Sam0345 asks:

Would you also arrange for your daughter to wait for you on Martin Luther King Boulevard?

Sam0345 is making the assumption that I am white. This happens to be correct (at least, as far as most people are concerned since sometime in the mid-20th century), but I don't think there was anything in my analysis to justify that assumption.

Thus we can assume that Sam0345 thinks my putative daughter is white. The problem is, while it may be unsafe for my putative white daughter to wait on the corner of MLK Blvd, there are also majority-white neighborhoods where it would be unsafe for a black individual to linger (and I mean because they risk being assaulted, not because the police would harrass them). This makes "neighborhoods you wouldn't want to linger in" a muddled proxy for "average character of the residents."

worse

P(H|e)=P(H)P(e|H)/P(e), P(e|H)/P(e) ~ 1

ETA: what this means is that assuming I wouldn't arrange for my daughter to wait for me on MLK blvd., that doesn't mean MLK blvd. is worse than other places unless I would arrange for my daughter to wait for me at those places. So I am criticizing the form of the argument.

Above, Konkvistador at least phrases it properly. My problem with sam0345's post is that he seems to sacrifice clarity for offensiveness.

This is unlike normal arguments over political correctness, in which all sides agree some tradeoff between positive values of communicating clearly, being correct, not making people feel offended, etc. is appropriate.

My problem with the above post is that it sacrifices accuracy for offensiveness, as if that were a positive value, rather than, say, a worthless thing, which might be the typical extreme anti-PC position.