An additional point here is the inclusion of 'or escalated the violence' with regards to police. How did they define escalation here?Octavious wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:25 pmBecause it is a complete non statement. The report, in the bit I believe you are referring to, saysJamiet99uk wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:49 pmYou conveniently missed the whole part where it identified that a lot of the reported violence (of which there was comparatively little, in totality) was initiated by the police or fascist counter-protesters.
In many instances, police reportedly began or escalated the violence, but some observers nevertheless blame the protesters.
which is utterly meaningless. Saying something "reportedly happened" is not the same as saying it happened, merely that someone said it did. The use of the word "many" is again meaningless. How many is many? A dozen? Twenty? Two-Hundred? Who knows?
Sorry, Jamie, but this... what would you even call it? It's not a paper in a peer reviewed journal... the musings of a couple of researchers, perhaps?... this musing is little more than a cynical exercise in using statistics to support an opinion.
Seriously, have a look at John Lott's work. It's pretty much the same junk methodology used to support liberal gun ownership law.
Does the example of a protestor throwing rocks/debris at the police and them responding by physically detaining them qualify as escalation?