The most current loss of my faith in humanity

[shadykid]

It's interesting how you decide to pick the outlier to support your claim. Just two years before that and the difference between southern and non-southern support is .5%, so obviously the real difference is not nearly as high as 12%. The average of the difference in opinion from 2000 to 2006 is roughly 6% (the same as just 2004+2006), and it only goes lower the more previous years you include. The trend shows southern support slowly rising over the others, but it's still not substantial. This is in line with Gallup's poll that only 4% (or less) more southerners support capital punishment. The study of white vs black opinion is irrelevant to your original claim.

Now tell me, do you consider 4-6% higher opinion of capital punishment enough to berate specifically southerners for their opinion of it and not the rest of the United States? Because if you do, then I'm just going to laugh at all of your future posts in this thread.

don't worry, there are plenty of other things to berate southerners for

[Constable Reggie]

Maybe so, but capital punishment support is not one of them.

[Tangerine]

Alright then, perhaps the crimes I read/heard about just happened to be committed by blacks most of the time. My apologies there.

The majority of common crime is committed by desperate poor people (on the flip side, the "biggest" crimes are committed by people with money), and race has nothing to do with it.

My advice is to look into what you're being told before you buy into it. Don't even take my word for it, go and look into it yourself. You'll probably learn a few different things along the way and be able to legitimately participate in discussions you probably couldn't have previously.

Although this isn't the thread for those discussions, lol.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Tangerine

[Phoenix Wright]

Why the hell did this become a two-page discussion about racism, and another two-page discussion about the South? The South's opinions on the death penalty have absolutely nothing to do with the woman's emotional outburst.

Anyway, I'm unsure of my feelings with this case. This could be as black and white as it seems, or there could be some added complexities that have yet come to light (I really, really want there to be). Either way, I don't think either of them should be executed for this horrific crime. The seventeen year-old should be tried as an adult, and be placed into prison for the amount of time the jury sees fit. The fourteen year-old is in a much more delicate situation. I think that, given the behavior of the seventeen year-old, it is likely that the child was dragged into something he wanted no part of, or attempted to prove himself to the guy. Given that angle, I think leniency on the boy is justified (basically any non-prison solutions if he were being tried as an adult). However, if it turns out that both of them are simply cold-hearted murderers, then I think a juvenile sentence, followed by a prison sentence once he comes of age is appropriate.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Phoenix Wright

[Chiki]

It's interesting how you decide to pick the outlier to support your claim. Just two years before that and the difference between southern and non-southern support is .5%, so obviously the real difference is not nearly as high as 12%. The average of the difference in opinion from 2000 to 2006 is roughly 6% (the same as just 2004+2006), and it only goes lower the more previous years you include. The trend shows southern support slowly rising over the others, but it's still not substantial. This is in line with Gallup's poll that only 4% (or less) more southerners support capital punishment. The study of white vs black opinion is irrelevant to your original claim.

Now tell me, do you consider 4-6% higher opinion of capital punishment enough to berate specifically southerners for their opinion of it and not the rest of the United States? Because if you do, then I'm just going to laugh at all of your future posts in this thread.

We don't really think of Hispanics or Asians when we talk about Southeners. Pretty sure we're talking about the people who lived in and established themselves in the South: the white people. It's hard to call people of other races "Southeners."

And I'd definitely consider 6% significant enough, considering the fact that the non-South includes the Midwest. The reason I even brought the South up was because of the context this murder took in, and argued that most people where she live have the same opinion as her.

Here's a study which pretty much undeniably proves me right:

http://www.gallup.co...ort-stable.aspx

Compared to the East, which is where I live, the South has a 68% support and 25% opposition rate. The East has a 54% and a 40% opposition rate. The Midwest is almost as bad as the South, which I have no problem admitting, and there's almost a 10% difference between the West and the South. The question for this study was simply if one supported the death penalty. This study took place in 2013.

You're missing the point... you said that the woman's words would lead to the shooter "unfairly dying." All we need are jurors who haven't heard her say that to eliminate the bias you're griping so much about. That's an entirely reasonable assumption.

1) Why do you think there are going to be prosecutors who think the same way I do? They may not decide to look for people who didn't hear that specifically. The prosecutors aren't me.

2) It showed her on the news saying that multiple times. It's a bit unlikely.

...right, so you don't know what the voir dire process is for. That's actually understandable, a lot of people don't, but they're not just asking questions for their own sake, they're asking questions specifically related to the jurors' pretrial understanding of the case specifically to eliminate the bias you're griping about.

Lol! http://dictionary.la...x?selected=2229

voir dire

(vwahr [with a near-silent "r"] deer) n. from French "to see to speak," the questioning of prospective jurors by a judge and attorneys in court.

I didn't say that. You're making a general statement about the voir dire process without accounting for the specific relevant application, namely "Can it screen out people who heard the woman say she wanted the shooter dead"? The answer is pretty clearly "yes," so the bias you're talking about isn't a problem.

You said that when you claimed that the voir dire process does work, which is why I even put the Duke study there in the first place because I anticipated that you were going to say it.

As I said earlier, the judges/prosecutors would not look for that exact "quality." Why should it come to their mind? The burden of proof is on you. All I am claiming is that the judge/prosecutors would attempt to look for less biased jury members and fail, by showing studies about how unreliable voir dire is. Your claim is far stronger: you claim that it can screen out people who don't have one very specific quality. Yet you have to prove that claim before I can take it seriously.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Olwen

[Constable Reggie]

We don't really think of Hispanics or Asians when we talk about Southeners. Pretty sure we're talking about the people who lived in and established themselves in the South: the white people. It's hard to call people of other races "Southeners."

This is quite literally the stupidest bullshit based on generalization that I've ever read in this entire forum. You're seriously so lazy that you can't bother to look up simple fucking statistics?

And again, you're cherry picking statistics to try and substantiate your claim. 2013 poll shows a 14% difference, yet just 2 years before that, the difference was only 4%. Keep cherry picking your statistics, but the real average will always likely be below 10%. Since apparently you think the South is made of almost all white stereotypical plantation owners (you may as well say that you think they all carry confederate flags what with all your fucking generalization), I seriously can't take the rest of your posts seriously anymore.

Jesus fucking christ not only do you generalize based on region, you're now doing it based on race too.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Chiki]

This is quite literally the stupidest bullshit based on generalization that I've ever heard in this entire forum. You're seriously so lazy that you can't bother to look up simple fucking statistics?

And again, you're cherry picking statistics to try and substantiate your claim. 2013 poll shows a 14% difference, yet just 2 years before that, the difference was only 4%. Keep cherry picking your statistics, but the real average will always likely be below 10%. Since apparently you think the South is made of almost all white southerners (you may as well say that you think they all carry confederate flags what with all your fucking generalization), I seriously can't take the rest of your posts seriously anymore.

You know, the Census doesn't dictate what I take Southerner to mean. What I mean by it is the people who have lived there for a significant amount of time.

And a study in 2013 is far more valid in this context. You can keep denying it all you like but it's truth lol. If the another study concludes negligible differences in the future, then I will retract y statements for that particular timeframe.

And that study wasn't even the same lol. It was asking about murder, not general support.You can say "but all death penalty cases are murder" but that isn't true. The way people are asked questions greatly influences their decision making skills..

Edited March 27, 2013 by Olwen

[Constable Reggie]

You should actually read some info about the South, and stop your generalization bullshit that you're pulling out of your ass. You originally said that all southerners have worse moral values than any other region, and now you're saying that it's valid because apparently most southerners are white? What the hell is wrong with you? When you make a statement that you're trying to pass off as fact, you don't generalize fucking everything around that claim. Your original claim that southerners in general have corrupt moral values is shot out the window after you just admitted that you believe Southerners are primarily white.

I could ask a sample survey the question "Recently there's been several hundred remorseless baby rapers who's gotten off the hook and are out free because the jury couldn't get a death sentence. Do you support death penalties?", and I sure as hell would bet that the average opinion will be much higher support than the simple poll question used in every fucking poll about the death penalty. Where are your so called polls that apparently survey based on general support for the death sentence, instead of just for murders and higher up? They don't exist, because they're the same thing. Stop trying to use these invisible polls as justification that southerners apparently support the death sentence [in general, apparently] much more than any other region does.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Chiki]

What I meant by Southerner from the very beginning are the people who lived in the South for a long time. Which means whites and blacks. So yes, that is very significant to my argument.

When did I say it was valid because most Southerners are white?

They aren't the same thing lol. Did you even read the previous post about the study in which people were asked about the death penalty in a racially charged manner? I've already conclusively proven this. You can ignore it if you choose, but all surveyors and scientists agree that it matters.

Anyway, this pretty much concludes the debate. I've already proven my argument. You aren't arguing against the validity of the study anymore, and it conclusively proves that I was right.

[eclipse]

What I meant by Southerner from the very beginning are the people who lived in the South for a long time. Which means whites and blacks. So yes, that is very significant to my argument.

When did I say it was valid because most Southerners are white?

They aren't the same thing lol. Did you even read the previous post about the study in which people were asked about the death penalty in a racially charged manner? I've already conclusively proven this. You can ignore it if you choose, but all surveyors and scientists agree that it matters.

Anyway, this pretty much concludes the debate. I've already proven my argument. You aren't arguing against the validity of the study anymore, and it conclusively proves that I was right.

First, multiple posts taken care of. Dunno what caused that.

SECOND, just because someone stops responding to you doesn't mean that you've "won". All you've proven is that you're incapable of being reasoned with, which isn't something to brag about. Furthermore, your own views did more to hinder you than anything I could've possibly said, which is why I kept silent.

[Constable Reggie]

Oh, so it's not just whites anymore,

Pretty sure we're talking about the people who lived in and established themselves in the South: the white people. It's hard to call people of other races "Southeners."

It's whites and blacks now.

By the way, this isn't the only time you've laughably changed your argument in this thread.

hey aren't the same thing lol. Did you even read the previous post about the study in which people were asked about the death penalty in a racially charged manner?

Of course, and it does nothing to prove that southerners specifically are somehow answering differently to a slightly differently formed question, it proves that all whites/blacks answer differently to a slightly differently formed question. You've yet to show a poll that asks for general support (by the way, this is not different than "for a murder case" in reality), and somehow expect me to believe that racially charging said question somehow proves your point.

Anyway, this pretty much concludes the debate. I've already proven my argument. You aren't arguing against the validity of the study anymore, and it conclusively proves that I was right.

So you admit that 4-9% higher opinion for support of the death penalty warrants said specific group to be criticized for their moral values. As I've promised,

hahahahahaha

All men have corrupt moral values

All whites have corrupt moral values

All republicans have corrupt moral values

All 65+ year olds have corrupt moral values

Therefore, roughly 90% of all Americans ever have corrupt moral values.

The proof is in the statistics. Am I doing it right?

Edited March 27, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Chiki]

First, multiple posts taken care of. Dunno what caused that.

SECOND, just because someone stops responding to you doesn't mean that you've "won". All you've proven is that you're incapable of being reasoned with, which isn't something to brag about. Furthermore, your own views did more to hinder you than anything I could've possibly said, which is why I kept silent.

This is what it takes for me to win an argument;

1) Have I proven that there is a significant change in morality depending upon regional changes? Yes.

2) Have I addressed my opponent's worry that the way a question is asked doesn't change anything? I have shown evidence to the contrary. So yes, I was right.

Another ad hominem. How am I incapable of being reasoned with? Show me that my studies are wrong, or at least I interpreted them the wrong way. There is a significant difference.

And how do my own views hinder what I say? Just because you find something morally objectionable doesn't mean I'm wrong. You might find it objectionable that blacks are superior to whites in some ways but that doesn't change the truth of it.

Let me see some reasoning in your nex post rather than comments about myself and my views.

Oh, so it's not just whites anymore,

It's whites and blacks now.

By the way, this isn't the only time you've laughably changed your argument in this thread.

Of course, and it does nothing to prove that southerners specifically are somehow answering differently to a slightly differently formed question, it proves that all whites/blacks answer differently to a slightly differently formed question.

So you admit that 4-9% higher opinion for support of the death penalty warrants said specific group to be criticized for their moral values. As I've promised,

hahahahahaha

Unfortunately I only had that study to work with, which only included white people. I would have preferred another study, but it was the best I could find. I admit I had issues with finding the right study till the Gallup one.

I never used that argument to prove that answers can change based on questions. Another strawman. Did you not see the study about how greatly racially charged questions can change answers? It's a different study.

Yes, I absolutely find a 4-9% change significant, especially when it's 14% compared to where I live. You know, my personal opinion is tha it's significant and that has no objective basis. So you can't really prove that it's insignificant.

[eclipse]

This is what it takes for me to win an argument;

1) Have I proven that there is a significant change in morality depending upon regional changes? Yes.

2) Have I addressed my opponent's worry that the way a question is asked doesn't change anything? I have shown evidence to the contrary. So yes, I was right.

Another ad hominem. How am I incapable of being reasoned with? Show me that my studies are wrong, or at least I interpreted them the wrong way. There is a significant difference.

And how do my own views hinder what I say? Just because you find something morally objectionable doesn't mean I'm wrong. You might find it objectionable that blacks are superior to whites in some ways but that doesn't change the truth of it.

Let me see some reasoning in your nex post rather than comments about myself and my views.

Unfortunately I only had that study to work with, which only included white people. I would have preferred another study, but it was the best I could find. I admit I had issues with finding the right study till the Gallup one.

I never used that argument to prove that answers can change based on questions. Another strawman. Did you not see the study about how greatly racially charged questions can change answers? It's a different study.

Yes, I absolutely find a 4-9% change significant, especially when it's 14% compared to where I live. You know, my personal opinion is tha it's significant and that has no objective basis. So you can't really prove that it's insignificant.

I don't need to. You're asserting that she means it because she is from the South. You've become so lost in proving your views (which, BTW, completely ignores the fact that many human qualities jump over things like race/religion/gender/other stuff we like to classify people as) that you've forgotten why you got into the argument in the first place. As you are not the woman in question, you are in no position to say whether or not she means it because she's from the South, or because she's under emotional stress. In other words, you lost the argument before you even provided statistics, because it's not something that can be proven in such a manner.

[Chiki]

I don't need to. You're asserting that she means it because she is from the South. You've become so lost in proving your views (which, BTW, completely ignores the fact that many human qualities jump over things like race/religion/gender/other stuff we like to classify people as) that you've forgotten why you got into the argument in the first place. As you are not the woman in question, you are in no position to say whether or not she means it because she's from the South, or because she's under emotional stress. In other words, you lost the argument before you even provided statistics, because it's not something that can be proven in such a manner.

Noo. I said I think it's more likely. I used the words probability and likely in that post.

That way, my argument actually becomes perfectly valid.

If you said America instead of South, then I'd agree with that statement but less so.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Olwen

[Constable Reggie]

I admit I had issues with finding the right study till the Gallup one.

Oh man, the cherry picking won't stop. You ever stop to think that the sampling error for said polls is +/- four percent? The real difference could be 6% for all we know. Why don't you try looking at previous polls and look at the trend instead of picking outliers?

I never used that argument to prove that answers can change based on questions. Another strawman. Did you not see the study about how greatly racially charged questions can change answers? It's a different study.

You've never shown that said racially charged answers can change specifically regional opinions, only that it can change all opinions. This therefore makes the second poll entirely irrelevant to your original claim, because you can't prove for shit that the difference for "Many people who are innocent are killed by execution, do you support the death penalty" will be a significantly different percentage of opinion when comparing regions as compared to simply "do you support the death penalty for murder cases". The difference between 34 to 40 and 54 to 60 is still the same.

Yes, I absolutely find a 4-9% change significant, especially when it's 14% compared to where I live. You know, my personal opinion is tha it's significant and that has no objective basis. So you can't really prove that it's insignificant.

Alrighty, so you completely agree with this claim:

All men have corrupt moral values

All whites have corrupt moral values

All republicans have corrupt moral values

All 65+ year olds have corrupt moral values

*addendum* All high school-only graduates have corrupt moral values

Therefore, roughly 90% of all Americans ever have corrupt moral values

[eclipse]

Noo. I said I think it's more likely. I used the words probability and likely in that post.

That way, my argument actually becomes perfectly valid.

If you said America instead of South, then I'd agree with that statement but less so.

REFRESHER TIME.

Apparently the mother said "I just hope, you know, that the shooter dies. I mean, I had to watch my baby die and I want him to die. A life for a life."

Southerners really have corrupt moral values. She's no better than the shooter.

I agree that it's acceptable to wish for his death, but I find it absolutely repulsive to campaign for it in the manner this woman is doing. It's one thing to want it and another thing to go around saying you want him dead and try to get it. It's sickening.

Of course she means it. Doesn't "a life for a life" sound familiar to you? It's the same kind of reasoning all Southerners have.

By that logic we should be raping rapists.

. . .I'm not seeing a "likely" in the segment I was involved with.

[Constable Reggie]

Wow, I can definitely see why PresidentEden got frustrated in this thread. You can't stop changing what you thought you said, can you?

Edited March 27, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Chiki]

REFRESHER TIME.

. . .I'm not seeing a "likely" in the segment I was involved with.

...I'm sorry, but I'm just appalled at this horrible strawman. Even Eden quoted the post I was talking about. And that post was addressed to you!

http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=38964&view=findpost&p=2331869

Because that's what most people in the South think, even when their children haven't been shot in the face. The probability that she's dead serious is more likely than the probability that she'll regret saying those things.

Oh man, the cherry picking won't stop. You ever stop to think that the sampling error for said polls is +/- four percent? The real difference could be 6% for all we know. Why don't you try looking at previous polls and look at the trend instead of picking outliers?

You've never shown that said racially charged answers can change specifically regional opinions, only that it can change all opinions. This therefore makes the second poll entirely irrelevant to your original claim, because you can't prove for shit that the difference for "Many people who are innocent are killed by execution, do you support the death penalty" will be a significantly different percentage of opinion when comparing regions as compared to simply "do you support the death penalty for murder cases". The difference between 34 to 40 and 54 to 60 is still the same.

Alrighty, so you completely agree with this claim:

Gallup sure agrees Southerners are more likely to support the death penalty. I think it's significant: it's your personal opinion if you don't, and I can do little to change that.

Wtf? If it can change all opinions why can't it change regional opinions? The burden of proof is on you.

I do agree with that claim, but replace all with most. I do think the vast majority of people have horrible values.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Olwen

[eclipse]

...I'm sorry, but I'm just appalled at this horrible strawman. Even Eden quoted the post I was talking about. And that post was addressed to you!

http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=38964&view=findpost&p=2331869

I did not know that digging up stuff that you said was a strawman. I'll keep that in mind, because it's hilarious.

Whether or not you're right can only be told with time. Trying to determine whether or not she's serious RIGHT NOW is impossible, because you are not that woman. Using data to back up this claim is equally absurd, because your polls indicate that not everyone in the South agrees on everything. I don't know where on the spectrum this woman falls, and neither do you. Maybe she was in that percentage that was against the death penalty, maybe she wasn't. Since we do not know this answer, making any sort of assertion on whether or not she means that quote is meaningless. All this did was show your views of people, which I think will hurt you in the long run. I don't care if you ignore EVERYTHING else I've said. Please look at the people of the South as people; they have their own individual likes, dislikes, morals, etc. Their commonality is where they live, and that's it. There's too many people to classify as anything, and by shoveling them all under some label or other, it denies them the chance to be people. Even if I don't agree with your views, you are more than that; you're a person. They are people, too.

[Constable Reggie]

2) Have I addressed my opponent's worry that the way a question is asked doesn't change anything? I have shown evidence to the contrary. So yes, I was right.

This, however, does not substantiate your argument in any way whatsoever. You showed that changing the wording of a question can impact poll percentages, you didn't show in any way at all that said changing of wording can somehow possibly make the gap between Southerners and every other region larger, just that it's possible. Possibility doesn't equal probability.

And again, the difference between 34 to 40 and 54 to 60 is still 6%.

Wtf? If it can change all opinions why can't it change regional opinions? The burden of proof is on you.

WHAT

WHAT

WHAT

You're the one trying to use this entirely irrelevant statistic to prove that it can widen specifically the regional opinion gap

I do agree with that claim, but replace all with most. I do think the vast majority of people have horrible values.

I'm reluctant to change the assertion so wishy washingly like you commonly do.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Chiki]

I did not know that digging up stuff that you said was a strawman. I'll keep that in mind, because it's hilarious.

Whether or not you're right can only be told with time. Trying to determine whether or not she's serious RIGHT NOW is impossible, because you are not that woman. Using data to back up this claim is equally absurd, because your polls indicate that not everyone in the South agrees on everything. I don't know where on the spectrum this woman falls, and neither do you. Maybe she was in that percentage that was against the death penalty, maybe she wasn't. Since we do not know this answer, making any sort of assertion on whether or not she means that quote is meaningless. All this did was show your views of people, which I think will hurt you in the long run. I don't care if you ignore EVERYTHING else I've said. Please look at the people of the South as people; they have their own individual likes, dislikes, morals, etc. Their commonality is where they live, and that's it. There's too many people to classify as anything, and by shoveling them all under some label or other, it denies them the chance to be people. Even if I don't agree with your views, you are more than that; you're a person. They are people, too.

I never said I know what spectrum she falls in. She's simply more likely to never regret it. That's what probability is.

Eclipse, I don't know where you find issue. I never said I know for certain. I could be wrong. My claim is that it's more likely. After all, she is just another person in the South.

[eclipse]

I never said I know what spectrum she falls in. She's simply more likely to never regret it. That's what probability is.

Eclipse, I don't know where you find issue. I never said I know for certain. I could be wrong. My claim is that it's more likely. After all, she is just another person in the South.

The assumption that she won't because she's from the South. Maybe she won't regret it, because she never gets over the loss of her baby. Maybe she won't regret it because deep down inside, she hates black teens. Maybe she won't regret it because she'll kill herself before she fully gets over the death of her baby. Maybe she won't regret it because she'll be kidnapped by aliens, who erase her memory. There's a lot of reasons why she might/might not regret it, and assuming that it's because she's from the South tells me that you're looking at an entire region as a label, not a group of individuals.

[Chiki]

The assumption that she won't because she's from the South. Maybe she won't regret it, because she never gets over the loss of her baby. Maybe she won't regret it because deep down inside, she hates black teens. Maybe she won't regret it because she'll kill herself before she fully gets over the death of her baby. Maybe she won't regret it because she'll be kidnapped by aliens, who erase her memory. There's a lot of reasons why she might/might not regret it, and assuming that it's because she's from the South tells me that you're looking at an entire region as a label, not a group of individuals.

I agree with you: it's a question of maybe.

Though maybe doesn't necessarily have to be 50/50. We can both agree on that.

She is more likely to be one of the 68% that do support the death penalty. This is just a mathematical claim,; you can't really deny it. If I lived in a village with 4 people, and 3/4 ate poop, and if someone randomly asked the question whether I ate poop, then it just is more likely that I'm one of the 3/4.

I never said I know for certain, did I?

[eclipse]

I agree with you: it's a question of maybe.

Though maybe doesn't necessarily have to be 50/50. We can both agree on that.

She is more likely to be one of the 68% that do support the death penalty. This is just a mathematical claim,; you can't really deny it. If I lived in a village with 4 people, and 3/4 ate poop, and if someone randomly asked the question whether I ate poop, then it just is more likely that I'm one of the 3/4.

I never said I know for certain, did I?

Good; neither of know whether or not she means it. Why are you pushing the point that she means it because she's from the South?

[Constable Reggie]

Wtf? If it can change all opinions why can't it change regional opinions? The burden of proof is on you.

I'd still like a response on this, because at this point I can't tell if you're being facetious or not.

She is more likely to be one of the 68% that do support the death penalty. This is just a mathematical claim,; you can't really deny it. If I lived in a village with 4 people, and 3/4 ate poop, and if someone randomly asked the question whether I ate poop, then it just is more likely that I'm one of the 3/4.

If that's the case, then everyone in the United States is more likely to support the death penalty than not (this means all of us, and you, too), because everywhere support for it's over 50%.This is just a mathematical claim,; you can't really deny it.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Constable Reggie