http://henrycountyreport.com/blog/2015/12/01/leaked-documents-reveal-dothan-police-department-planted-drugs-on-young-black-men-for-years-district-attorney-doug-valeska-complicit
>The group of officers requested they be granted anonymity, and shared hundreds of files from the Internal Affairs Division. They reveal a pattern of criminal behavior from within the highest levels of the Dothan Police Department and the district attorney’s office in the 20th Judicial District of Alabama. Multiple current and former officers have agreed to testify if United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch appoints a special prosecutor from outside the state of Alabama, or before a Congressional hearing. The officers believe that there are currently nearly a thousand wrongful convictions resulting in felonies from the 20th Judicial District that are tied to planted drugs and weapons and question whether a system that allows this can be allowed to continue to operate.
>>4584
But remember, BLM is just whining about a non-existent problem. Black people just commit more crimes, that's the only factor at play here.
>still can't post images to an imageboard
Fine. Here's a link:
https://veuwer.com/i/3fd5.png
Shows some statistics on race in the justice system. Things like blacks receiving longer sentences for the same crimes, or being more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession despite similar levels of use. /pol/ can talk all they want about dindus committing more crime but the fact is there is a strong racial bias in our court system and among the police.
That link also has some numbers on gender, note the OP is police planting drugs on black MEN. We usually don't talk about sexism here because it doesn't fit the narrative, but sexism against men in our justice system is on the same level as racism against blacks.
>>4595
> But remember, BLM is just whining about a non-existent problem.
ProfressorFrink'ssarcasmdetectorexploding.jpg
>>4595
Receiving longer sentences for the same crimes usually comes down to criminal record, conduct in court, efficacy of the lawyer and the temperament of the judge. Racial biased is developed.
>Men
Men commit more violent crimes, it's in our nature.
The real "sexism" is in sentencing. But that's also developed.
>>4902
>it's in our nature.
No, it's in our education.
>>6458
>testosterone
>aggressive behavioralisms
>you can "teach out" nature
>>6467
You want to greentext? Fine.
>different men show completely different levels of aggression
>but we're all the same
>>6473
>men don't show a general trend of aggression
There's these things called "statistics" and those called "outliers".
I swear you're scientifically illeterate if you think those outliers disprove the trend.
You can't "re-educate" genes you slimey liberal yuppie shit.
>>6525
>>men don't show a general trend of aggression
Don't misquote me faggot, I never said that. I said that men are educated to be more aggressive than women, which explains a higher general trend towards aggression.
>There's these things called "statistics" and those called "outliers".
Do you have any such statistics at hand, then? What I have here is such a statistic, and the difference in aggression can easily be explained with a difference in treatment of the genders. In fact, while I was searching for it, that's the explanation I stumbled over. Boys are told to solve their problems through aggression, girls are told otherwise. Boys are treated more strictly too, and are much more likely to receive corporal punishment.
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/fuzzy0%7Bimage0%7D.gif
>You can't "re-educate" genes
But you can hide all your problems behind "it's not my fault, it's just my genes" if you're too lazy to change. I bet you do the same thing to explain your 350 pounds of body weight. It's just your genes, right?
>>6563
>Don't misquote me faggot, I never said that.
It is what you were implying nigger.
>I said that men are educated to be more aggressive than women, which explains a higher general trend towards aggression.
No they are not, prove it. Prove men are "taught" to be aggressive anyway. We have more testosterone and have more aggressive, competitive behavioralisms than women. It's been in our nature for probably 250,000 years.
>Do you have any such statistics at hand, then? What I have here is such a statistic
Which shows men are generally more aggressive than women, by nature, not by "education". If it was so how do you explain trials involving young children that blow your argument out of the water?
>and the difference in aggression can easily be explained with a difference in treatment of the genders.
Except it cant, you're just implying that it is, not proving it. "Genders" (sexes) are treated differently because we ARE different. I'm assuming now you're some droll moronic women, I have to sign up for the draft because men are inherently more combat ready than women because of our natural stature and more competitive nature, war is the ultimate competition.
>In fact, while I was searching for it, that's the explanation I stumbled over. Boys are told to solve their problems through aggression, girls are told otherwise.
Huffington post is not a valid site for sex behavioralisms and trying to explain 250,000 years of human history and pre history.
>Boys are treated more strictly too, and are much more likely to receive corporal punishment.
Now that is some valid criticism, boys in school are set up to be disadvantaged, to actually play away from their competitive nature and behavioralisms. In the 70's school was regeared to serve women's educational interests instead of mens.
Corporal punishment is outlawed by the way.
>http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/fuzzy0%7Bimage0%7D.gif
Literally doesn't prove anything.
>>6563
>>You can't "re-educate" genes
>But you can hide all your problems behind "it's not my fault, it's just my genes" if you're too lazy to change.
Who says I'm hiding or lazy? I'm explaining it. I'm not saying it's an "excuse". People lose self control, get frustrated and so on. Men, are by nature, more aggressive. That is pretty much fact.
>I bet you do the same thing to explain your 350 pounds of body weight. It's just your genes, right?
I'm 6'1' 200 lbs... and no, while weight does have a genetic component, it's ultimately under your control
>>6585
>It is what you were implying nigger.
No, it was not.
When I say that men are educated to be more violent than women I *imply* that there is a general trend among men towards aggression. So that's basically the opposite of what you misquoted.
>If it was so how do you explain trials involving young children
Different treatment begins at birth. Baby boys are left to cry for longer than baby girls, for example.
>No they are not, prove it.
Men and women have different roles in society. Are you not aware of this? You yourself consider men to be different from women (because they are more violent) and you actually believe that you treat them the same way?
>you're just implying that it is, not proving it.
Also, you seem to be unaware of what implying means. It's to suggest something without outright saying it. You mean I am "claiming" it.
>Corporal punishment is outlawed by the way.
Are you implying it doesn't happen?
>Literally doesn't prove anything.
I never claimed it proved anything. I am saying that you have no proof either. You are asserting that it's all hormones and that education plays no role whatsoever while even accepting the fact that the sexes are being treated differently.
>Men, are by nature, more aggressive. That is pretty much fact.
>while [aggression] does have a genetic component, it's ultimately under your control
Allow me to use your phrasing for my purposes. This is all that I am claiming.
If you really need proof that education has an influence on people, then I'll just consider you clinically retarded and leave you to your "victory". The only thing we can argue about here is the extent to which human behavior is down to his genes and how much of it is learned.
>>6596
Their roles in society are a development of their nature, their nature is more competitive, aggressive and dominate. Their nature isn't developed from their roles.
You're a fucking retard who has consumed the absolute worst of "feminist" propaganda.
There is no sense arguing with a liberal yuppie shit like you.
