853

New York Times managed this with eloquence.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 157 points 5 months ago

Should also be one dot labeled “running for president”

[-] pozbo@lemmy.world 54 points 5 months ago

And another that is labeled "ate a bullet for breaking a secure barrier".

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 27 points 5 months ago

Imagine trying to martyr someone climbing through a broken window to threaten Congress while being warned by the Capitol Police that they will shoot them for doing it.

Regardless of whether some Congress critters deserve to be threatened, it's just the most privileged idiocy at best, especially to do it because the election didn't go the way you wanted.

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

It’s probably already been said, but that event is White Privilege personified. The fact that you have so little interaction with law enforcement, not even any real negative interaction, and see all the white badasses in movies able to not get shot when they’re the Badass In The Right and the Dumb Cops Don’t Get It, so they let you by…

Think how many stories of minorities getting serious abuse, fear, or even just killed. Those stories become the infamous “Talk” some PoC parents have to have with their kids about interaction with the police. It’s generational. They’d know the chance of being shot is real.

But this white chick? Nah. Not gonna worry. The shock from everyone surrounding the issue is just further proof.

Not trying to make this a race thing, but just SMH at the whole wildly different worldview some people have.

[-] blady_blah@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

I get what you're saying, but imagine for a second that Trump managed to convince two states legislators to send in R electoral college votes and throw out the democratic election. Imagine how pissed you'd be. It's not that hard to imagine liberals storming the capital because of a stolen election.

I don't find the reverse scenario to be that far fetched. I get their misplaced anger. They were sold lies and those lies are enraging if you believe them. I don't think it's that hard to see the other side's viewpoint.

[-] Rice_Daddy@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Ohh empathy! Always nice to see a dose of that!

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 12 points 5 months ago

If some dumbass lib climbed through a window at the head of mob chanting for the President's blood because they lost and were stupid enough to fall for easily disproven lie I also wouldn't blame the Secret Service for popping their head.

I'd say the exact same thing as I say about Babbit.

"Skill Issue."

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] paddirn@lemmy.world 72 points 5 months ago

Look at all those Antifa people who got in trouble /s

[-] DemBoSain@midwest.social 34 points 5 months ago

not pictured: all the Federal agents that incited the poor peaceful MAGA sight-seers.

/s

[-] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 16 points 5 months ago

Would be nice to see a video of the event to finally set the record straight.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 6 points 5 months ago

It's a damn shame no one took any pictures the whole day

[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 61 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I wish this graphic included a # and % for each category and color coded for misdemeanants and felons.

[-] Pratai@lemmy.ca 12 points 5 months ago

Yeah… it’s really not data. It’s just a drawing.

[-] mako 16 points 5 months ago

This certainly is data, which doesn't exist purely in tabular tables. If you're interested in doing so you could count to see how many records exists in the set, and you can easily view the "prosecution_result" field for each record. The data is also arranged into groups for easier consumption of trends that the creator is showcasing.

If you were to look at the raw data, probably stored in tabular records, you wouldn't gain much insight into the overarching trends without spending more time studying and taking notes than the few seconds it took to absorb the trends in the author's visualization.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] athos77@kbin.social 60 points 5 months ago

Also, they've only caught like half the people who were there.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Vode_An@lemmy.ml 40 points 5 months ago

Much like Jesus died for your sins, they were arrested for my amusement

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CluckN@lemmy.world 38 points 5 months ago

Where’s the arrow pointing to the dead lady?

[-] rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml 25 points 5 months ago

What about the arrow pointing to the guy who accidentally tasered himself so hard in the balls that he died?

[-] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

You can die from that? Thank you for saving my life

[-] pozbo@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

Well there go MY weekend plans :/

[-] meliaesc@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Ha, that's my weekend plans sorted!

[-] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

To be fair, that tickmark would be under terrorist.

[-] Pratai@lemmy.ca 14 points 5 months ago

They’re all terrorists though.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] PatFussy@lemm.ee 29 points 5 months ago

The majority of them were given charges of breaking and entering into a capitol building or picketing in a capitol building. Not really sure what the graphic is trying to convey. It makes it seem like the majority plead guilty to inssurrection.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It's not as clear as it should be, it means convicted people that are still fighting the charges

Add: I want to read the article of the story behind the two who were acquitted.

[-] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Formally speaking, a conviction will attach once a defendant is found guilty by a trial court. Even while one or more appeals may be ongoing, it is accurate to describe the defendant as convicted. The status of a federal conviction sticks until such time the conviction is judicially overturned by a successful appeal, or when pardoned by the executive. But not clemency, which is a reduction in the penalty by the executive, but retains the conviction.

A person who has their conviction overturned or pardoned can no longer be accurately described as convicted. Although colloquially, it's unclear if "ex-convict" is an acceptable description or not.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

But wouldn't the pleaded guilty and convicted people overlap?

Also, source article?

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 52 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

the distinction is between those who worked out a plea bargain (plead guilty) and those who were found guilty by a jury at trial (plead not guilty and were then convicted). both are, technically, convictions, but the difference is between those who owned up to their crimes (and saved the courts and the taxpayers the trouble and expense of a trial) and those who tried to get away with it.

[-] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 14 points 5 months ago

The latter group of defendants -- the ones convicted by a jury -- also receive heavier sentences, since the federal sentencing guidelines recommend that defendants pleading guilty before trial get a reduced severity score, potentially shaving months off the sentence, or omitting the custodial sentence entirely, replaced by probation.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Compared to the total number of federal defendants (using 2022 data), there appears to have been a slightly higher rate here of going to trial than defendants overall. Both sets demonstrate that when federal prosecutors bring cases, they don't tend to miss. Also demonstrated is how federal trials rarely result in an acquittal.

Does this mean judges and juries are biased against federal defendants? Likely not, since again: federal prosecutors tend to only pursue a case they know they can win. Knowing this, it must be a tough job for federal public defence lawyers but someone has to do it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Oh, look what just dropped into my news feed:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/family-of-woman-shot-during-january-6-capitol-riot-sues-us-government-seeking-30-million/ar-AA1myxt8?ocid=U506DHP&pc=U506&cvid=25de3c1c41534add9b0503430090a01f&ei=27

Conservative activist group Judicial Watch said in a Friday press release its lawyers are representing Aaron Babbitt in the lawsuit. Babbitt is seeking $30 million.

...

But Babbitt said in the lawsuit his wife was ambushed when she was shot and multiple people yelled, "You just murdered her."

Jesus christ these people are fucking morons. "ambushed"? An officer yelling at you with a gun pointed at you is "ambushed"? Who gives a fuck what people yelled.

[-] mmmmm@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago
[-] woshua@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 5 months ago
[-] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

If these people were on the left they wouldn't even be alive to get convicted. Instead, all but the most egregious get to walk off scot free.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
853 points (96.8% liked)

Data Is Beautiful

5773 readers
1 users here now

A place to share and discuss data visualizations. #dataviz


(under new moderation as of 2024-01, please let me know if there are any changes you want to see!)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS