Elijah McLain

[Mad Jack]

Policing in black & white

Police departments are eager for ways to reduce racial disparities.

www.apa.org

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dhb]

If you make a bad call and kill an innocent nam,

I thought that made you a Vet.

 

[Mad Jack]

I thought that made you a Vet.

Gotta love autocorrect

 

[Matty44]

Minneapolis Police Use Force Against Black People at 7 Times the Rate of Whites (Published 2020)

When the officers use kicks, chokeholds, punches, takedowns, Mace spray, Tasers and the like, the person subject to that force is black about 60 percent of the time.

www.nytimes.com

Police Dog Bites Black Man

Police dogs reveal the hidden racial prejudices of the police officers who deploy them.

www.newyorker.com

Fact check: Police killed more unarmed Black men in 2019 than conservative activist claimed

A prominent conservative activist said in a Facebook video that police only killed eight unarmed Black men in the U.S. in 2019. That claim is false.

www.usatoday.com

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

So you’re arguing 13 vs 8? Ok......


Listen there were a lot of studies you guys posted that claim a racial disparity based off of using total percent of the population as part of their metric for determining overall likelihood. That’s a flawed methodology. It’s irrelevant what percent of the population black people make up. What’s relevant is the number of police interactions, and more namely, the number of violent crimes committed that would put you in a situation to interact with the police in the first place. A LARGE percent of the population doesn’t have any interaction with the police other than perhaps an occasional speeding ticket or other minor traffic offense.

It’s like if I claimed that referees were racist cause they called relatively more roughing the passer penalties on black defenders vs white defenders based off their percent make up of the general population of the country. That’d be silly and an irrelevant stat. You’d have to use percent of defensive players in the NFL that were either black or white as your starting point and go from there.

Perhaps a silly analogy, but I think you get the point.

 

[Matty44]

I think one of the biggest PR jobs that law enforcement and fire has put on has been this idea that their jobs are so incredibly deadly and dangerous. LEOs rank 16th on the list of deadly jobs. You're almost 4x more likely to die being an garbage truck driver than a cop.

The 34 deadliest jobs in America

Some jobs have a higher risk of fatal injuries than others, such as fishing and logging workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

www.google.com

And maybe that's the problem. Maybe they should have thought of him as an innocent kid first. What in the world is wrong with walking around with a ski mask on in a public place? Yeah maybe if you're hiding in the bushes outside a window with a boombox playing the pink panther soundtrack there may be an issue but come on. Your quoting of the laws notes that there must be a reasonable suspicion of that individual committing/preparing to commit/having just committed a crime, not sure that was here.

And if he started to run? Let him go. Nobody saw him commit a crime.

This was a failure of the system on a ridiculous number of levels. LEO training, bias, EMS response (and agreement to administer sedation to a calm restrained individual).

Any thoughts on why they removed their cams?

So the only jobs more dangerous than cops are ones that work with heavy machinery and high voltage electrical. Therefore, their job isn’t dangerous? Is that the point you’re trying to make?

And as far as what the cops should’ve done.....

Are you saying if cops respond to reports of a suspicious person in a ski mask after dark, they find the guy and tell him to stop, and he takes off in a dead sprint, they should just let him go? That’s your opinion of good policing?

As far as body cams, I think I laid out my opinion earlier. I’m very pro body cams. I think it’s very understandable that they fell off during the initial physical struggle with the guy and I wouldn’t expect them to put them back on in the midst of restraining someone. However, I think when the situation was under control, they should make every attempt to get them back on, and for sure when the guy told them to leave the camera where it was that was messed up. I think that aspect of this case should definitely be scrutinized and potentially punished.

 

[Lawpy]

Finally!

Seattle Police Dismantle ‘Police-Free Zone’

Seattle police on Wednesday dismantled the self-styled Capitol Hill Organized Protest area, ending a three-week standoff between police and protesters who had declared it a police-free zone.

www.wsj.com

 

[MediMike]

So the only jobs more dangerous than cops are ones that work with heavy machinery and high voltage electrical. Therefore, their job isn’t dangerous? Is that the point you’re trying to make?

And as far as what the cops should’ve done.....

Are you saying if cops respond to reports of a suspicious person in a ski mask after dark, they find the guy and tell him to stop, and he takes off in a dead sprint, they should just let him go?

If they had no reason to believe he was committing a crime besides being weird? Yes. That's exactly my point.

And yes. The fact that cops lose lives at a massively lower rate compared to other professions (including landscaper and lawn maintenance supervisors) shows that the public impression of the inherent risk to policing is significantly overblown which lends to their ability to receive a pass on a lot of sh#t that most others would not.

 

[Matty44]

If they had no reason to believe he was committing a crime besides being weird? Yes. That's exactly my point.

And yes. The fact that cops lose lives at a massively lower rate compared to other professions (including landscaper and lawn maintenance supervisors) shows that the public impression of the inherent risk to policing is significantly overblown which lends to their ability to receive a pass on a lot of sh#t that most others would not.

Perhaps the differing viewpoint here comes from the fact that he was reported to them as a suspicious person. Whether you think the guy who reported him was right or wrong to call him in is a separate issue. I would agree that the cops don’t have a right to just stop people who look weird for no reason. But the fact that they are called in specifically to investigate a suspicious person report, one must reasonable assume it’s their duty to investigate. And in that situation, if the suspicious person took off running, it seems like poor policing to just say, “meh, let’s just let him go.” Perhaps that’s the disconnect here.....I dunno.


As far as the danger, do cops need to be the top dangerous job in order to act cautious? Or is the fact that there is a potential to be killed AT ALL enough to be cautious. I’m not gonna die in the OR doing my job, at least not from any job related hazard. If there was even a slight chance my pt could reach under his gown, pull a gun and shoot me during induction, I’d always be wary and on guard. And yeah, maybe I’d have an itchy trigger finger on my sux syringe.

 

[Mad Jack]

So you’re arguing 13 vs 8? Ok......


Listen there were a lot of studies you guys posted that claim a racial disparity based off of using total percent of the population as part of their metric for determining overall likelihood. That’s a flawed methodology. It’s irrelevant what percent of the population black people make up. What’s relevant is the number of police interactions, and more namely, the number of violent crimes committed that would put you in a situation to interact with the police in the first place. A LARGE percent of the population doesn’t have any interaction with the police other than perhaps an occasional speeding ticket or other minor traffic offense.

It’s like if I claimed that referees were racist cause they called relatively more roughing the passer penalties on black defenders vs white defenders based off their percent make up of the general population of the country. That’d be silly and an irrelevant stat. You’d have to use percent of defensive players in the NFL that were either black or white as your starting point and go from there.

Perhaps a silly analogy, but I think you get the point.

Literally using the racist argument of "black people just do more crime, it can't be helped." Yikes

 

[Matty44]

Literally using the racist argument of "black people just do more crime, it can't be helped." Yikes

Literally using the argument that to determine the probability of an outcome among a certain group, you should use a relevant subject population that actually has a chance of encountering said outcome.

And perhaps you are offended by the notion that black people commit more crime than other ethnic groups, but your feelings don't really alter the data.

In 2016 black or african americans committed 26.8% of all crime and 37.5% of all violent crimes, despite being ~13% of the population.

Table 21

ucr.fbi.gov

in 2017 black or african americans committed 27.2% of all crime and 37.5% of all violent crimes, despite being ~13% of the population.

Table 43

ucr.fbi.gov

So, I don't know if you just disagree with the FBI crime statistics or what, but pointing out those numbers doesn't seem like a racist argument to me.

 

[anbuitachi]

Literally using the argument that to determine the probability of an outcome among a certain group, you should use a relevant subject population that actually has a chance of encountering said outcome.

And perhaps you are offended by the notion that black people commit more crime than other ethnic groups, but your feelings don't really alter the data.

In 2016 black or african americans committed 26.8% of all crime and 37.5% of all violent crimes, despite being ~13% of the population.

Table 21

ucr.fbi.gov

in 2017 black or african americans committed 27.2% of all crime and 37.5% of all violent crimes, despite being ~13% of the population.

Table 43

ucr.fbi.gov

So, I don't know if you just disagree with the FBI crime statistics or what, but pointing out those numbers doesn't seem like a racist argument to me.

this might be a dumb question but hispanic is listed separately under ethinicity, instead of race like the rest of them. my question is under the race part, did hispanics mostly get included with white...?

 

[Matty44]

this might be a dumb question but hispanic is listed separately under ethinicity, instead of race like the rest of them. my question is under the race part, did hispanics mostly get included with white...?

That is my understanding of that specific table of data.

 

[Mad Jack]

Literally using the argument that to determine the probability of an outcome among a certain group, you should use a relevant subject population that actually has a chance of encountering said outcome.

And perhaps you are offended by the notion that black people commit more crime than other ethnic groups, but your feelings don't really alter the data.

In 2016 black or african americans committed 26.8% of all crime and 37.5% of all violent crimes, despite being ~13% of the population.

Table 21

ucr.fbi.gov

in 2017 black or african americans committed 27.2% of all crime and 37.5% of all violent crimes, despite being ~13% of the population.

Table 43

ucr.fbi.gov

So, I don't know if you just disagree with the FBI crime statistics or what, but pointing out those numbers doesn't seem like a racist argument to me.

The thing is, other people also commit tons of crime. The difficulty is, we don't have people pulling our asses over left and right and patrolling our areas of town like war zones, so we just don't get caught. Excessive enforcement creates the image of disproportionate criminal activity beyond what would be expected based on socioeconomic factors.

 

[anbuitachi]

The thing is, other people also commit tons of crime. The difficulty is, we don't have people pulling our asses over left and right and patrolling our areas of town like war zones, so we just don't get caught. Excessive enforcement creates the image of disproportionate criminal activity beyond what would be expected based on socioeconomic factors.

ive heard this argument before. i think in 2020, its rare to have many murder cases where no one has any clue to who are suspects. often times they are caught on some type of video.

while your statement can be made for smaller crimes, i believe you can simply look at murders or similar type of crime. unless you have proof or good evidence that asians commit fewer murders compared to their population size because they are CAUGHT less, i dont really see that as an good argument.

 

[Mad Jack]

ive heard this argument before. i think in 2020, its rare to have many murder cases where no one has any clue to who are suspects. often times they are caught on some type of video.

while your statement can be made for smaller crimes, i believe you can simply look at murders or similar type of crime. unless you have proof or good evidence that asians commit fewer murders compared to their population size because they are CAUGHT less, i dont really see that as an good argument.

Most murders are unsolved, as are most missing persons cases (which often are probably murders)

 

[anbuitachi]

Most murders are unsolved, as are most missing persons cases (which often are probably murders)

if that is true, then should be increasing police presence in other neighborhoods, especially asian. 97k crime by asian is only aorund 1% of the cases. Asians make up 5.5% of US. that's a difference of FIVE times

 

[Mad Jack]

if that is true, then should be increasing police presence in other neighborhoods, especially asian. 97k crime by asian is only aorund 1% of the cases. Asians make up 5.5% of US. that's a difference of FIVE times

Or we could collectively decide that victimless crimes shouldn't be prosecuted and cut the majority of police funding

 

[anbuitachi]

Or we could collectively decide that victimless crimes shouldn't be prosecuted and cut the majority of police funding

police restructuring is ok. i dont know about cutting off majority of police funding. there should be separate entities that exist for other stuff instead of piling everything onto the police.

it's also hard to define what victimless crimes really mean... almost like the pain score, mental trauma can be fairly subjective which makes the situation trickier. between family members, friends, and co workers, i know 3 ppl that got assaulted (completely unprovoked) in the past month. none of them very serious (one got smacked in the back; one got their phone slapped onto the ground followed by verbal abuse; one got verbal abuse and then spat on + robbed of personal jewelry) but they are mentally traumatizing to them. 1 of them called the police, and i cant say i fault her for doing so. it's definitely a significant uptick

 

[Matty44]

The thing is, other people also commit tons of crime. The difficulty is, we don't have people pulling our asses over left and right and patrolling our areas of town like war zones, so we just don't get caught. Excessive enforcement creates the image of disproportionate criminal activity beyond what would be expected based on socioeconomic factors.

Hmmmm, that would be a nice and tidy explanation to blame it all on excessive policing of different communities, wouldn’t it? And if we go by the premise that proportional amounts of crime are committed by all races, and disparities in crime rates only show up secondary to unbalanced enforcement, it’d be fair to say that we have a perception problem then, right? Equal/proportional amounts of crime are committed by each race, but we only PERCEIVE that black Americans commit more crimes because they are arrested more due to unbalanced/biased policing.

Is that the gist of it?

Sooooo, if only you could have the VICTIMS of every crime just tell you what race the person was who committed the crime against them, you could remove the biased cops from the equation and get the true percent breakdown of crimes committed by each race. And you could then prove your point that the disparity in crimes statistics isn’t really a disparity in crimes committed, just a disparity in criminals being caught.

Man, wouldn’t that be great if there was that kind of information out there......




Oh, hey look! Guess they interview victims of crime every year. Lucky us.

Home

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.

www.bjs.gov

Home

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.

www.bjs.gov

Hmmmmm, so as reported by the crime victims themselves, blacks commit twice the amount of violent crime you'd expect based on population, and whites, Asians, and Hispanics commit less crime than you'd expect based on their population.



I guess the only logical conclusion is that the victims are racist too?




Now, let's recall that total deaths from LEO shootings for 2018 was 998. I know there are other deaths from cops that aren't gun related, but shootings are the VAST majority. I don't have stats from 2018, but a study from 2009-2012 showed firearm deaths at the hands of law enforcement to be just under 94% of all lethal uses of force by law enforcement (see below).

Of those 998, "...45 percent white men; 23 percent black men; and 16 percent Hispanic men. Women have accounted for about 5 percent of those killed, and people in mental distress about 25 percent of all shootings. " Police shot, killed nearly 1,000 in 2018 – Investigative Reporting Workshop

Now, do those percentages match up with the percent of the population by race?

White - 62.3%...............45% X
Black - 12.0%................23% X
Hispanic - 17.1%.............16%

Or do they line up with percent of violent crimes committed by race?

White - 48.9%...............45%

Black - 24.9%................23%

Hispanic - 15.2%.............16%

You be the judge.

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[nimbus]

Hmmmm, that would be a nice and tidy explanation to blame it all on excessive policing of different communities, wouldn’t it? And if we go by the premise that proportional amounts of crime are committed by all races, and disparities in crime rates only show up secondary to unbalanced enforcement, it’d be fair to say that we have a perception problem then, right? Equal/proportional amounts of crime are committed by each race, but we only PERCEIVE that black Americans commit more crimes because they are arrested more due to unbalanced/biased policing.

Is that the gist of it?

Sooooo, if only you could have the VICTIMS of every crime just tell you what race the person was who committed the crime against them, you could remove the biased cops from the equation and get the true percent breakdown of crimes committed by each race. And you could then prove your point that the disparity in crimes statistics isn’t really a disparity in crimes committed, just a disparity in criminals being caught.

Man, wouldn’t that be great if there was that kind of information out there......




Oh, hey look! Guess they interview victims of crime every year. Lucky us.

View attachment 311613

Home

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.

www.bjs.gov

Home

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.

www.bjs.gov

Hmmmmm, so as reported by the crime victims themselves, blacks commit twice the amount of violent crime you'd expect based on population, and whites, Asians, and Hispanics commit less crime than you'd expect based on their population.



I guess the only logical conclusion is that the victims are racist too?




Now, let's recall that total deaths from LEO shootings for 2018 was 998. I know there are other deaths from cops that aren't gun related, but shootings are the VAST majority. I don't have stats from 2018, but a study from 2009-2012 showed firearm deaths at the hands of law enforcement to be just under 94% of all lethal uses of force by law enforcement (see below).

Of those 998, "...45 percent white men; 23 percent black men; and 16 percent Hispanic men. Women have accounted for about 5 percent of those killed, and people in mental distress about 25 percent of all shootings. " Police shot, killed nearly 1,000 in 2018 – Investigative Reporting Workshop

Now, do those percentages match up with the percent of the population by race?

White - 62.3%...............45% X
Black - 12.0%................23% X
Hispanic - 17.1%.............16% View attachment 311621

Or do they line up with percent of violent crimes committed by race?

White - 48.9%...............45% View attachment 311621
Black - 24.9%................23% View attachment 311621
Hispanic - 15.2%.............16% View attachment 311621

You be the judge.

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

View attachment 311620

What is the intent of your post? Are you are arguing for racial profiling? It looks like whites commit more crimes than any other race by a large margin.

 

[Mad Jack]

police restructuring is ok. i dont know about cutting off majority of police funding. there should be separate entities that exist for other stuff instead of piling everything onto the police.

it's also hard to define what victimless crimes really mean... almost like the pain score, mental trauma can be fairly subjective which makes the situation trickier. between family members, friends, and co workers, i know 3 ppl that got assaulted (completely unprovoked) in the past month. none of them very serious (one got smacked in the back; one got their phone slapped onto the ground followed by verbal abuse; one got verbal abuse and then spat on + robbed of personal jewelry) but they are mentally traumatizing to them. 1 of them called the police, and i cant say i fault her for doing so. it's definitely a significant uptick

Assault is a crime with a victim.

I'm talking drug crime, loitering, moving violations, etc. None of this should be handled by the same people that are handling murders

 

[Mad Jack]

Hmmmm, that would be a nice and tidy explanation to blame it all on excessive policing of different communities, wouldn’t it? And if we go by the premise that proportional amounts of crime are committed by all races, and disparities in crime rates only show up secondary to unbalanced enforcement, it’d be fair to say that we have a perception problem then, right? Equal/proportional amounts of crime are committed by each race, but we only PERCEIVE that black Americans commit more crimes because they are arrested more due to unbalanced/biased policing.

Is that the gist of it?

Sooooo, if only you could have the VICTIMS of every crime just tell you what race the person was who committed the crime against them, you could remove the biased cops from the equation and get the true percent breakdown of crimes committed by each race. And you could then prove your point that the disparity in crimes statistics isn’t really a disparity in crimes committed, just a disparity in criminals being caught.

Man, wouldn’t that be great if there was that kind of information out there......




Oh, hey look! Guess they interview victims of crime every year. Lucky us.

View attachment 311613

Home

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.

www.bjs.gov

Home

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.

www.bjs.gov

Hmmmmm, so as reported by the crime victims themselves, blacks commit twice the amount of violent crime you'd expect based on population, and whites, Asians, and Hispanics commit less crime than you'd expect based on their population.



I guess the only logical conclusion is that the victims are racist too?




Now, let's recall that total deaths from LEO shootings for 2018 was 998. I know there are other deaths from cops that aren't gun related, but shootings are the VAST majority. I don't have stats from 2018, but a study from 2009-2012 showed firearm deaths at the hands of law enforcement to be just under 94% of all lethal uses of force by law enforcement (see below).

Of those 998, "...45 percent white men; 23 percent black men; and 16 percent Hispanic men. Women have accounted for about 5 percent of those killed, and people in mental distress about 25 percent of all shootings. " Police shot, killed nearly 1,000 in 2018 – Investigative Reporting Workshop

Now, do those percentages match up with the percent of the population by race?

White - 62.3%...............45% X
Black - 12.0%................23% X
Hispanic - 17.1%.............16% View attachment 311621

Or do they line up with percent of violent crimes committed by race?

White - 48.9%...............45% View attachment 311621
Black - 24.9%................23% View attachment 311621
Hispanic - 15.2%.............16% View attachment 311621

You be the judge.

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

View attachment 311620

Not all victims of crime are interviewed, and the majority of victims never get their case to even be taken seriously. Assaults in the hospital are a good example of this- even getting the police to take a statement or file a report is a herculean task. With regard to police not shooting as many white criminals, there is less enforcement in white areas and it's pretty well established whites will be treated better even when police interact with them for the same reason. Look at the white mass shooters that have walked away alive when compared with black people that have been gunned down for damn near nothing.

Anyway, I guess all of that is to say that it is impossible to know true crime rates because reporting rates are going to be higher and response higher in some situations and lower in others.

What is the intent of your post? Are you are arguing for racial profiling? It looks like whites commit more crimes than any other race by a large margin.

His post is one hell of a dog whistle if you ask me

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Assault is a crime with a victim.

I'm talking drug crime, loitering, moving violations, etc. None of this should be handled by the same people that are handling murders

And in many places they aren't. My town has a special traffic unit that handles tickets, wrecks, stuff like that. Similar with loitering as there are a few bicycle units who do nothing but patrol downtown (which is basically the only place where loitering is a problem).

In fact, don't most places do this? Its why you have special VICE units, violent crime units, and so on.

 

[Matty44]

Not all victims of crime are interviewed, and the majority of victims never get their case to even be taken seriously. Assaults in the hospital are a good example of this- even getting the police to take a statement or file a report is a herculean task. With regard to police not shooting as many white criminals, there is less enforcement in white areas and it's pretty well established whites will be treated better even when police interact with them for the same reason. Look at the white mass shooters that have walked away alive when compared with black people that have been gunned down for damn near nothing.

Anyway, I guess all of that is to say that it is impossible to know true crime rates because reporting rates are going to be higher and response higher in some situations and lower in others.

His post is one hell of a dog whistle if you ask me

You can try to explain the data away all you want, or you can just cry racism when you don’t like the data posted. Either way, it’s quite apparent your not gonna be convinced by any data I show you.

 

[Matty44]

And for those critical thinkers and open-minded lurkers out there, consider which scenario is more likely.

Scenario A:

Despite the horrible racist actions taken by some police, a la the George Floyd case, racism in the police force is the exception, not the rule. And consistent with studies by Fryer, Lott and Moody, etc, white cops are no more likely to target and kill black suspects than whites, or any other race. And in fact there is almost a direct 1:1 correlation between the percentage of people that engage in a risky behavior (violent crime) and the percent of a bad outcome (death).

OR

Scenario B:

Racism is the rule, and not the exception, and somehow you have to do mental and/or statistical gymnastics to get from the data I showed to the data vector cited to prove an over 13x more likelihood of blacks being killed by cops than whites.






It’s usually a horse....

 

[vector2]

Roland Fryer is wrong: There is racial bias in shootings by police
July 12, 2016
2020 update: The specific flaws of Roland Fryer's paper have now been characterized in two studies (by other scholars, not myself). Knox, Lowe, and Mummolo (2019) reanalyze Fryer's data to find it understates racial biases. Ross, Winterhalder, and McElreath (2018) do something similar through a statistical simulation.

Roland Fryer is wrong: There is racial bias in shootings by police

2020 update: The specific flaws of Roland Fryer's paper have now been characterized in two studies (by other scholars, not myself). Knox, Lowe, and Mummolo (2019) reanalyze Fryer's data to find it understates racial biases. Ross, Winterhalder, and McElreath (2018) do something similar through a...

scholar.harvard.edu

As for John Lott, his fulltime job is presupposing conclusions for conservative causes like guns and anti-choice and then "demonstrating" a result so the "study" headline can run in Breitbart or the National Review. I guess it's possible he is a serious economist/social scientist who by coincidence happens to arrive at a conservative conclusion 100% of the time, but I'll let each person make up their own mind regarding the credulity of such a notion.

The GOP’s favorite gun ‘academic’ is a fraud

The journalistic quest for neutrality has led to a sacrifice of intellectual integrity.

archive.thinkprogress.org

 

[Matty44]

Roland Fryer is wrong: There is racial bias in shootings by police
July 12, 2016
2020 update: The specific flaws of Roland Fryer's paper have now been characterized in two studies (by other scholars, not myself). Knox, Lowe, and Mummolo (2019) reanalyze Fryer's data to find it understates racial biases. Ross, Winterhalder, and McElreath (2018) do something similar through a statistical simulation.

Roland Fryer is wrong: There is racial bias in shootings by police

2020 update: The specific flaws of Roland Fryer's paper have now been characterized in two studies (by other scholars, not myself). Knox, Lowe, and Mummolo (2019) reanalyze Fryer's data to find it understates racial biases. Ross, Winterhalder, and McElreath (2018) do something similar through a...

scholar.harvard.edu

As for John Lott, his fulltime job is presupposing conclusions for conservative causes like guns and anti-choice and then "demonstrating" a result so the "study" headline can run in Breitbart or the National Review. I guess it's possible he is a serious economist/social scientist who by coincidence happens to arrive at a conservative conclusion 100% of the time, but I'll let each person make up their own mind regarding the credulity of such a notion.

The GOP’s favorite gun ‘academic’ is a fraud

The journalistic quest for neutrality has led to a sacrifice of intellectual integrity.

archive.thinkprogress.org

You can pick and poke at each of the people I mentioned, but that doesn’t get you anywhere close to going from an almost exactly proportional correlation between crime and fatal police force and your claims of 13x more likely to die at the hands of the police. Sorry.

 

[vector2]

You can pick and poke at each of the people I mentioned, but that doesn’t get you anywhere close to going from an almost exactly proportional correlation between crime and fatal police force and your claims of 13x more likely to die at the hands of the police. Sorry.

The claim specifically was young, unarmed, nonsuicidal, male victims of fatal force are 13 times more likely to be black. And that wasnt my claim. It was Schimmack and et al's response to the flawed Johnson-Cesario study using Johnson-Cesario's own datasets to demonstrate as such..

 

[Matty44]

The claim specifically was young, unarmed, nonsuicidal, male victims of fatal force are 13 times more likely to be black. And that wasnt my claim. It was Schimmack and et al's response to the flawed Johnson-Cesario study using Johnson-Cesario's own datasets to demonstrate as such..

Yes, I was referencing one of many statistics that you have cited that claims an extreme difference in fatal force from cops that I believe is not accurate.

 

[Mad Jack]

And in many places they aren't. My town has a special traffic unit that handles tickets, wrecks, stuff like that. Similar with loitering as there are a few bicycle units who do nothing but patrol downtown (which is basically the only place where loitering is a problem).

In fact, don't most places do this? Its why you have special VICE units, violent crime units, and so on.

I'm these people shouldn't be armed sworn officers. In my city they're all trained as police officers just shuffled to different enforcement units with no additional meaningful training

 

[vector2]

Yes, I was referencing one of many statistics that you have cited that claims an extreme difference in fatal force from cops that I believe is not accurate.

Well I guess that’s just your opinion and not really an argument unless you can point out what exactly was the problem with Schimmack’s analysis of the Johnson-Cesario data.

 

[Matty44]

Well I guess that’s just your opinion and not really an argument unless you can point out what exactly was the problem with Schimmack’s analysis of the Johnson-Cesario data.

My argument was in all the data that I posted, and your argument and Schimmack's analysis doesn't address any of the data that I posted. HIs critique of the Johnson-Cesario data tries to use the argument for using US population as a whole, which I've already pointed out is flawed methodology. And if you're going to continue to try and point out that crime stats can only be measured against the back drop of the entire us population, and not just the subset that commits crime, specifically violent crime, then we'll never come to any middle ground. Not that I'm holding my breath that I'll convince you of anything. I'm posting mainly for the lurkers and middle of the road people.

 

[vector2]

My argument was in all the data that I posted, and your argument and Schimmack's analysis doesn't address any of the data that I posted. HIs critique of the Johnson-Cesario data tries to use the argument for using US population as a whole, which I've already pointed out is flawed methodology. And if you're going to continue to try and point out that crime stats can only be measured against the back drop of the entire us population, and not just the subset that commits crime, specifically violent crime, then we'll never come to any middle ground. Not that I'm holding my breath that I'll convince you of anything. I'm posting mainly for the lurkers and middle of the road people.

You need to read Schimmack again cause it does nothing of the sort as far as “using the US population as a whole.” They were criticizing the construction of Johnson's model in addition to the fact it did not control for suicidal people

“
The published odds ratio of 0.15 [by Johnson] is based on a regression model that made the intercept correspond to a county with 4 times more White (50%) than Black (12%) citizens. In addition, the intercept of the model corresponds to a country where White homicide rates equal 1) Black homicide rates and 2) Hispanic homicide rates and where victims are 3) average age (36.71 y) and White and Black victims are equally likely to 4) have mental health problems, 5) be suicidal, 6) be armed, and 7) attack an officer. We found that including suicidal as a predictor had the strongest effect on the intercept, which doubled the odds of the victim being White (OR = 0.24 vs. 0.49). In contrast, adjusting only for differences in Black and White homicide rates left the intercept unchanged (OR = 0.48 vs. 49). Thus, the main contribution of the regression analysis is to show that that the odds of a victim being White double when the percentage of suicidal victims increases from 11% in the actual population to 50% in a hypothetical population. The fact that older suicidal victims are disproportionally more likely to be White shows that not all victims of lethal use of force are violent criminals.”

....To examine racial disparities in this group, we specified an alternative model that focused on young (age 20 y), unarmed male victims that showed no signs of mental health problems and were not suicidal in a county with equal proportions of Black and White citizens. The intercept of this model suggested that victims with these characteristics are 13.67 times more likely to be Black than White, 95% confidence interval = 6.65, 28.13 (Racial Disparity in Fatal Use of Force).”

A better criticism is that is Johnson’s data only includes the year 2015, but it is inarguable that the subset of young, unarmed, non-suicidal black men fared worse in that year than other groups.

 

[Matty44]

“ These claims are misleading because the reported results apply only to a subset of victims and do not control for the fact that we would expect a higher number of White victims simply because the majority of US citizens are White.”

 

[vector2]

“ These claims are misleading because the reported results apply only to a subset of victims and do not control for the fact that we would expect a higher number of White victims simply because the majority of US citizens are White.”

You're misunderstanding what Schimmack is saying. He's saying that part of the reason Johnson et all could come up with a 6.67x lower likelihood of the victim being black is because Johnson et al are starting with a 2015 dataset where the victims are 55% white, 19% black, 27% Hispanic and not controlling for this ratio, ergo if you don't look at a single other factor then right off the bat you're 2.8x less likely to find a black victim just because there's so many more whites in the population. Do you get that?

I'm pretty sure you didn't actually read the Johnson study or its criticism because it seems you don't realize that Johnson et al created a subset with a regression model and then analyzed the data using specific characteristic inputs. Some of those inputs (such as mental illness or suicidality) skew the dataset so that their subset doesn't have a connection with actual demographics or even with reality. Schimmack used a model where his input characteristics can show a 13x likelihood of a fatal encounter for a demographic we're actually interested on vis a vis BLM: young, unarmed, non-suicidal, black, male.

 

[Matty44]

You're misunderstanding what Schimmack is saying. He's saying that part of the reason Johnson et all could come up with a 6.67x lower likelihood of the victim being black is because Johnson et al are starting with a 2015 dataset where the victims are 55% white, 19% black, 27% Hispanic and not controlling for this ratio, ergo if you don't look at a single other factor then right off the bat you're 2.8x less likely to find a black victim just because there's so many more whites in the population. Do you get that?

I'm pretty sure you didn't actually read the Johnson study or its criticism because it seems you don't realize that Johnson et al created a subset with a regression model and then analyzed the data using specific characteristic inputs. Some of those inputs (such as mental illness or suicidality) skew the dataset so that their subset doesn't have a connection with actual demographics or even with reality. Schimmack used a model where his input characteristics can show a 13x likelihood of a fatal encounter for a demographic we're actually interested on vis a vis BLM: young, unarmed, non-suicidal, black, male.

I see no raw numbers in the link you posted by Schimmack. How many lethal interactions have there been between cops and 20y unarmed black males? Where are the actual death numbers that they are using for their 13x number?

 

[vector2]

I see no raw numbers in the link you posted by Schimmack. How many lethal interactions have there been between cops and 20y unarmed black males? Where are the actual death numbers that they are using for their 13x number?

It’s funny how you demand raw numbers from the response to the article but yet weren’t really in knowing the same thing from the original Johnson article which supported your preconceived notions.

In either case, the appendix, raw data set, and the algorithm Schimmack ran on the data are here.

Supporting Information

www.pnas.org

Racial Disparity in Fatal Use of Force

Hosted on the Open Science Framework

osf.io

 

[Matty44]

It’s funny how you demand raw numbers from the response to the article but yet weren’t really in knowing the same thing from the original Johnson article which supported your preconceived notions.

In either case, the appendix, raw data set, and the algorithm Schimmack ran on the data are here.

Supporting Information

www.pnas.org

Racial Disparity in Fatal Use of Force

Hosted on the Open Science Framework

osf.io

I dunno, the links you send me don’t open on my computer.....if you can see the hard numbers, please tell me how many unarmed black 20y men have been killed by the cops and how many unarmed while 20y men have been killed by the cops.

But you are correct I didn’t demand to look at the data sets from the original Johnson article cause the claim seemed very consistent with the raw data that I’ve seen elsewhere. And when there is a radical claim that unarmed black men are 13x more likely to be killed by the cops, I need hard data. And yes, I do call that a radical claim, because we all know that the cops shot and killed somewhere between 9-15 unarmed black men last year, and somewhere between 19-25 unarmed white men last year. And that ratio is pretty consistent for the last 5 years or so for which we have stats on this stuff.

So please, explain to me how you get from those numbers to a 13 fold increased risk for unarmed black (specifically) 20 year old men to die at the hands of cops. Maybe I’m too dumb to understand the statistical gymnastics it takes to get from one group of people X, who has less deaths than another group Y, to magically be in a place where group X now is 13 times more likely to die than Y. ESPECIALLY when the n is like ~10 for group X. It makes no sense.

And on a side note, you conveniently ignore the data I posted and took us on this tangent of a critique of one of the tertiary studies I mentioned. Do you have any response to the data I posted that shows each racial group dies at the hands of police pretty much at a rate in line with the percent of violent crime that group commits each year. And that was sampling ~1000 deaths and ~250,000 victims of crime to get to that conclusion.

 

[vector2]

I dunno, the links you send me don’t open on my computer.....if you can see the hard numbers, please tell me how many unarmed black 20y men have been killed by the cops and how many unarmed while 20y men have been killed by the cops.

But you are correct I didn’t demand to look at the data sets from the original Johnson article cause the claim seemed very consistent with the raw data that I’ve seen elsewhere. And when there is a radical claim that unarmed black men are 13x more likely to be killed by the cops, I need hard data. And yes, I do call that a radical claim, because we all know that the cops shot and killed somewhere between 9-15 unarmed black men last year, and somewhere between 19-25 unarmed white men last year. And that ratio is pretty consistent for the last 5 years or so for which we have stats on this stuff.

So please, explain to me how you get from those numbers to a 13 fold increased risk for unarmed black (specifically) 20 year old men to die at the hands of cops. Maybe I’m too dumb to understand the statistical gymnastics it takes to get from one group of people X, who has less deaths than another group Y, to magically be in a place where group X now is 13 times more likely to die than Y. ESPECIALLY when the n is like ~10 for group X. It makes no sense.

And on a side note, you conveniently ignore the data I posted and took us on this tangent of a critique of one of the tertiary studies I mentioned. Do you have any response to the data I posted that shows each racial group dies at the hands of police pretty much at a rate in line with the percent of violent crime that group commits each year. And that was sampling ~1000 deaths and ~250,000 victims of crime to get to that conclusion.

The initial radical claim is the one Johnson et al were so easy to pronounce and which you were so eager to run with which was that black people have an odds ratio of 0.15 (aka 6.67x less) to be fatally shot by police compared with white people- a claim which is absurd on its face. Both Johnson and Schimmack require some statistical wizardry which is beyond my means as well- the point is that you were acting like the study was some bulletproof evidence when in fact serious critiques exist and they had to publish a clarification amending the wording of their conclusions.

It also wouldnt surprise me if each racial group dies at the hands of police at roughly the same rate they offend (although you have to link me again to the specific data you were talking about). What really concerns me is that unarmed black people seem to die at higher rates than unarmed white people, although the exact rate is controversial

"Victims were majority white (52%) but disproportionately black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites. Most victims were reported to be armed (83%); however, black victims were more likely to be unarmed (14.8%) than white (9.4%) or Hispanic (5.8%) victims. "

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Matty44]

The initial radical claim is the one Johnson et al were so easy to pronounce and which you were so eager to run with which was that black people have an odds ratio of 0.15 (aka 6.67x less) to be fatally shot by police compared with white people- a claim which is absurd on its face. Both Johnson and Schimmack require some statistical wizardry which is beyond my means as well- the point is that you were acting like the study was some bulletproof evidence when in fact serious critiques exist and they had to publish a clarification amending the wording of their conclusions.

It also wouldnt surprise me if each racial group dies at the hands of police at roughly the same rate they offend (although you have to link me again to the specific data you were talking about). What really concerns me is that unarmed black people seem to die at higher rates than unarmed white people, although the exact rate is controversial

"Victims were majority white (52%) but disproportionately black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites. Most victims were reported to be armed (83%); however, black victims were more likely to be unarmed (14.8%) than white (9.4%) or Hispanic (5.8%) victims. "

Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: Findings From the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States, 2009–2012

Several high-profile cases in the U.S. have drawn public attention to the use of lethal force by law enforcement (LE), yet research on such fatalities is limited. Using data from a public health surveillance system, this study examined the characteristics ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I posted my data in the thread a handful of posts back if you want to scroll up. You don’t need to chase down links, it’s in my posts. And the last paragraph you posted is from a study that arrived at their disparity by using general population breakdown, which again, I don’t think is a valid methodology. You logically need to factor in crime committed when you’re looking at outcomes that involve police interaction. I don’t know how there is any intellectual honest way to make assumptions off of data that doesn’t account for crimes committed, I just don’t. If you disagree, which I assume you do since you keep posting data from studies that don’t make that assumption, can you explain why it would be appropriate to use the entire population of the US when making statistical claims about police deaths instead of using the subset of the population that has most of the interactions with the police, that being the group that is committing crimes?

 

[vector2]

And the last paragraph you posted is from a study that arrived at their disparity by using general population breakdown, which again, I don’t think is a valid methodology.

I agree a general population breakdown is neither here nor there in regard to the proportional number of whites vs blacks shot. Which is why that wasn't my concern- it was the percentage UNARMED that is my point of contention because if you are unarmed then the crime committed is almost totally irrelevant since the officer is likely using lethal force in an unwarranted fashion. And, to be painfully pedantic since you're being typically willfully ignorant, that is why I bolded unarmed black victims at 14.8% and white at 9.4%.

 

[vector2]

 

[coffeebythelake]

I agree a general population breakdown is neither here nor there in regard to the proportional number of whites vs blacks shot. Which is why that wasn't my concern- it was the percentage UNARMED that is my point of contention because if you are unarmed then the crime committed is almost totally irrelevant since the officer is likely using lethal force in an unwarranted fashion. And, to be painfully pedantic since you're being typically willfully ignorant, that is why I bolded unarmed black victims at 14.8% and white at 9.4%.

View attachment 311774

quite a bit of variability between populations though, not just "unarmed victim."

 

[nimbus]

View attachment 311790

Reminds me of residents getting fired for acting badly. Good for the chief. They can’t be cops.

 

[vector2]

quite a bit of variability between populations though, not just "unarmed victim."

The most notable variation though is mental health and suicide by cop wherein whites are represented at 3 to 7x the rate of blacks. In the Johnson-Cesario study this inclusion doubles the odds ratio of the victim being white, ergo it makes it even more stunning that unarmed blacks could reach absolute number parity or a 50% higher OR than unarmed whites in the study I quoted.

 

[Matty44]

I agree a general population breakdown is neither here nor there in regard to the proportional number of whites vs blacks shot. Which is why that wasn't my concern- it was the percentage UNARMED that is my point of contention because if you are unarmed then the crime committed is almost totally irrelevant since the officer is likely using lethal force in an unwarranted fashion. And, to be painfully pedantic since you're being typically willfully ignorant, that is why I bolded unarmed black victims at 14.8% and white at 9.4%.

Oh come now, I thought we were actually having a nice conversation for once, free of insults. Why ya gotta start now?

Anyways, "unarmed" absolutely does not mean force is unwarranted. That's a complete and total fallacy, and I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to realize that. Was Michael Brown unarmed?



"Out of the 20 “unarmed” suspects, 11 were committing a violent crime and fighting with a police officer before they were shot. The fights were brutal with some choking the officer. Others like Nana Adomako was beating an Fremont (CA) Police officer in the head so violently that he almost lost consciousness. After Adomako was shot and killed, he was considered “unarmed.”

Brian Easley was a 33 year old military veteran that was shot by a SWAT Officer after he took two bank employees hostage and claimed to have a bomb. He didn’t have a bomb so therefore he was “unarmed.”

Two suspects were running from cops and simulated shooting them after placing their hands in their waistband. JR Williams was one of them. A registered sex offender, he fled on foot when a Phoenix Police officer tried to place him under arrest. During the chase, he kept his hands concealed and threatened to shoot the officers. At one point, he turned and drew his arm from his waistband with a clenched hand, simulating a shooting stance. That action got him killed and also classified as “unarmed.”

Isaiah Tucker drove his car at an Oshkosh (WI) Police officer and they were classified as “unarmed” which is a mistake by the Washington Post considering they classify cars as a weapon in their data.

There was a tragedy in the data when a woman was shot by police in Florida during a search warrant when her boyfriend used her as cover as he was shooting at cops. She was “unarmed” but the man behind her was firing at will as officers entered the residence.

All but two officers were cleared of any wrongdoing. A police officer was charged with murder after he killed 14 year old Jordan Edwards, who was a passenger in a car fleeing a party that police were present at. An Amtrak Officer in Chicago tried to arrest a man for marijuana possession when he took off running. The officer shot and killed the suspect as he was fleeing and the officer was also charged with murder.

Police shot and killed 30 White Americans in 2017 that were considered “unarmed” by the Washington Post. That was 3% of all shootings compared to 2% of all African American Shootings.

Almost half of the suspects were in brutal fights with officers. One incident occurred in Toms River (NJ) when Christopher Apostolus busted out of a closet and ran towards officers. He grabbed an officer’s neck and the officer’s gun before being shot. He was also “unarmed.”

Many officers attempted other means of force prior to using deadly force including one Ohio officer that was attacked by Vincent Palma. Palma charged at the officer and attacked him. The officer utilized a Taser, Baton and even fired warning shots in the ground but the attack continued. Palma was shot and killed and he was also considered “unarmed.”

Suspects also ran, took aggressive stances and simulated shooting officers before being shot and in some cases this was done to citizens. Hayden Stutz called a Canton Police Dispatcher and threatened to kill officers when they arrived. The officers did arrive and he was holding a woman’s head on the ground telling her he had a gun and was going to kill her if she moved. He refused to get off the woman when cops arrived and told them he had a gun. After being killed by police and a weapon not being found, he was also considered “unarmed.”

As in the earlier cited data, there were a few “unarmed” citizens that were with violent felons and were unfortunately shot by the police in the process including an incident in Mississippi where an ex-con was shooting at officers and in the return fire, his girlfriend was also killed."

Unarmed Alaska police officers take fire from gunman; armed citizen gets suspect to surrender

KWETHLUK, Alaska - A 19-year-old Alaska man is facing attempted murder charges after breaking into a public safety building and firing

www.lawofficer.com

 

[vector2]

Oh come now, I thought we were actually having a nice conversation for once, free of insults. Why ya gotta start now?

Anyways, "unarmed" absolutely does not mean force is unwarranted. That's a complete and total fallacy, and I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to realize that. Was Michael Brown unarmed?



"Out of the 20 “unarmed” suspects, 11 were committing a violent crime and fighting with a police officer before they were shot. The fights were brutal with some choking the officer. Others like Nana Adomako was beating an Fremont (CA) Police officer in the head so violently that he almost lost consciousness. After Adomako was shot and killed, he was considered “unarmed.”

Brian Easley was a 33 year old military veteran that was shot by a SWAT Officer after he took two bank employees hostage and claimed to have a bomb. He didn’t have a bomb so therefore he was “unarmed.”

Two suspects were running from cops and simulated shooting them after placing their hands in their waistband. JR Williams was one of them. A registered sex offender, he fled on foot when a Phoenix Police officer tried to place him under arrest. During the chase, he kept his hands concealed and threatened to shoot the officers. At one point, he turned and drew his arm from his waistband with a clenched hand, simulating a shooting stance. That action got him killed and also classified as “unarmed.”

Isaiah Tucker drove his car at an Oshkosh (WI) Police officer and they were classified as “unarmed” which is a mistake by the Washington Post considering they classify cars as a weapon in their data.

There was a tragedy in the data when a woman was shot by police in Florida during a search warrant when her boyfriend used her as cover as he was shooting at cops. She was “unarmed” but the man behind her was firing at will as officers entered the residence.

All but two officers were cleared of any wrongdoing. A police officer was charged with murder after he killed 14 year old Jordan Edwards, who was a passenger in a car fleeing a party that police were present at. An Amtrak Officer in Chicago tried to arrest a man for marijuana possession when he took off running. The officer shot and killed the suspect as he was fleeing and the officer was also charged with murder.

Police shot and killed 30 White Americans in 2017 that were considered “unarmed” by the Washington Post. That was 3% of all shootings compared to 2% of all African American Shootings.

Almost half of the suspects were in brutal fights with officers. One incident occurred in Toms River (NJ) when Christopher Apostolus busted out of a closet and ran towards officers. He grabbed an officer’s neck and the officer’s gun before being shot. He was also “unarmed.”

Many officers attempted other means of force prior to using deadly force including one Ohio officer that was attacked by Vincent Palma. Palma charged at the officer and attacked him. The officer utilized a Taser, Baton and even fired warning shots in the ground but the attack continued. Palma was shot and killed and he was also considered “unarmed.”

Suspects also ran, took aggressive stances and simulated shooting officers before being shot and in some cases this was done to citizens. Hayden Stutz called a Canton Police Dispatcher and threatened to kill officers when they arrived. The officers did arrive and he was holding a woman’s head on the ground telling her he had a gun and was going to kill her if she moved. He refused to get off the woman when cops arrived and told them he had a gun. After being killed by police and a weapon not being found, he was also considered “unarmed.”

As in the earlier cited data, there were a few “unarmed” citizens that were with violent felons and were unfortunately shot by the police in the process including an incident in Mississippi where an ex-con was shooting at officers and in the return fire, his girlfriend was also killed."

Unarmed Alaska police officers take fire from gunman; armed citizen gets suspect to surrender

KWETHLUK, Alaska - A 19-year-old Alaska man is facing attempted murder charges after breaking into a public safety building and firing

www.lawofficer.com

1. That guy conveniently doesn’t describe how many of these so-called narratives are corroborated by bodycam footage or third-party testimony. I think we all know how scary and threatening the unarmed suspect is going to sound when only the involved cops corroborate each other’s BS story

2. He doesn’t mention the incidence of mental illness for white vs black even though Wapo provides the filter on their database, and we know including the mentally ill disproportionately increases the number of whites in the cohort significantly.

3. Even if the cops’ narratives about the suspects provocative behavior is true, that still doesn’t invalidate or explain why the 2009-2012 data from the study I posted shows there was a 50% higher odds ratio of the unarmed suspect being black.

 

[Matty44]

1. That guy conveniently doesn’t describe how many of these so-called narratives are corroborated by bodycam footage or third-party testimony. I think we all know how scary and threatening the unarmed suspect is going to sound when only the involved cops corroborate each other’s BS story

2. He doesn’t mention the incidence of mental illness for white vs black even though Wapo provides the filter on their database, and we know including the mentally ill disproportionately increases the number of whites in the cohort significantly.

3. Even if the cops’ narratives about the suspects provocative behavior is true, that still doesn’t invalidate or explain why the 2009-2012 data from the study I posted shows there was a 50% higher odds ratio of the unarmed suspect being black.

1. You conveniently dismiss the very valid point that unarmed does not equal not-dangerous because.......you assume lying, racist cops? Do you think every data point from every cop interaction in the studies that YOU point to has been captured on body cam? Maybe provide any kind of evidence from any one of those cases that they didn't happen as they were stated and then you can start to make your point. But its a pretty week argument to say "Well, of course, we all know every cop is a liar, so you can't believe anything about any of those deadly encounters." Can you really not even acknowledge that unarmed doesn't mean that you can't pose a violent threat to the cops?

2. So if you take out the unarmed whites (and blacks) who were suicidal and the unarmed blacks (and whites) who were actually violently attacking the police, despite being characterized as unarmed, how many actual murders of unarmed people who were posing no threat to the cops actually exist?

3. It is such an incredibly small number of unarmed people killed by the cops each year, especially if you take out the suicidal unarmed people, and the unarmed people that were actually violently attacking the cops in some other fashion. Do you really think you can draw any meaningful conclusion about the police as a whole and systemic racism from such a small number of true unarmed, non-violent deaths at the hand of police? You can use the exact data you bolded in that 2009-2012 study and say unarmed white people are over 60% more likely to be killed by the cops than Hispanics, so therefore the cops must be racist against whites (and blacks) and preferential towards Hispanics? Each of these "unarmed" victims has a unique scenario that it seems unfair to lump them all together. That's why each incident needs to be looked at individually and assessed based on the facts of each case. Michael Brown is not at all similar to George Flloyd, which is not at all similar to Rayshard Brooks, which is not at all similar to Daniel Shaver, which is not at all similar to Breonna Taylor, which is not at all similar to Tony Timpa.

 

[vector2]

1. You conveniently dismiss the very valid point that unarmed does not equal not-dangerous because.......you assume lying, racist cops? Do you think every data point from every cop interaction in the studies that YOU point to has been captured on body cam? Maybe provide any kind of evidence from any one of those cases that they didn't happen as they were stated and then you can start to make your point. But its a pretty week argument to say "Well, of course, we all know every cop is a liar, so you can't believe anything about any of those deadly encounters." Can you really not even acknowledge that unarmed doesn't mean that you can't pose a violent threat to the cops?

There is certainly a possibility one can pose a threat when unarmed, but the number of times an officer needs to use lethal force against someone not holding a deadly weapon is closer to 0- not 50-70 times a year. And if you weren't so desperate to defend the police you'd realize the evidence is the before-and-after study done in America where before this decade a cop was essentially never implicated in a murder/manslaughter/wrongful death suit while in the line of duty. And then magically when bodycams became prevalent and every joe blow is recording encounters with their iphone we see a rate of malfeasance that would've been thought absurd if there wasnt video evidence. Police, prosecutors, and the DA have one job- and it's certainly not making sure you are exercising your rights to the fullest extent of the Constitution every time you have a encounter with them.

2. So if you take out the unarmed whites (and blacks) who were suicidal and the unarmed blacks (and whites) who were actually violently attacking the police, despite being characterized as unarmed, how many actual murders of unarmed people who were posing no threat to the cops actually exist?

3. It is such an incredibly small number of unarmed people killed by the cops each year, especially if you take out the suicidal unarmed people, and the unarmed people that were actually violently attacking the cops in some other fashion. Do you really think you can draw any meaningful conclusion about the police as a whole and systemic racism from such a small number of true unarmed, non-violent deaths at the hand of police? You can use the exact data you bolded in that 2009-2012 study and say unarmed white people are over 60% more likely to be killed by the cops than Hispanics, so therefore the cops must be racist against whites (and blacks) and preferential towards Hispanics? Each of these "unarmed" victims has a unique scenario that it seems unfair to lump them all together. That's why each incident needs to be looked at individually and assessed based on the facts of each case. Michael Brown is not at all similar to George Flloyd, which is not at all similar to Rayshard Brooks, which is not at all similar to Daniel Shaver, which is not at all similar to Breonna Taylor, which is not at all similar to Tony Timpa.

You're the second person to make this "incredibly small number" argument erroneously. Scroll back up in the thread if you want to learn why per capita fatality by police numbers matter and how the US compares poorly to every other country, including those with similar violent crime and firearm homicide rates.

 

[Matty44]

You're the second person to make this "incredibly small number" argument erroneously. Scroll back up in the thread if you want to learn why per capita numbers matter and how the US compares poorly to every other country, including those with similar violent crime and firearm homicide rates.

Ok, maybe I’m not as bright as you and can’t interpret the statistics in a way that makes small numbers seem significant like you can, but last year we had about 10 unarmed black people killed by cops. That’s a fact. In a country of 330 million, that is an incredibly small number.

10/330,000,000 = 0.00000003% chance of being an unarmed black person killed by police.

In the US, odds of death are:

- 2.5x higher chance of being killed by lightning
- 6x higher chance of being killed by a storm
- 9x higher chance of being killed by a venomous plant or animal
- and about the same odds of dying from malaria, spiders, or hot air balloons.

Fancy dance all you like, that’s still an INCREDIBLY small number. Every life lost is a tragedy, but 10 outta 330,000,000 is still a blip on the radar.








And yes, I’m aware there aren’t 330,000,000 black people in America.