Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

Brian?

nullzero wrote: »

So what do you propose then Brian?

There is systemic racism in all American police forces sometimes and not others? It either exists or it doesn't.

There was a number of posts made earlier that were extolling the virtue of defunding. As usual any sense of nuance was abandoned and only the possible positives were discussed.

I asked about defunding police in high crime areas, I should have included the caveat of situations where the social programmes that are typically linked to defunding programmes could or would not tend to be successful. I didn't provide enough detail in my question, my apologies.

In the end we're all capable of sidestepping issues that relate to arguments we make, but are we gracious enough to recognise that we are not infallible?

I propose

1. Everyone actually acknowledges the problem exists. Which seems to be a way bigger ask than it should be.

2. A meaningful dialogue takes place between lawmakers and community activists. Including BLM, but not limited to them.

3. The outcome of this dialogue is then used to guide new training and procedures for police departments to follow.

4. I’d also like if the racists stopped being racists obvs.

Biafranlivemat

Brian? wrote: »

So you agree defunding the police can work well?

My idea of reform is to make BLM redundant by eliminating the issue. You’re notion of my idea is some nonsense you just made up.

If the bLM mob was handed complete power over every State,Federal and local PD's tomorrow. They still not go away.

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

Old ground. These have all been asked and answered.

You seem to be using the statistics to fit your argument, it would be instructive to clearly state your views on them.

This whole thread is an exercise in repetition, yet you are happy to engage again and again.

Potatoeman

Carfacemandog wrote: »

You should check out Camden and Newark, who both did this while extremely high crimes areas and have had something like 40 and 50% reductions in the decade since.

One (I think Camden) defunded, while the other disbanded. Both have far better functioning police departments and subsequent drops in crime as a result.

If it works and the people that live there agree to it ,sure. I wouldn’t be in favour of it in Ireland though.

Retr0gamer

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You seem to be using the statistics to fit your argument, it would be instructive to clearly state your views on them.

This whole thread is an exercise in repetition, yet you are happy to engage again and again.

He isn't. He is using statistics, actual hard factual data, to back up his argument. Unlike you who only provides a biased opinion and at best anecdotal evidence.

As for your last comment, it really should be applied to you as you are sounding like a broken record.

nullzero

Retr0gamer wrote: »

He isn't. He is using statistics, actual hard factual data, to back up his argument. Unlike you who only provides a biased opinion and at best anecdotal evidence.

As for your last comment, it really should be applied to you as you are sounding like a broken record.

Those statistics don't explain why those people were interacting with the police to begin with; they were breaking the law.

The issues surrounding the disproportionate numbers of African American males involved in crime has been addressed on this thread and we can all agree that it is an issue that needs to be addressed, some of it could be addressed by the police reforms being suggested here but it doesn't always bear the fruit it would be hoped it would.

The crux of this discussion is that there is a systemic concerted effort on the part of all the police forces and other law enforcement agencies in the United States to unfairly target African Americans because of deep rooted racism.

No evidence has been provided to support that assertion, some isolated instances of law enforcement officers engaging in related behaviour has been brought into the discussion, it has shown that overt racism on the part of these people results in them losing their jobs. Surely in a systemically racist environment this would not be the case?

So in the absence of any evidence (the type of hard facts you sought to invoke) the notion of organised systemic racism is nothing more than a conspiracy theory, and the per capita statistics do not tell a story that supports it.

Brussels Sprout

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

There was more than just Police reform in the GFA

...and it will take more than structural reform of the police in the USA to reduce widespread inequality in that country but it's an excellent place to start.

Other areas that require action:

• Underfunding of services
• Access to credit
• School funding
• Food deserts in urban areas
• Widespread voter disenfranchisement
• Prison sentence reform
• Reform of bail laws

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

Well for starters, I can't think of any black neighborhood, been invaded by Police and Auxiliary police (B specials) and the use of armored cars firing indiscriminately.

Plenty of examples of US cops doing similar.

Here is one:

https://twitter.com/SCSTATE1896/status/1226180034630688768?s=20

As for armoured vehicles, this monster was provided to the town of fewer than 9,000 residents and a low crime rate.

https://twitter.com/thedailyangle/status/1273988711211024385?s=20

Than there is the The Glenanne Gang, alone they were responsible for up to 120 murders. The equivalent in the US would be about 8000 murdered, in 4 year period.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenanne_gang

RUC collusion, hundreds of innocent people shot, based on their suspected political leanings.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ruc+collusion&t=ffsb&atb=v244-6&ia=web

The RUC allies, British military intelligence collusion.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=British+military+intelligence+collusion++northern+ireland&t=ffsb&atb=v244-6&ia=web

The FBI warned how the US police force were infiltrated by white supremacist groups and basically nothing was done.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/fbi-white-supremacists-in-law-enforcement

That article lists several instances of police getting caught and below are some more recent:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/5/27/21272143/chicago-police-department-officers-antifa-proud-boys

https://apnews.com/article/12ece8cedbf045259dcddebf619141e7

https://theintercept.com/2020/06/19/militia-vigilantes-police-brutality-protests/

https://theintercept.com/2020/08/28/kyle-rittenhouse-violent-pro-trump-militias-police/

Foxtrol

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

Trump was only elected 4 years ago, but you are blaming him for the problem.

Only speaking about the suburbs of Boston, These very Liberal, Biden voting towns have not rolled out the red carpet for poor blacks to move into.
WHY?

I'm not blaming Trump for the problem, I'm pointing to his vitriol as an example of how there are still issues with black people getting housing today, which the other poster implied wasn't an issue like it was for Catholics in the north.

Trump holds plenty of blame for policing taking a step backward though , which is difficult to think was possible, for doing absolutely nothing related to consent decrees during his term.

I'm not sure the point you're making regarding Boston suburbs, I acknowledge there is plenty of racism throughout US society and the Boston is infamous for it.

AbusesToilets

Retr0gamer wrote: »

He isn't. He is using statistics, actual hard factual data, to back up his argument. Unlike you who only provides a biased opinion and at best anecdotal evidence.

As for your last comment, it really should be applied to you as you are sounding like a broken record.

Using them without context, or clarifying his opinion on them.

Are blacks over represented in the shootings because of racism, or because they are more violent? I would argue that the statistics reflect the overall national trend of violence found in their communities, which precipitate higher levels of police interaction.

How do you square a claim of widespread police racism with black suspects more likely to be shot by non-white police officers, given that officers are generally representative of the community in which they serve?





https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-the-data-say-about-police-shootings/

The results paint a picture of definite disparity when it comes to race and police shootings. Although more white people are shot in total, people from minority ethnic groups are shot at higher rates by population. One paper published in August found that a black man is 2.5 times more likely than a white man to be killed by the police during his lifetime. The difference, albeit smaller, is also there for women. But the authors did not make any conclusions regarding racial bias of police officers, in part because not everyone has an equal chance of coming into contact with the police. Crime rates and policing practices differ across communities, as do the historical legacies that influence them. Aggressive policing over time can increase local levels of violence and contact with the police, says Frank Edwards, a sociologist at Rutgers University in Newark, New Jersey, and an author on the paper. “This is inherently a multilevel problem,” he says.

Researchers have used various approaches to try to determine the best benchmarks for the data, such as looking at the arrest rates where the shootings occurred or factoring in the context of encounters that end in a shooting. Did the suspect have a weapon? Were officers or another civilian being threatened? In a 2017 study, for example, Nix determined that black people fatally shot by the police were twice as likely as white people to be unarmed. Those findings align with many studies published since 2015 suggesting that racial biases do influence police shootings.

Some research runs counter to this conclusion. This July, authors of a study that pulled information from The Washington Post and The Guardian databases, as well as directly from police departments, said they found no evidence of biases against black or Hispanic people. In addition to factoring in the crime rates of the communities where the shootings happened, the authors looked at the race of the officers involved.

Several scientists have taken issue with their methods, however. To sidestep some of the questions about encounter rates, the study authors started from the pool of people shot by the police and then calculated the chance that they were of a certain race. Jonathan Mummolo, a political scientist at Princeton University, New Jersey, argues that the real question to ask in order to detect racial bias is the reverse: does a citizen of a certain race face a greater chance of getting shot by the police? And answering this question requires knowing, or at least reasonably approximating, that elusive encounter rate.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877

From the study referenced:

What Is the Evidence for Racial Disparity?

When considering all FOIS in 2015, we did not find anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparity. How do we explain these results? Our data are consistent with three possible explanations.

One police-centered explanation is that these disparities reflect depolicing (33, 34). Depolicing occurs when police officers’ concerns about becoming targets in civil litigation and the media spotlight impede officers from enforcing the law. Such concerns have been heightened due to recent high-profile shootings of Black men (35). The disparities in our data are consistent with selective depolicing, where officers are less likely to fatally shoot Black civilians for fear of public and legal reprisals. All else equal, this would increase the likelihood that a person fatally shot was White vs. Black. However, depolicing might be limited to areas with high-profile shootings (36). This explanation also does not explain the disparity observed when comparing White and Hispanic civilians. Future research could test for depolicing more rigorously by using a quasiexperimental time-lagged study investigating police use of force in cities before and after high-profile shootings where racial issues are prominent.

On the other hand, a civilian-centered explanation for these disparities is that White civilians may react differently toward police than racial minorities in crime-related situations. If White civilians present more threat toward police, this could explain why a person fatally shot was more likely to be White than Black or Hispanic. Among those fatally shot by police, Whites are more likely (relative to racial minorities) to be armed and pose a threat (26). We attempted to control for civilian threat level by measuring whether they were armed and attacking, but found these variables unrelated to the race of a person fatally shot. These issues illustrate a broader challenge in inferring civilian characteristics during fatal shootings. The newspaper databases we analyzed contained at least some errors (e.g., in whether civilians are coded as armed; ref. 37). There are likely more false positives and negatives in these databases, such as when separating individuals committing suicide who are not experiencing a mental health crisis from those who are experiencing a mental health crisis. Another challenge is that dichotomous variable codes may not capture the complexity of these interactions (e.g., a person is coded as attacking, but they had stopped struggling before they were fatally shot). One solution is to code civilian threat level in a more continuous way (e.g., ref. 10). But this will only be realistic if better records of FOIS are kept at the federal level. For this reason, we urge caution when interpreting the impact of civilian characteristics on racial disparities in fatal shootings.

Finally, the lack of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparity and the impact of race-specific crime are consistent with an exposure argument, whereby per capita racial disparity in fatal shootings is explained by non-Whites’ greater exposure to the police through crime. This explanation is consistent with studies that have used violent crime as a benchmark for testing disparity (20, 23⇓–25). However, this does not mean that researchers should continue to use benchmarking approaches, even if using violent crime over population size. Rather, researchers can take one or both predictors into account with our approach. Moreover, unlike the benchmark approach, our conclusions regarding racial disparity do not depend on which predictors are used (SI Appendix).
What These Findings Do Not Show.

Our analyses test for racial disparities in FOIS, which should not be conflated with racial bias (21). Racial disparities are a necessary but not sufficient, requirement for the existence of racial biases, as there are many reasons why fatal shootings might vary across racial groups that are unrelated to bias on the behalf of police officers.

For example, we found that a person fatally shot by police was much more likely to be White when they were suicidal. This does not mean that there are department policies or officer biases that encourage fatal shootings of suicidal White civilians. A more plausible explanation is that White civilians are more likely to attempt “suicide by cop” than minorities (38). Similarly, Black and Hispanic officers (compared with White officers) were more likely to fatally shoot Black and Hispanic civilians. This does not mean that there are department policies encouraging non-White officers to fatally shoot minorities. Rather, the link between officer race and FOIS appears to be explained by officers and civilians being drawn from the same population, making it more likely that an officer will be exposed to (and fatally shoot) a same-race civilian.

We stress that these findings cannot incriminate or exonerate officers in any specific case. Findings at the national level do not directly speak to the presence or absence of bias in individual shootings. In other words, whether a particular officer shows bias in any individual case is a different question than whether officers in general show bias. Claims of national bias in FOIS requires examining fatal force in aggregate, and not just in one incident or racial group (39).
Conclusion.

Until now, researchers have been unable to test questions related to officer characteristics in fatal shootings. We created a near-complete database of fatal shootings in 2015 to test questions about racial disparities in FOIS. However, continued work on this issue will require more information about the officers, civilians, and circumstances surrounding these events. We encourage federal agencies to enforce policies that require recording information about the civilians and officers in FOIS to better understand the relationship between civilian race and police use of force.

I don't expect you to provide any clarity, given your penchant for riding the coattails of others, and general inability to offer any cogent opinions of your own.

Foxtrol

There seems to be a misunderstanding by some here of what 'systematic' means in the context of racism.

It doesn't mean that there are a bunch of lads in leadership positions today saying 'let's go get black people', even if there are many examples of racist cops in leadership. It is that over the years due to people acting in both good and bad faith a system is now in place that positively or negatively impacts groups differently.

Take policing of marijuana for example, despite similar usage rates if you're black you're 3.73 likely to be arrested for it than if you're white. I don't know how anyone can look at those numbers and say that there isn't something systematically wrong that leads to such inequitable policing.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877

I don't expect you to provide any clarity, given your penchant for riding the coattails of others, and general inability to offer any cogent opinions of your own.

Did you even click that link before sharing? The authors had to write multiple corrections due to errors and then retracted their research.

This is the note they provided in the retraction, specifically calling out the type of inferences you made as wrong:

The authors wish to note the following: “Our article estimated the role of officer characteristics in predicting the race of civilians fatally shot by police. A critique pointed out we had erroneously made statements about racial differences in the probability of being shot (1), and we issued a correction to rectify the statement (2).

Despite this correction, our work has continued to be cited as providing support for the idea that there are no racial biases in fatal shootings, or policing in general. To be clear, our work does not speak to these issues and should not be used to support such statements. We take full responsibility for not being careful enough with the inferences made in our original report, as this directly led to the misunderstanding of our research.

https://www.pnas.org/content/117/30/18130

nullzero

Foxtrol wrote: »

There seems to be a misunderstanding by some here of what 'systematic' means in the context of racism.

It doesn't mean that there are a bunch of lads in leadership positions today saying 'let's go get black people', even if there are many examples of racist cops in leadership. It is that over the years due to people acting in both good and bad faith a system is now in place that positively or negatively impacts groups differently.

Take policing of marijuana for example, despite similar usage rates if you're black you're 3.73 likely to be arrested for it than if you're white. I don't know how anyone can look at those numbers and say that there isn't something systematically wrong that leads to such inequitable policing.

Funny that you change the parameters after working within the previous parameters and failing to prove your point. There's some goalpost reference that could be used here I think...

The issues facing certain groups of African Americans (I find it odd that I'm the big bad supposed "right winger" and I'm the one using that term instead of Black to describe this group of people) are exacerbated by a system which is set up to come down heavier on poorer people and crimes committed by poorer people that relate to drugs typically used by poorer people, who then get sold down the river into a prison system which is for the most part a private business that will find any means necessary to keep as many inmates in prison for as long as possible because that's how it makes its money.

It's a bad system and while African Americans are getting a raw deal within that system it is not because they are African Americans.

Foxtrol

nullzero wrote: »

Funny that you change the parameters after working within the previous parameters and failing to prove your point. There's some goalpost reference that could be used here I think...

The issues facing certain groups of African Americans (I find it odd that I'm the big bad supposed "right winger" and I'm the one using that term instead of Black to describe this group of people) are exacerbated by a system which is set up to come down heavier on poorer people and crimes committed by poorer people that relate to drugs typically used by poorer people, who then get sold down the river into a prison system which is for the most part a private business that will find any means necessary to keep as many inmates in prison for as long as possible because that's how it makes its money.

It's a bad system and while African Americans are getting a raw deal within that system it is not because they are African Americans.

So overall are black families significantly poorer than white because of something inherently wrong with them or is it a systematic issue?

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

Did you even click that link before sharing? The authors had to write multiple corrections due to errors and then retracted their research.

This is the note they provided in the retraction, specifically calling out the type of inferences you made as wrong:



https://www.pnas.org/content/117/30/18130

The report is useful as tool to undermine the assertion that the greater number of blacks involved in police shootings is as a result of racial biases.

The correction they made was in relation to the math of one of their models, and not related to the central thesis of the study.

The authors wish to note the following: “Recently, we published a report showing that, among civilians fatally shot, officer race did not predict civilian race and there was no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities (1). Specifically, we estimated the probability that a civilian was Black, Hispanic, or White given that a person was fatally shot and some covariates. The dataset contains only information about individuals fatally shot by police, and the race of the individual is predicted by a set of variables. Thus, we compute Pr(race|shot, X) where X is a set of variables including officer race.

“Although we were clear about the quantity we estimated and provide justification for calculating Pr(race|shot, X) in our report (see also 2, 3), we want to correct a sentence in our significance statement that has been quoted by others stating ‘White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers.’ This sentence refers to estimating Pr(shot|race, X). As we estimated Pr(race|shot, X), this sentence should read: ‘As the proportion of White officers in a fatal officer-involved shooting increased, a person fatally shot was not more likely to be of a racial minority.’ This is consistent with our framing of the results in the abstract and main text.

Their retraction has nothing to do with the merits of the argument they put forward, rather it's related to people's usage of said information. You're attempt to dismiss it out of hand falls well into line with that trend of misuse.

nullzero

Foxtrol wrote: »

So overall are black families significantly poorer than white because of something inherently wrong with them or is it a systematic issue?

There is systemic issue that effects poor people as a group in America. It doesn't require the colour of the persons skin to be taken into consideration. If you are born poor there's a reasonable chance you will die poor.
We have similar (I would in fact argue identical) issues in this country, skin colour isn't a factor, being poor is the problem.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

So overall are black families significantly poorer than white because of something inherently wrong with them or is it a systematic issue?

It's both. There is historical discrimination that led to present day circumstances, redlining, denial of banking resources. These played into having less property ownership and resulting lower wealth generation. They also mean poorer schools etc.

There are also cultural issues that seem persistent among blacks, relating to education and employment.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The report is useful as tool to undermine the assertion that the greater number of blacks involved in police shootings is as a result of racial biases.

The correction they made was in relation to the math of one of their models, and not related to the central thesis of the study.

Their retraction has nothing to do with the merits of the argument they put forward, rather it's related to people's usage of said information. You're attempt to dismiss it out of hand falls well into line with that trend of misuse.

The incorrect usage they describe in the retraction is the exact way that you are trying to use it in this discussion.

I'll post the authors words again:

Despite this correction, our work has continued to be cited as providing support for the idea that there are no racial biases in fatal shootings, or policing in general. To be clear, our work does not speak to these issues and should not be used to support such statements

Foxtrol

nullzero wrote: »

There is systemic issue that effects poor people as a group in America. It doesn't require the colour of the persons skin to be taken into consideration. If you are born poor there's a reasonable chance you will die poor.
We have similar (I would in fact argue identical) issues in this country, skin colour isn't a factor, being poor is the problem.

If you believe it has nothing to do with race then why is there such a huge disparity in wealth of an average white and black family? Are they just unlucky to have ended up poor?

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

It's both. There is historical discrimination that led to present day circumstances, redlining, denial of banking resources. These played into having less property ownership and resulting lower wealth generation. They also mean poorer schools etc.

There are also cultural issues that seem persistent among blacks, relating to education and employment.

There is therefore similar 'cultural' issues with poor white people in the US and all around the world.

Your first paragraph is bang on though.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

The incorrect usage they describe in the retraction is the exact way that you are trying to use it in this discussion.

I'll post the authors words again:

The study challenges the view that there is a disparity in the numbers of black people being shot by the police, as is argued here to support evidence of systemic racism.

We report three main findings: 1) As the proportion of Black or Hispanic officers in a FOIS increases, a person shot is more likely to be Black or Hispanic than White, a disparity explained by county demographics; 2) race-specific county-level violent crime strongly predicts the race of the civilian shot; and 3) although we find no overall evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities in fatal shootings, when focusing on different subtypes of shootings (e.g., unarmed shootings or “suicide by cop”), data are too uncertain to draw firm conclusions. We highlight the need to enforce federal policies that record both officer and civilian information in FOIS.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The study challenges the view that there is a disparity in the numbers of black people being shot by the police, as is argued here to support evidence of systemic racism.

Yes, it challenges those numbers but at the same time in no way claims that there aren't racial biases when it comes policing or shooting, which it is what that article is regularly used to imply.

The research also points to how terrible the data on this topic is which, after several attempts to try to explain how many gaps there are in it, I've learned over the last few months to try to stay out of the weeds of those discussions. They can't go anywhere because by design nearly every police force and union resists tracking acts of violence by cops.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

Yes, it challenges those numbers but at the same time in no way claims that there aren't racial biases when it comes policing or shooting, which it is what that article is regularly used to imply.

The research also points to how terrible the data on this topic is which, after several attempts to try to explain how many gaps there are in it, I've learned over the last few months to try to stay out of the weeds of those discussions. They can't go anywhere because by design nearly every police force and union resists tracking acts of violence by cops.

So, to again tackle the question that's been unaddressed, do Brian? and other posters feel there is a disparity in the numbers in police shootings?

Are blacks over represented?

Are whites under/ over/ or correctly represented?

Are such numbers reflective of the overall trend in crime?

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

So, to again tackle the question that's been unaddressed, do Brian? and other posters feel there is a disparity in the numbers in police shootings?

Are blacks over represented?

Are whites under/ over/ or correctly represented?

Are such numbers reflective of the overall trend in crime?

I've already stated my opinion, the data regarding police shooting and other brutality is complete garbage and designed to be that way.

Either way, the discussion is a complete distraction when it comes to solutions. The BLM movement isn't asking for police reform for black people only, so even if you can prove that the police are brutalising all races equally it doesn't change what they are calling for regarding police reform will help all races.

nullzero

Foxtrol wrote: »

If you believe it has nothing to do with race then why is there such a huge disparity in wealth of an average white and black family? Are they just unlucky to have ended up poor?

Rich white people have been monopolising American life for centuries. African Americans were emancipated from slavery in 1865 and weren't treated equally for another century.

The majority of white wealth in America can be attributed to the WASP elite.

So clearly ethnicity has been an issue in the past and there is a hangover in socio economic terms. There are plenty of white people in generational poverty in America as well.

Poverty isn't something that runs along racial lines even if some communities are stuck in abysmal circumstances.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

I've already stated my opinion, the data regarding police shooting and other brutality is complete garbage and designed to be that way.

Either way, the discussion is a complete distraction when it comes to solutions. The BLM movement isn't asking for police reform for black people only, so even if you can prove that the police are brutalising all races equally it doesn't change what they are calling for regarding police reform will help all races.

I'm sorry, the data is garbage when it doesn't support your views?

Curious

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

I'm sorry, the data is garbage when it doesn't support your views?

Curious

All police data is garbage when it comes to acts of violence by police officers and I've been saying it for months. It has been accepted many times by the US government and even law enforcement agencies themselves.

In the research you keep going back to, they repeatedly state it and even highlight it in their abstract, which you just posted.

We highlight the need to enforce federal policies that record both officer and civilian information in FOIS.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

All police data is garbage when it comes to acts of violence by police officers and I've been saying it for months. It has been accepted many times by the US government and even law enforcement agencies themselves.

In the research you keep going back to, they repeatedly state it and even highlight it in their abstract, which you just posted.

That study draws data from FBI statistics, and from the WaPo/ Guardian projects, which are frequently referenced by those with your general view. The data might be lacking, but that doesn't mean what has been collected is garbage.

Foxtrol

nullzero wrote: »

Rich white people have been monopolising American life for centuries. African Americans were emancipated from slavery in 1865 and weren't treated equally for another century.

The majority of white wealth in America can be attributed to the WASP elite.

So clearly ethnicity has been an issue in the past and there is a hangover in socio economic terms. There are plenty of white people in generational poverty in America as well.

Poverty isn't something that runs along racial lines even if some communities are stuck in abysmal circumstances.

I'm struggling to get my head around your logic here.

- You accept that racist practices have caused black families to be on average significantly poorer than white families.

- You believe policing comes down heavier on poor communities.

- Despite believing both of those things, you think the policing structure and cops are able to keep both of those things completely separate, neither consciously nor sub-consciously connect them - that a given black person is more likely to be poor and therefore face a different approach to policing?

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

That study draws data from FBI statistics, and from the WaPo/ Guardian projects, which are frequently referenced by those with your general view. The data might be lacking, but that doesn't mean what has been collected is garbage.

I admit to similarly referencing shooting data when I started to discuss this topic but that was before I did some research and realized how terrible the data is and how open to manipulation by police departments. It is like accepting research data on smoking from cigarette companies.

Take your FBI statistics, here is a quote from the research paper you referenced about how bad their data is:

Until recently, the only nationwide data on FOIS was compiled yearly in the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Report. On a voluntary basis, departments report the number of justifiable homicides by on-duty law-enforcement officers. Not only are these shootings underreported (by ∼50%; ref. 2), such reports do not provide information about the officers or circumstances surrounding these shootings.

It is a disgrace that the WaPo/ Guardian have done a better job than the US government but their data again is no where close to complete. They try to piece it together from a bunch of sources, including local media, but there are holes everywhere (which they admit to).

Sure both sides use the data but it is one step above guessing at what the true numbers are, that is even before going shootings that don't result in deaths, where the data is even worse, and other forms of police brutality, where the data is basically non-existent.