I'm originally from a large industrial city where the local cops have a reputation for being heavy handed and corrupt. While there always a good number of Black cops, even after WWII, now the Department is at least half Black and Latino. These demographic changes have not improved police conduct and corruption, but if anything, have made it worse. It just doesn't command attention when White cops are the wrongdoers.
In making comparisons, The benchmark used is important.
If one looks at percentage of blacks killed compared to percentage of black population, it will seen that blacks are killed more often than they should be.
But one better benchmark would be the percentage of police interactions for each race, or percentage of violent crime for each race.
If one race commits more violent crime per capita, or has more police interactions per capita, it stands to reason that race will have more potential opportunities to be shot by police, and get killed more often.
Exactly. It’s all about the benchmark. Stats passed around by liberals focus on overall population, but the relevant population here is the one that interacts with police, so comparisons to race-specific crime rates, as a proxy, address the issue better.
The linked article even includes three corrections, at least one of which leans on this exact misleading benchmark of percentage of population rather than percentage of violent crime.
I'm originally from a large industrial city where the local cops have a reputation for being heavy handed and corrupt. While there always a good number of Black cops, even after WWII, now the Department is at least half Black and Latino. These demographic changes have not improved police conduct and corruption, but if anything, have made it worse. It just doesn't command attention when White cops are the wrongdoers.
"Dude, my paper just got published in PNAS!"
"P...p...penis?!"
"Yeah, PNAS!!"
Hehehehehe... Only topped by when journal abbreviations are used for "analytical," e.g., J Anal Chem.
In making comparisons, The benchmark used is important.
If one looks at percentage of blacks killed compared to percentage of black population, it will seen that blacks are killed more often than they should be.
But one better benchmark would be the percentage of police interactions for each race, or percentage of violent crime for each race.
If one race commits more violent crime per capita, or has more police interactions per capita, it stands to reason that race will have more potential opportunities to be shot by police, and get killed more often.
Exactly. It’s all about the benchmark. Stats passed around by liberals focus on overall population, but the relevant population here is the one that interacts with police, so comparisons to race-specific crime rates, as a proxy, address the issue better.
The linked article even includes three corrections, at least one of which leans on this exact misleading benchmark of percentage of population rather than percentage of violent crime.
They'll just claim that blacks have more interactions with police because racial profiling
We need a Soros, ACLU, SPLC, Social Media sites and millions of Twitter bots
Presents this study to a lefty.
Lefty reads opening paragraph, dismisses report because the facts don't match the TV facts.
Lefty continues to be a lefty.
And the evidence gently weeps.