The study liberal friends are sharing: The Relationship Between Structural Racism and Black-White Disparities in Fatal Police Shootings at the State Level: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0027968417303206#bib23
In the study, the authors develop a "state racism index" based on 1. Residential segregation, 2. Incarceration rate gap, 3. Educational attainment gap, and 4. Employment disparity index.
Based on this index, they then compare fatal shootings of unarmed people. Results: "After controlling for numerous state-level factors and for the underlying rate of fatal shootings of black victims in each state, the state racism index was a significant predictor of the Black-White disparity in police shooting rates of victims not known to be armed (incidence rate ratio: 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.50). For every 10-point increase in the state racism index, the Black-White disparity ratio of police shooting rates of people not known to be armed increased by 24%."
They say they control for race-specific crime rates. I'm wondering how they were able to do that, and even if that is controlled for, isn't it still just correlation not causation? The correlation is interesting, but it doesn't convince me of systemic police racism. So what else could explain this correlation?
The authors said they controlled for the crime rates, which is why I got confused. How did they do that? I don't understand statistical modeling, so it's a struggle understanding these kinds of papers.
The rebuttal is:
If there's one thing to fix, it's the presence of a father.
Blue Stronghold Metropolises themselves are the systemic racism. They all deliberately punish Fathers, Firearms, and Fetuses.
#BFFFM
When blacks, only 13% of the population, do 50% of all homicides in America year after year it shows their propensity for violence. The far majority of police shooting blacks is due to the blacks brandishing a weapon of one kind or another and attacking police or others.
And where does one find this "racial residential segregation"? Democrat cities.
Of course not, because then they'd have to address the fact that most black people aren't shot by cops, they're shot by other blacks.
TBH the whole paper sounds like post hoc bullshit founded on statistical fuckery designed to confirm a pre-existing bias.
Ok thanks for confirming what I thought was a weird study that didn't really prove anything. There are too many correlational studies that do this kind of post hoc analysis. I guess I'll sit tight for the unintentional experimental study that is about to play out in these "defund the police" cities.
I just know that when they start quoting per capita statistics that they're full of shit. Police encounter blacks and whites about equally, and kill twice as many whites. If you're looking for racial bias in police shootings it doesn't make the slightest difference how many people are in the population(s) that the police never encountered. If you're not coming into contact with the police then they're not killing you at all, and if you are, your chances of being shot are distinctly higher if you're white. If you want more black people to get shot then by all means disband the police and let the neighborhood gangs run wild, because they're the ones doing most of it.