race baiting.

is that true? I'm only aware of that one study which shows that police are less likely to shoot a black person, by Roland Frye, and it isn't even published yet

though this isn't something I look at very much
---

uugghhhhhhh they would

"Teachers might use the guns on unarmed students" is a legit concern. "Teachers might use the guns on more unarmed black students than white" is just dumb.
---

Webmaster4531 posted...

Well in this instance it's to save lives. Admirals motive to post facts is he thinks black people are inferior.

So basically it depends on whos saying the stats if its racist or not. Gotcha.
---

Balrog0 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

And if you want to cite studies, we can reference the fact that police statistically are more likely to rough up a black criminal versus a white one, but less likely to shoot and kill a black criminal versus a white one. If you want to extrapolate based on actual gun data, there's no reason to think teachers would be lighting up black kids. You're just fear mongering and race baiting.

is that true? I'm only aware of that one study which shows that police are less likely to shoot a black person, by Roland Frye, and it isn't even published yet

though this isn't something I look at very much

It was a Harvard study done a year or two back by a black professor looking to objectively prove police bias against black criminals in terms of gun violence. He was actually surprised by his results and considered not publishing them, but did so anyway in the name of truth.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html

In shootings in these 10 cities involving officers, officers were more likely to fire their weapons without having first been attacked when the suspects were white.

EDIT: Yea, we're talking about the same guy, though. I had just forgotten his name. Is there something wrong with his study?
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

"Teachers might use the guns on unarmed students" is a legit concern. "Teachers might use the guns on more unarmed black students than white" is just dumb.

I don't see how given

(a) Teachers possibly using guns on unarmed students is a valid concern.
(b) Studies that say that security officers in schools/discipline from teachers for the same "crime" has been disproportionately applied to black students.

that the thing you call dumb isn't a valid conclusion.
---

s0nicfan posted...

It was a Harvard study done a year or two back by a black professor looking to objectively prove police bias against black criminals in terms of gun violence. He was actually surprised by his results and considered not publishing them, but did so anyway in the name of truth.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html

In shootings in these 10 cities involving officers, officers were more likely to fire their weapons without having first been attacked when the suspects were white.

yeah I mean there was a lot of pushback from others when he released this study, though

http://datacolada.org/50
https://scholar.harvard.edu/jfeldman/blog/roland-fryer-wrong-there-racial-bias-shootings-police

I do see what you're saying, but one novel study being looked at by the NBER is not the same as something having been rigorously proven. It is something to consider, though.
---

Anteaterking posted...

(b) Studies that say that security officers in schools/discipline from teachers for the same "crime" has been disproportionately applied to black students.

Studies also show that when it comes to actually shooting people racial bias isn't a factor.
---

s0nicfan posted...

EDIT: Yea, we're talking about the same guy, though. I had just forgotten his name. Is there something wrong with his study?

I'm not smart enough to answer that per se, but the links that I shared have some issues with his methods. My personal feeling isn't that we should dismiss it but more that I don't think it proves much either
---

s0nicfan posted...

Studies also show that when it comes to actually shooting people racial bias isn't a factor.

You mean your one new study.
---

Balrog0 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

It was a Harvard study done a year or two back by a black professor looking to objectively prove police bias against black criminals in terms of gun violence. He was actually surprised by his results and considered not publishing them, but did so anyway in the name of truth.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html

In shootings in these 10 cities involving officers, officers were more likely to fire their weapons without having first been attacked when the suspects were white.

yeah I mean there was a lot of pushback from others when he released this study, though

http://datacolada.org/50
https://scholar.harvard.edu/jfeldman/blog/roland-fryer-wrong-there-racial-bias-shootings-police

I do see what you're saying, but one novel study being looked at by the NBER is not the same as something having been rigorously proven. It is something to consider, though.

I just think you (not literally you, but "people") can't use a study that shows that black kids are more likely to get detention and extrapolate to "black kids are more likely to get shot" because when it comes to the severity of punishment, there are WILDLY different conclusions in terms of racial disparity. The studies are valid, but the logical leap being made isn't.

EDIT: Also, while those counter-arguments are interesting, I can't help but feel that they're coming from a place of bias. The harvard link, for example, BEGINS with "There should be no argument that black and Latino people in Houston are much more likely to be shot by police compared to whites." That preconceived bias is going to taint any counter-argument.
---

Anteaterking posted...

EndOfDiscOne posted...

"Teachers might use the guns on unarmed students" is a legit concern. "Teachers might use the guns on more unarmed black students than white" is just dumb.

I don't see how given

(a) Teachers possibly using guns on unarmed students is a valid concern.
(b) Studies that say that security officers in schools/discipline from teachers for the same "crime" has been disproportionately applied to black students.

that the thing you call dumb isn't a valid conclusion.

They shouldn't using be guns on unarmed student, period. It doesn't matter if the student is black or white.

Would you rather teachers shot 5 white students and 10 black students, or 10 white students and 10 black students?
---

Anteaterking posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Studies also show that when it comes to actually shooting people racial bias isn't a factor.

You mean your one new study.

Oh sorry, I didn't realize that a Harvard study done by a black professor to try and prove racial bias that turned out as unexpected should be tossed out because it doesn't fit your narrative.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Oh sorry, I didn't realize that a Harvard study done by a black professor to try and prove racial bias that turned out as unexpected should be tossed out because it doesn't fit your narrative.

I'm not tossing it out. I just think you're misleadingly representing it as some sort of academic consensus, instead of properly putting it in the context of other studies.
---

Anteaterking posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Oh sorry, I didn't realize that a Harvard study done by a black professor to try and prove racial bias that turned out as unexpected should be tossed out because it doesn't fit your narrative.

I'm not tossing it out. I just think you're misleadingly representing it as some sort of academic consensus, instead of properly putting it in the context of other studies.

And YOU aren't properly putting those other studies in context of this one. If you're looking at the whole picture, there's nothing even close to enough evidence to conclude that teachers are more likely to shoot black students. Again: there's NO REASON to think that a study on minor punishments translates to murder rates.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Fam_Fam posted...

oh that definitely will happen.

black students are already given disproportionately heavy punishments, both in the criminal justice system and in schools. will be worse when you involve guns.

The teachers are intended to stop active shooters with their firearms. Do you think teachers are going start shooting black kids for lesser offenses than that? Do you think if a black kid got into a fist fight with another student that the teacher would open fire on them, whereas a white kid would need to start shooting people before the teacher would use their firearm?

if a student attacks a teacher and he /she has a gun
yep they will use it to protect themselves
---

s0nicfan posted...

And YOU aren't properly putting those other studies in context of this one. If you're looking at the whole picture, there's nothing even close to enough evidence to conclude that teachers are more likely to shoot black students. Again: there's NO REASON to think that a study on minor punishments translates to murder rates.

Just looking at the methodology of the studies Antifar posted vs Fryer's, the first translate over more effectively to the type of situations we are talking about.

You seem to be trying to "disprove" the allegations by interpreting Fryer's study as claiming that police officers are less likely to shoot black people than white people. But what he claimed to have shown is that in duplicate circumstances less blacks were shot than whites. However, we're talking about adding guns to an environment which puts black students in these circumstances more often. E.g. If a security officer shoots a student 1% of the time they are called regardless of race, but security officers are called twice as often on blacks than whites for the same incident, then that leads to black students being shot twice as often.

Fryer's study looks at that and says "I guess race doesn't make a difference", because he's starting the equation at the point where the officer is called, not at the point of the inciting event.
---