RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Police shoot and kill 2X more whites than blacks

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 9:14 am    ::: Police shoot and kill 2X more whites than blacks Reply Reply with quote

How The Washington Post is examining police shootings in the United States

Quote:
The Washington Post is compiling a database of every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since Jan. 1, 2015.

The Post is documenting only those shootings in which a police officer, in the line of duty, shoots and kills a civilian — the circumstances that most closely parallel the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., which began the protest movement culminating in Black Lives Matter and an increased focus on police accountability nationwide.


The WP databases show that in 2015, police killed 495 whites vs. 258 blacks; in 2016, police killed 465 whites vs. 233 blacks; and in 2017 to date, police have killed 211 whites vs. 113 blacks.

Therefore, over the past 30 months, police have shot and killed 1171 whites vs. 604 blacks. Ignoring other races: Of the white + black total killed, 66% have been white and 34% have been black. From these data, police shoot and kill white victims at a rate essentially two times that of black victims.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 9:21 am    ::: Re: Police shoot and kill 2X more whites than blacks Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
How The Washington Post is examining police shootings in the United States

Quote:
The Washington Post is compiling a database of every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since Jan. 1, 2015.

The Post is documenting only those shootings in which a police officer, in the line of duty, shoots and kills a civilian — the circumstances that most closely parallel the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., which began the protest movement culminating in Black Lives Matter and an increased focus on police accountability nationwide.


The WP databases show that in 2015, police killed 495 whites vs. 258 blacks; in 2016, police killed 465 whites vs. 233 blacks; and in 2017 to date, police have killed 211 whites vs. 113 blacks.

Therefore, over the past 30 months, police have shot and killed 1171 whites vs. 604 blacks. Ignoring other races: Of the white + black total killed, 66% have been white and 34% have been black. From these data, police shoot and kill white victims at a rate essentially two times that of black victims.


If the black population was equal to the white population...

Blacks make up about 13% of the US population. If 34% of police shooting victims are black then a black person who encounters a cop is 2.6 times as likely to be shot as a white person who does so.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 9:31 am    ::: Re: Police shoot and kill 2X more whites than blacks Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
How The Washington Post is examining police shootings in the United States

Quote:
The Washington Post is compiling a database of every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since Jan. 1, 2015.

The Post is documenting only those shootings in which a police officer, in the line of duty, shoots and kills a civilian — the circumstances that most closely parallel the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., which began the protest movement culminating in Black Lives Matter and an increased focus on police accountability nationwide.


The WP databases show that in 2015, police killed 495 whites vs. 258 blacks; in 2016, police killed 465 whites vs. 233 blacks; and in 2017 to date, police have killed 211 whites vs. 113 blacks.

Therefore, over the past 30 months, police have shot and killed 1171 whites vs. 604 blacks. Ignoring other races: Of the white + black total killed, 66% have been white and 34% have been black. From these data, police shoot and kill white victims at a rate essentially two times that of black victims.


If the black population was equal to the white population...

Blacks make up about 13% of the US population. If 34% of police shooting victims are black then a black person who encounters a cop is 2.6 times as likely to be shot as a white person who does so.


Population percentage is relevant, but I don't think I agree with your statistical conclusion, which seems to be a non sequitur. The WP data show that when whites "encounter" (to use your word) police in the line of duty, they are twice as likely to be shot and killed than blacks. What we don't know is the percentage of all police encounters that are white vs. black. Would you agree with that modification?
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 9:38 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

oh thank god, proof there is no racial bias among white cops. Laughing



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 11188



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 9:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
oh thank god, proof there is no racial bias among white cops. Laughing


Any person with the agenda to prove that racism is few and far between are more dangerous than overt racists.



_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
hyperetic



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5344
Location: Fayetteville


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 9:57 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think Pilight's point is a valid one.

Now...on face value of the title of this thread, if that's the case, why aren't more white people up in arms about police shootings? Why do so many cops get off scott-free after so many of these shootings juried by majority if not all white juries? Are the white shootings disproportionately justified? What percentage of the shootings are off unarmed white people?
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 10:55 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I actually attended a talk given by a statistician named Roland G. Fryer Jr., who was studying this.

According to him, a number like this is irrelevant, because in order to see if there is a bias you need to consider the situation. The statistical analysis has to come with similar situations.

When it came to non deadly violence, Fryer said that Hispanics and Blacks were about 2.5 times more likely to receive non violent actions from police towards them, than white people - in the same situation.

However, when it came to deadly violence, he found know difference. Now, he cautioned that only one district was willing to give this information up (you go Houston). So it might just be that Houston's police officers are different from the rest of the country.

However, he seemed to think it was actually irrelevant. That the first set of numbers was what was relevant. That there are very very few Philando Castiles, and many many minorities who are beaten regularly without cause. (Including himself and his peers at Harvard. One of his fellow professors was beaten in front of his children in his yard). His takeaway was "Black Dignity Matters."



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 11:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

hyperetic wrote:
I think Pilight's point is a valid one.

Now...on face value of the title of this thread, if that's the case, why aren't more white people up in arms about police shootings? Why do so many cops get off scott-free after so many of these shootings juried by majority if not all white juries? Are the white shootings disproportionately justified? What percentage of the shootings are off unarmed white people?

This was actually a major fight within the ranks of the NRA after the Castile shooting. Many members were upset that the NRA leadership didn't take a stance on the matter.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 11:55 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:

Blacks make up about 13% of the US population. If 34% of police shooting victims are black then a black person who encounters a cop is 2.6 times as likely to be shot as a white person who does so.


hyperetic wrote:
I think Pilight's point is a valid one.


Actually it's not. There is no obvious logical basis for equating share of total population to rate of police encounters.

Now if someone has some evidence that the rate of police encounters in fact correlates 1:1 with share of population, I'd be happy to see it.

It seems nobody in these discussions ever wants to address how economics and demographics might have a major impact on crime rates, and consequently on rate of police encounters and rate of violent police encounters.

I readily admit to having compiled no data myself, but I guess I can make some assumptions too, such as that the rate of police encounters is likely a lot lower in high income, high education level, low population density locales such as Santa Clara County, Suffolk County, Marin County, Somerset County, Fairfax County, etc, which also happen to be predominantly white, than they are in low income, low education level, high population density areas such as Memphis, New Orleans and Detroit, which also happen to be predominantly black. It's also probably a lot lower in rural, low population density, agricultural areas such the Dakotas and Wyoming, than it is in the Bronx, or East Chicago, or Camden. I doubt if the difference in these is primarily driven by the racial composition.

I guess it's easier to just focus on race as being the one and only variable, when it might well be far down the list.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 11:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
pilight wrote:

Blacks make up about 13% of the US population. If 34% of police shooting victims are black then a black person who encounters a cop is 2.6 times as likely to be shot as a white person who does so.


hyperetic wrote:
I think Pilight's point is a valid one.


Actually it's not. There is no obvious logical basis for equating share of total population to rate of police encounters.

Now if someone has some evidence that the rate of police encounters in fact correlates 1:1 with share of population, I'd be happy to see it.


I responded to a bad statistic with another bad statistic. People will use whichever one they like to prove whatever point they already believe.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 12:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:


I responded to a bad statistic with another bad statistic.


Didn't mean to single yours out. Laughing

Did not mean to suggest that I thought the assertion to which you were responding was valid. Indeed I thought the opposite was pretty obvious. I assumed that was intentional and rhetorical.

Hey, I don't see any victims in the database identified as Pacific Islander or as Aboriginal race of Australia. I wonder how they factor into this.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 12:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

My takeaway from this is how it highlights white privilege, and how that privilege has a significant downside.

Because white people should be up in arms about how often we are killed by the police without legal consequence. The "All Lives Matter" group should be echoing BLM if they truly hold to their supposed tenet. But because of privilege we don't have the long history of being targeted by those in authority abusing their power, unlike persons of color.

So when we see this, our assumption is that these white people are being killed because they deserve it, and that assumption then is transfered to all the other races of people killed. Persons of color, having been tought, for good reason, not to trust the police don't buy that assumption. Thus BLM.

Because white people have so long been the "authority", we are much more likely to accept traditional authoritarian behaviors in the US. Thus we grant police officers so much leeway on what is considered "reasonable" behavior. But not only does that hurt us, it compounds it for persons of color. Study after study has proven that we all hold implicit biases within us that will trigger emotions like fear. The only way to overcome them is rational thought and extensive training.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 2:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:

So when we see this, our assumption is that these white people are being killed because they deserve it


You probably have a point there. And five years ago, it was probably assumed by most white people that those killed by police (regardless of race) brought it on themselves, at least in part, unless and until there was good evidence to the contrary.

And that presumption was never particularly valid, regardless of the victim's race.

Now, the assumption seems to have swung the other way to a point where it's still not particularly valid. If we have a young black male shot by a cop, there is a large portion of the population (black and white) eager to presume the cop was completely unjustified and out of line, and more than happy to believe anything said by relatives, co-occupants, or other interested persons. Remember Ferguson? Witnesses claimed Brown was shot while on his knees, that there were two police involved, that the police shot Brown multiple times, and of course the entire "hands up, don't shoot" thing. All of it was complete bullshit, in several cases fabricated by people who weren't anywhere close to the scene at the time it happened. (As was a woman who testified she saw Brown "pummel" the cop, by the way, but also was nowhere near the scene at the time.)

So what came out of Ferguson was a share of the population that concluded without foundation that Brown was a thug who must have been doing something wrong and got what he deserved, and a share of the population that chose to believe a completely impossible set of "facts" based on completely fabricated testimony and to assume Brown was an entirely innocent victim of a racist cop. Riots and an entire protest movement and slogan were founded on a total fiction that a guy with his hands in the air surrendering was murdered in cold blood.

Video has delivered some outrageous examples of instances where the police were grossly unjustified in their actions. Eric Garner remains at the top of the list for me. Cases like Garner, and cases like Michael Brown should give everyone pause before assuming anything.

But the reality remains, that these things aren't happening to anyone, black or white, in Greenwich Connecticut, Beverly Hills, and Potomac, Maryland. And the assumptions are driven as much by economics and demographics as by race.


hyperetic



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5344
Location: Fayetteville


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 2:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
pilight wrote:

Blacks make up about 13% of the US population. If 34% of police shooting victims are black then a black person who encounters a cop is 2.6 times as likely to be shot as a white person who does so.


hyperetic wrote:
I think Pilight's point is a valid one.


Actually it's not. There is no obvious logical basis for equating share of total population to rate of police encounters.

Now if someone has some evidence that the rate of police encounters in fact correlates 1:1 with share of population, I'd be happy to see it.

It seems nobody in these discussions ever wants to address how economics and demographics might have a major impact on crime rates, and consequently on rate of police encounters and rate of violent police encounters.

I readily admit to having compiled no data myself, but I guess I can make some assumptions too, such as that the rate of police encounters is likely a lot lower in high income, high education level, low population density locales such as Santa Clara County, Suffolk County, Marin County, Somerset County, Fairfax County, etc, which also happen to be predominantly white, than they are in low income, low education level, high population density areas such as Memphis, New Orleans and Detroit, which also happen to be predominantly black. It's also probably a lot lower in rural, low population density, agricultural areas such the Dakotas and Wyoming, than it is in the Bronx, or East Chicago, or Camden. I doubt if the difference in these is primarily driven by the racial composition.

I guess it's easier to just focus on race as being the one and only variable, when it might well be far down the list.


Since its a statistical analysis about shootings based on race and it attempted to use a 1:1 comparison it is legitimate to point out if one group has a higher PERCENTAGE of occurrances than the other. You are absolutely right about economics, population, education, location, etc. play a factor. That's a broader topic. This specifically addresses the volume of police shootings of citizens. Once that is established you get into the specifics of why.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 06/27/17 3:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:

But the reality remains, that these things aren't happening to anyone, black or white, in Greenwich Connecticut, Beverly Hills, and Potomac, Maryland. And the assumptions are driven as much by economics and demographics as by race.

Absolutely. Implicit biases exist for more things than just race.

Police in higher crime areas (which almost always overlaps high poverty areas) tend to see themselves as a "cleaning force" or there to "fight crime" and it creates an adversarial relationship with the public and also frames the lens through which they will process all interactions. Someone sees enough people who look a certain way, dress a certain way, and talk a certain way commit crimes and suddenly they start seeing everyone who looks, dresses, and talks thay way as "suspicious". But that look, dress, and speech, are all part of the local culture and are not actual indicators of criminality.

Police in Beverly Hills see themselves as servants of the public, there for the protection of everyone in the community. Their relationship is more symbiotic and cooperative than authoritarian and adversarial, which means that is the lens through which they will view and weigh all interactions with the public. Not surprisingly, far fewer police officers in those communities end up "fearing for their lives".



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Force10rulz



Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Posts: 1966
Location: Puget Sound


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/03/17 11:01 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Genero36 wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
oh thank god, proof there is no racial bias among white cops. Laughing


Any person with the agenda to prove that racism is few and far between are more dangerous than overt racists.


It's disgusting that anyone goes out to try and prove that killing black people isn't as bad as whites. Total racist intent, and Plight said it all, the ratio of blacks to whites doesn't add up.



_________________
Seattle Storm 3 times Champions
Luuuc
#NATC


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21900



Back to top
PostPosted: 07/03/17 7:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

OMG ... pilight introduces an element of context into an otherwise meaningless stat, and is accused of a "non sequitur" by the original poster?
Laughing



_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 07/03/17 7:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Luuuc wrote:
OMG ... pilight introduces an element of context into an otherwise meaningless stat, and is accused of a "non sequitur" by the original poster?
Laughing


People use statistics like a drunk uses a lamppost, for support rather than illumination



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin