A percentage is a ratio of two numbers, in this case you are trying to compare
^People who engaged in violence and were convicted at one protest^/~People who were at that protest~
with
^Number of protest events that became violent^/~Number of protest events for this cause~
To compare that you will have to wait a few years for all of the court cases to wind down. Hope that helps.
EDIT: Format
sorry but that’s not a fair analysis of the data put forward by ACLED here. they are counting demonstrations not demonstrators. and they are most certainly not couning charges so no clue where you got that.
here are some similar, though admittedly not directly parallel, statistics (published jan 2022):
6.8% of pro-Trump demonstrations (112 of 1,646) between January 2020 and November 2021 were armed compared to 1.5% of all other demonstrations (501 of 33,298).
The percentage of armed pro-Trump demonstrations increased last year. In 2021, 8.8% of pro-Trump demonstrations were armed (32 of 364) compared to 6.2% in 2020 (80 of 1,282).
What percent of the armed Trump supporters were violent?
Doesn't matter. There was violence at Jan 6, ergo Jan 6 was 100% violent. Compare that to nearly 0% violence for the students. Why do you think 100% and 0% are close?
I’d say BLM was near 0% violence but you’re say it was 100%.
What? How "I'm say" it was 100%? What are you talking about?
You’re saying.
Are you coming at me for a small typo?
I'm coming at you for acting like you're making a valid point, and lying when people confront you about it. Now, could you please explain?
What am I lying about?
You said:
I’d say BLM was near 0% violence but you’re say it was 100%.
Again, how do "I'm say" that BLM was near 100% violence? Most BLM protests were completely peaceful, meaning BLM was near 0% violent. Why do you lie and say I'm saying the opposite?
Pretty sure this guy is some kind of troll, especially because of the weird grammar. Reporting him and moving on.
There was violence at Jan 6, ergo Jan 6 was 100% violent.
Unless you’re saying there was no violence at BLM then you’re saying it was 100% violent.
I’m saying it was near 0%.
Is that clear enough for you or do you need me to clarify something?
Could you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iludfj6Pe7w
One thousand people where charged out of twenty-five thousand, that's only 4% of the people.
That means 96% were being peaceful and that's damn near 100%
Sorry... you think that the only people who were violent were the ones who got charged?
That's weird, because that's not how it usually works.
I'm just using verifiable numbers here.
And trying to conflate a percentage of protests with a percentage of people at one particular protest. The two are not comparable.
This article say there was north of 100,000 people there which makes the number ultimately charged under one percent.
A percentage is a ratio of two numbers, in this case you are trying to compare
^People who engaged in violence and were convicted at one protest^/~People who were at that protest~
with
^Number of protest events that became violent^/~Number of protest events for this cause~
To compare that you will have to wait a few years for all of the court cases to wind down. Hope that helps.
EDIT: Format
sorry but that’s not a fair analysis of the data put forward by ACLED here. they are counting demonstrations not demonstrators. and they are most certainly not couning charges so no clue where you got that.
here are some similar, though admittedly not directly parallel, statistics (published jan 2022):
What percent of the armed Trump supporters were violent?
Doesn't matter. There was violence at Jan 6, ergo Jan 6 was 100% violent. Compare that to nearly 0% violence for the students. Why do you think 100% and 0% are close?
I’d say BLM was near 0% violence but you’re say it was 100%.
What? How "I'm say" it was 100%? What are you talking about?
You’re saying.
Are you coming at me for a small typo?
I'm coming at you for acting like you're making a valid point, and lying when people confront you about it. Now, could you please explain?
What am I lying about?
You said:
Again, how do "I'm say" that BLM was near 100% violence? Most BLM protests were completely peaceful, meaning BLM was near 0% violent. Why do you lie and say I'm saying the opposite?
Pretty sure this guy is some kind of troll, especially because of the weird grammar. Reporting him and moving on.
Unless you’re saying there was no violence at BLM then you’re saying it was 100% violent.
I’m saying it was near 0%.
Is that clear enough for you or do you need me to clarify something?
Multiple Palestine protests
Multiple BLM protests
One Jan 6 protest
Think that was the confusion here^
i don’t have that data i’m sorry