Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

justbecauseiluvthis t1_j9wxurg wrote

This is just RVA.

Half our murders (or so) go unsolved, every year. Which means there are 1000's of murderers in a city of 200,000. Obviously taking some liberties, but you get the idea.

Ninja Edit:

Citation

https://www.nbc12.com/2022/01/13/93-people-killed-richmond-2021-least-41-cases-remain-unsolved/?outputType

16

I_AM_RVA t1_j9yucc5 wrote

What? Thousands of murderers? Yeah, you are taking “some” liberties with logic and with math.

12

justbecauseiluvthis t1_j9z1dvr wrote

well, let's say 50 a year go unsolved. Times that by 10 years, that's 50 murders unsolved. Math is easy on this one. Chances are, if you live in the city, someone you pass on your daily has killed someone.

Shootings are 3-4 times the amount that actually die, so in the people you pass everyday, there are 3-4 times the amount of people that have shot someone.

EDIT: Bad math, I was thining of the more than 100 murders we have per year, times 10. Thank you for the correction.

0

I_AM_RVA t1_j9z6w0e wrote

Sigh.

First, there aren’t 50 unsolved a year. You just made that up. Even if there were, 50 a year doesn’t equal 1000 over ten years. You said “math is easy on this one,” but I think you actually had a great deal of difficulty with 50 x 10. And even still, having 50 unsolved on a year over year basis — which there are not — does not mean that those continue to go unsolved forever. Also, even if there were 50, which there aren’t, you have no idea who does the murders. You can’t assume it’s one person per murder, that’s stupid. You can’t assume they all live here, either, that’s stupid. You also can’t assume that they would stay here after a murder! So, to sum up, you made some shit up, did basic math wrong, made several illogical assumptions, and then said something really inflammatory and wrong. There are NOT thousands of murderers walking around and you do NOT walk by one every day.

Your comment is atrocious and ought to be moderated, frankly.

7

justbecauseiluvthis t1_j9z8mkd wrote

Ummm... I cited my source, and it's consistent. We don't just cap existence at 10 year chunks, there are murders from 20,30+ years ago. You were right I was sleepy on the math, still adds up over time. Well if we presume murderers are coming in from outside the city (that's 'stupid,' most murders are committed by people the victim knew,) so if there are other cities in the US, it's safe to presume if all these people are also moving after they murder, an equal number are leaving their city and coming here after their murder.

I'm sorry, but yes, the city has countless unsolved murders, feel free to fact check how many unsolved murders have been in RVA over the past 50 years.

You keep saying 'assume,' and 'stupid,' yet you have not cited a single thing, it's all your uncomfortable cognitive dissonance over the city having murderers in it. Just don't piss people off is my advice.

−3

opienandm OP t1_j9wzvag wrote

I think you missed the point. I believe the suspect is known and there is no danger to the public from people who were involved.

I just want the RPD to make a statement, not just in this case, but in all cases where they know that the suspect is no longer a risk to the public. Shit, they didn’t even say whether or not suspects were at large with respect to several murders over the past few weeks. Is it so difficult to say, “The suspect is <known/unknown> and/or <at large/apprehended>”?!?

I’ll make it a Google form that any officer can fill out in 15 seconds.

−18

sleevieb t1_j9xj9w2 wrote

They get nothing from that and risk opening themselves up to liability.

It’s a terrible idea to comment on any ongoing investigation.

25

opienandm OP t1_j9y8rkd wrote

Meanwhile, pressers are held to spread lies. It’s laughable that you use this argument in light of the VAST amounts of commentary the RPD has made over the past two years.

In general, I agree with the ongoing investigation commentary thing, however please explain how an investigation would be compromised or any additional litigation risk beyond what the RPD already seems comfortable with would be incurred by stating: “Our investigation continues and we believe the any risk to the public as a direct result of this incident has passed.”

0

sleevieb t1_j9yu36l wrote

First of all “no risk to the public” suggests they are a risk to a different group of people which is othering some poor black people so you can assuge your own paranoia and anxiety.

Second of all you don’t know why a cooperating witness or co conspirator or whoever would come forward. Maybe they fear for the life.

What if someone involved in this incident shoots it out in the street and clips a civilian. Now the cops own words are back to haunt them.

I can’t believe you got me defending rpd lol this is just common sense.

And yeah they make up terrorist attacks to justify going to war against their own citizens over protests of mass destruction but dude also lost his job and fucked his career up on that one. Trust Stoney and get balogned

5

JoeSabo t1_j9y1ef9 wrote

No police force anywhere does this. Why qoukd you expect RPD to? They're too busy framing people for mass shootings and inflicting brain injuries on innocent autistic kids to do anything helpful.

6

opienandm OP t1_j9y9h9l wrote

You’re kidding about the first sentence, right? Police departments are constantly stating whether or not someone was apprehended, if a suspect or person of interest has been identified and if there is any risk to the public. It happens daily all over this country.

Did you know that RPD has people who are paid to do these sorts of things? I mean, it’s actually their job. And at least one of them was a well-known journalist in Richmond prior to joining the RPD.

This is one of the reasons why I expect more.

2