They are literally telling you that your own eyes are lying to you
Link

Quote:

---

A zoomed-in view on a particular protest may show violence, but data from the Crowd Counting Consortium (CCC) provides a zoomed-out view, showing that protests in the aggregate were largely peaceful.
Started in 2017, the CCC is a public access database that tracks protest activity in the United States. With the help of a web crawler and citizen reporting, a research team compiles and codes protests reported in the media. The CCC breaks down violence into four categories: number of arrests, number of participant injuries, number of police injuries, and property damage. The group also tracks published estimates of crowd size.
In CCC data collected from May 2020 to June 2021, 94% of protests involved no participant arrests, 97.9% involved no participant injuries, 98.6% involved no injuries to police, and 96.7% involved no property damage.

---

Every life counts, right Libs?

China Compulsory Certification?

Arrests do not seem to be credible but an evaluation of insurance claims seems more relevant to the violence that happened.

OldArmyBrent said:

---

Lol at considering arrests as an indicator of how violent a protest was. What a crock of *****

---

Especially when the city leaders won't let the police do anything. All a part of their big lie.

LDA9336 said:

---

Quote:

---

In CCC data collected from May 2020 to June 2021, 94% of protests involved no participant arrests, 97.9% involved no participant injuries, 98.6% involved no injuries to police, and 96.7% involved no property damage.

---

---

If police had been allowed to do their jobs properly, this figure would have been higher by a ton. Lib mayors and police chiefs tied their hands and turned law enforcment personnel into spectators.

Crimes were ignored!

Lmao

What did they define as "protests"?

Were a handful of people in the street in some podunk town counted as a "protest"?

how big is the denominator for them to get 94-99% for those stats?

I mean, there were many peaceful "marches".. the one in Houston went fine. there were even a few dozen people on a corner holding BLM signs in The Woodlands TX one day... I don't think those count the same as Portland or Minneapolis

So destroying property is only 4% of what protestors do? Where have I heard that logic before?

I saw some peaceful gents with "white people should die" signs in Dallas. Wonder if that made it into the list.

Spore Ag said:

---

Arrests do not seem to be credible but an evaluation of insurance claims seems more relevant to the violence that happened.

---

So much this.

If you want really get to the Truth of most debates, follow the money or observe how it is being used. Observe the habits and behaviors of lenders, mortgagees, and banks.

Global warming exists? Call me when the banks stop lending on massive oceanfront properties.

There was no violence at these protests? Let's take a look at the insurance claims.

Etc. Etc. Ad nauseum etc.

Cassius said:

---

Quote:

---

They are literally telling you that your own eyes are lying to you

---

That's called gaslighting. It started under Obama and is now 24/7 with Biden and Dem media.

---

Guess what....Obama & Co. are still running things through Rice & Biden. Why do you think he's so quiet.

He stated himself how bitter he was that Trump was "undoing" many of his "accomplishments."

Percentage is irrelevant. When you protest everywhere everyday for months the denominator becomes astronomical.

BTW, how many protestors were at 1/6 and how many injuries / arrests? Using their own metric, I'd speculate it was also 95+% peaceful" so why is that considered by many lefties to be worse than 9/11?

An explosive but mostly tranquil German moon expedition.

Mostly peaceful



Could find the comprehensive video that was much longer documenting a lot more destruction.

The Democratic Party leadership, leftist progressives and legacy media caused this.

I am a huge believer freedom of speech and people's rights to protest.

But anyone that protests and breaks the law - including blocking traffic - needs to be thumped, tossed in jail, and prosecuted.

MaxPower said:

---

Using their own metric, I'd speculate it was also 95+% peaceful" so why is that considered by many lefties to be worse than 9/11?

---

Because the democracy was at risk!! Those unarmed citizens led by a man with no shirt and horns on his hat were angry about the election and angry about the authoritarian left using propaganda media fake news, compromised tech platform monopolies, bought and paid for judicial systems, and weaponized/politicized bureaucracies to interfere, censor, silence, change rules, vilify, humiliate, and dehumanize patriotic supporters of America first policies, and steal an election. They thought the democracy was already stolen from "we the people" and the the Capitol Police allowed them to walk in and demonstrate, pose for pictures, etc. which means they were this close to overtaking the US Government in a coup d'etat, grabbing the nuclear codes and having the US military at their command! (Please just disregard the antifa/blm impostors who encouraged them to break windows, film it, and sell their video to CNN for tens of thousands of dollars.)

CCC,

This is a good example of defining your target data so broadly that the results become meaningless. For example there were daily protests in Killeen concerning Vanessa Guillan. No violence, no police needed, no property damage. I am sure the dozens of these protest were swept up in the CCC's webcrawler. If they had broken down the protests by subject matter and reported the percentage of violence I am sure the results would be much different.

Also, this same logic and data can be used to prove that any "white supremacist" protests were equally non violent.

Demosthenes81 said:

---

Also, this same logic and data can be used to prove that any "white supremacist" protests were equally non violent.

---

Or police shootings....

Demosthenes81 said:

---

This is a good example of defining your target data so broadly that the results become meaningless. For example there were daily protests in Killeen concerning Vanessa Guillan. No violence, no police needed, no property damage. I am sure the dozens of these protest were swept up in the CCC's webcrawler. If they had broken down the protests by subject matter and reported the percentage of violence I am sure the results would be much different.

Also, this same logic and data can be used to prove that any "white supremacist" protests were equally non violent.

---

LOL, somehow I feel like the "data" will be different for those...

Demosthenes81 said:

---

This is a good example of defining your target data so broadly that the results become meaningless. For example there were daily protests in Killeen concerning Vanessa Guillan. No violence, no police needed, no property damage. I am sure the dozens of these protest were swept up in the CCC's webcrawler. If they had broken down the protests by subject matter and reported the percentage of violence I am sure the results would be much different.

Also, this same logic and data can be used to prove that any "white supremacist" protests were equally non violent.

---

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

January 6 where no one had weapons was violent and they just walked around in the capital was worse than 911.

Portland, Seattle, and Minneapolis counted as 1 protest probably...otherwise the hundreds of days Portland was under siege should have skewed this number...

Research conducted during and after WWII has clearly demonstrated that more than 80% of US service members served in VITAL but non-combatant roles of logistics and support. Further (and much more obscure) research done by WW2 U.S. Army Brigadier General S.L.A. Marshall found that less than 20 percent of combatants fired their weapons and, if they did fire, they did not aim to strike the enemy.

It appears then that ~2% of the Americans who fought in World War 2 did the killing that defeated the Axis powers. That means TWO out of ONE HUNDRED Americans in service participated in projecting their energy toward the destruction of the enemy. If I count aircrews, submariners, crews of combat ships and merchant mariners who saw conflict I could raise that number to 10%... EVERYONE in those positions probably "fought".

Why consider this information?

I could very easily write a headline at the end of those World Wars that declared,
"MOSTLY PEACEFUL FORCES DEFEAT THE AXIS POWERS".

Tramp96 said:

---

Did I go back in time to 2020 and no one told me?

---

Oh god... not again

Article was posted yesterday