Originally Posted by gofast
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Furthermore, the law enforcement/security types are not always or even often honest -- especially about the stopping of innocent people.
If you need evidence of a bias, there it is in black and white. Your statement clearly illustrates your biased opinion and presumption that LE/security "types" are more often than not dishonest when stopping people.
Wrong.
By the way, I did
not make a presumption that LE/security types are more often than not dishonest when stopping people. The data
suggested that law enforcement/security types are not always or even often honest, especially about the stopping of
innocent people. I said what I said; and I did not say that which you claim I said as evidence of "bias".
Where did you read the unwritten and arrive at the idea that I think that LE/security types are more often than not dishonest when stopping people? Did I write that LE/security types are more often than not dishonest when stopping people? No. I suggest being careful about putting words in the mouths of others or imagining what they presumed/assumed when one hasn't even correctly read what they wrote.
The truth is that the sets of data we went through indicated that law enforcement/security types were not always or even often honest -- especially about the stopping of innocent people.
I do have a bias -- and a strong one at that -- for data-based analysis, especially when it comes to matters of security and government relations.
Originally Posted by gofast
The inherent idiocy of prohibition aside, the profiling examples you provide were/are anomalies. The examles on 60 Minutes and the like were not even anecdodal, they were unrepresentative of the whole. That being said, I am one of the rare LE/security "types" who will admit that prohibition against drugs is as equally moronic as was the Eighteenth Amendment. The reasons it failed in the 1920's are the same reasons is fails today. We will never, ever stop it, and it is stupid to try.
Where in this thread did I talk about profiling examples, related to "prohibition", which you claim were/are anomalies? Please do share and/or address the right persons.
Am I to presume that those "profiling examples" which you claim are "anomalies" are fully to your satisfaction?
[I wouldn't presume such. However, if you care to share how the "profiling examples" were/are "anomalies" and whether those "anomalies" are to your satisfaction it could be amusing.]
That which people claim are anomalies are often not anomalies; it just requires drilling down into the data and classifying and qualifying items more fully. But careful reading and analysis of data is not everyone's cup of tea.
Did I say: "LE/security "types" are more often than not dishonest when stopping people"? No, no, no.
