No racial bias in police shootings, new study finds

[TheMediator]

The statistics imply that LESS blacks get shot.

Can you read?

Statistically speaking, no. The confidence interval is such that there's insufficient evidence to make a claim one way or the other about the employment of lethal force (or the usage of pepper spray/batons on "compliant citizens", apparently).

[petej0]

That's what I heard too. You could almost hear his voice cracking.

Yeah, while yelling, "I told him not to reach for it" which means he gave an order and the guy did not comply. It sounds as though this cop was freaking out because he was scared that he was almost about to have been shot.

[Bollocks]

The study controls for the # of acts. Nobody is denying that police mistreat blacks, we are denying the narrative that cops walk around the city ready to shoot blacks. Every cop in the US knows if they shoot a white guy it'll be a case open, case closed situation. A cop will most likely put themselves in danger more to avoid shooting a black guy because they know that shooting a black guy is going to get them in a lot of trouble and their city/precinct/etc.

Plus who is to say that it isn't African Americans who are more violent than other races which leads to more violent reactions from the police. Everyone knows blacks have got attitude, talk to a cop like they are a punk and don't be shocked when they slam you down a bit harder when they are putting the cuffs on. Not saying its right, but don't poke the bear if you don't want the paw.

But the study takes into account behavor. It reduces the ratio, but it cannot explain why is there still disparity.

[derpkitteh]

When given orders you obey, especially when a cop has a gun pointed at you. I read that the cop pulled him over because he matched the description of an armed robbery suspect they were on the look out for. So already the cop is on high alert. It is a sad, sad ending.

i mean, i definitely understand that. but, like i've seen this kind of scenario on cops before, they usually give them a little more time to obey the command than this guy got. it seems like he just immediately shot him before he could register the new command.

[Breccia]

A new study is needed to see if the police are negatively biased against dumb motherfuckers.

[Xada]

Agreed. Probably something to do with how easy it is to feel an emotion rather than a structured thought.

- - - Updated - - -



It's proportionally in line with how much more crime they commit, though: http://www.colorofcrime.com/2016/03/...vised-edition/

Before people get the wrong idea, I do not think that black people are naturally more predisposed to commit crime, but I think we need to have a more honest discussion and realise that there are clearly more serious underlying issues that should be addressed first.

The only reason I could see to have a discussion about this is to make sure everyone knows what kind of effects these numbers produce. Yes, there is racist cops, but it isn't the norm. Cops can't know every person individually, so they carry with them information from every encounter whether they mean to or not. The cops probably do feel a trend when it comes to race, behavior, what the person wears, etc... A cop probably would be more relaxed pulling over an old man in a restored Corvette (you know the type, short sleeved-collared shirt, baseball cap, shorts, knee socks, aviator glasses) than a young man wearing a hoodie and jeans driving a POS. It's not that the cop knows them, it's his mind going "I've run into a situation similar to this" and then their actions are dictated by how "well" these interactions go.

I'd make the case that the most effective way you can fight this stereotype is to find a way to lower those rates. If you succeed in that and wait for the next generation to take over, you will see cops actions change.

[Deleted]

Statistically speaking, no. The confidence interval is such that there's insufficient evidence to make a claim one way or the other about the employment of lethal force (or the usage of pepper spray/batons on "compliant citizens", apparently).

It's a 95% Confidence interval.

It covers 95% of the normal percieved cases, that is not even remotely close to "Insufficient Evidence".

[petej0]

There is no data suggesting that escalation.

The data simply implies that Blacks get shot equally as much as whites or less. No more, no less. One could even question the legitimacy of the data to begin with.

Yeah, but that has nothing to do with anything I said.

- - - Updated - - -

i mean, i definitely understand that. but, like i've seen this kind of scenario on cops before, they usually give them a little more time to obey the command than this guy got. it seems like he just immediately shot him before he could register the new command.

That is what it may seem. All we have is the cops story and the girlfriends story. Both will conflict on how many times he said the command and how long until the shots were fired.

[Jademist]

Did anyone actually read the article? I feel like most people here didn't even bother to read the article.

Here is an excerpt from the article:
"The study did not say whether the most egregious examples — the kind of killings at the heart of the nation’s debate on police shootings — are free of racial bias. Instead, it examined a much larger pool of shootings, including nonfatal ones. It focused on what happens when police encounters occur, not how often they happen. Racial differences in how often police-civilian interactions occur reflect greater structural problems in society.

Official statistics on police shootings are poor. James Comey, the F.B.I. director, has called the lack of data “embarrassing and ridiculous.” Even when data exists, the conditions under which officers decide to fire their weapons are deeply nuanced and complex."

[TheMediator]

But the study takes into account behavor. It reduces the ratio, but it cannot explain why is there still disparity.

Right, it's like those "Gender Gap" studies where people went ape-shot over everything wrong with them, yet studies have come out that have control for all the obvious factors and it still shows a few cents per dollar difference, seeming to indicate that there is, in fact, some degree of discrimination involved in salaries.

In this scenario there are either some other uncontrolled variables at play beyond those already accounted for, there is discrimination occurring, or this study is a statistical anomaly.

It's a 95% Confidence interval.

It covers 95% of the normal percieved cases, that is not even remotely close to "Insufficient Evidence".

Null hypothesis is contained within the range of possible difference of means for that specific measure. That means "insufficient evidence".

[Deleted]

Yeah, but that has nothing to do with anything I said.

It does ; You don't have data to support your claim.

[unbound]

Interesting to note that it isn't a peer-reviewed study at this point...it is a working paper - http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

It will be interesting to see where this falls out. The references in the paper are almost exclusively in support of the paper's main premise. However, a good scientific study that runs counter to the reams of studies that have the opposite conclusion should be specifically calling out most of those studies and explain why this study does something that the other studies couldn't account for or did improperly. As such, this paper will likely be torn apart if it ever gets submitted for peer review.

[Deleted]

Did anyone actually read the article? I feel like most people here didn't even bother to read the article.

Here is an excerpt from the article:
"The study did not say whether the most egregious examples — the kind of killings at the heart of the nation’s debate on police shootings — are free of racial bias. Instead, it examined a much larger pool of shootings, including nonfatal ones. It focused on what happens when police encounters occur, not how often they happen. Racial differences in how often police-civilian interactions occur reflect greater structural problems in society.

Official statistics on police shootings are poor. James Comey, the F.B.I. director, has called the lack of data “embarrassing and ridiculous.” Even when data exists, the conditions under which officers decide to fire their weapons are deeply nuanced and complex."

It took shootings on a more general scale, and it states that the underlying data to begin with is flawed, cuz not all of it is recorded or truly distinguishable.

Albeit, statements such as "Deeply nuanced and complex", is irrelevant. It's a matter of how many get shot, compared to whites. If the number is equal, then there is no disparity. In this specific case, with the data (That might be flawed), it's a LESS than whites, in terms of shootings.

- - - Updated - - -

Interesting to note that it isn't a peer-reviewed study at this point...it is a working paper - http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

It will be interesting to see where this falls out. The references in the paper are almost exclusively in support of the paper's main premise. However, a good scientific study that runs counter to the reams of studies that have the opposite conclusion should be specifically calling out most of those studies and explain why this study does something that the other studies couldn't account for or did improperly. As such, this paper will likely be torn apart if it ever gets submitted for peer review.

The article already admitted that there is a lack of underlying data.

[petej0]

It does ; You don't have data to support your claim.

What, my claim that the crime rates in the inner city require more police increasing the amount of police encounters, increasing resentment towards the police? What claim in particular are you talking about?

[Nynax]

So, lets take what you said. You have a group who, because their low socio-economic status, commit more crimes and thus under more scrutiny by law enforcement. They live in an area with more police coverage to help fight the increased crime thus more encounters with the police. This increased presence brings more resentment towards them and less cooperation (snitches get stitches) less trust and so when encounters do happen are filled with more tense and anger. Which is a vicious circle feeding on itself.

So we have a group of people committing crimes causing life to be miserable for everyone else who lives in these neighborhoods. We have a group of people who job is to protect/help the victims in these neighborhoods and when they do their job of upholding the laws they are given shit by the same community they are serving. They encounter more resistance during detaining and arresting and are generally disliked.

While the police have their fair share of aggressiveness and assaults during arrests. It looks like both side will have to come together to solve this issue. It isnt a one sided issue, and it wont be solved if only one side changes their approach.

There's actually a post making the rounds on Facebook by a black cop suggesting just that.

Personally I've always said that the core of all this "racism" stuff is really an issue of income inequality and how difficult it is for the majority of people at the very bottom in America to rise to a decent standard of living. (and don't bring up anecdotal "bootstrap" stories, those are very much not the norm and take an exceptional person) But unfortunately every single large scale program that gets proposed to do something about that is labeled "socialism" and gutted or destroyed.

[Pearl1717]

This study doesn't take into account population sizes. When you account for the relative populations of whites & minorities it makes minorities still more likely to be shot. Takes about 30 seconds to figure that out (or to not just link the first article you read).

[dubious_doomhammer]

Plus who is to say that it isn't African Americans who are more violent than other races which leads to more violent reactions from the police. Everyone knows blacks have got attitude, talk to a cop like they are a punk and don't be shocked when they slam you down a bit harder when they are putting the cuffs on. Not saying its right, but don't poke the bear if you don't want the paw.

Really? You want to blame their skin color instead of things like socioeconomic status?

[GennGreymane]

Your stats are the Rickon Stark of stats, forgotten less than a minute after they die.

#greymanestatsmatter

[Bollocks]

Interesting to note that it isn't a peer-reviewed study at this point...it is a working paper - http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

It will be interesting to see where this falls out. The references in the paper are almost exclusively in support of the paper's main premise. However, a good scientific study that runs counter to the reams of studies that have the opposite conclusion should be specifically calling out most of those studies and explain why this study does something that the other studies couldn't account for or did improperly. As such, this paper will likely be torn apart if it ever gets submitted for peer review.

Is it really that controversial? It doesn't seem to controversial to me. Saying that latinos and blacks are mistreated by police.

[Thetruth1400]

I do feel like americans are kinda missing the point, when they study which color of people their cops shoot way too much much^^
Pretty sure whatever kind of change in training (or whatever the solution is to this problem) is necessary, it will be a plus for everyone. Its not like you need to really be careful that you only stop the right kind of police brutality, so that its fair to everyone^^

Missing the point in that yeah, people are getting shot by cops, but at the same time that's just a very minuscule fraction of gun violence overall in the US. There were 986 people killed by cops in 2015, of those only 35 were unarmed, which isn't to say not a threat. There were 73,505 gun related injuries, 11,208 deaths, 21,175 suicides by gun, 505 accidental discharge deaths, and 281 unclear intent deaths for a total of 33,636 deaths by gun. That's 2.9% by cop, and of those only 3.5% were to someone unarmed.

The news LOVES to make it like it's a massive issue of cops running around shooting people left and right, when that's just not the case. You're 11 times more likely to be killed by some random person. You're 21 times more likely to kill yourself with a gun. You're 77 times more likely to get shot randomly and not die from it, then you are to have a run in with a cop and die. Hell, you're only 2 times as likely to die by cop as you are an accidental discharge killing you.

At the end of the day, it's really a non issue. Yes, criminals die to cops, and yes there is a very, very small chance of a wrongful police death. Unless the United States is willing to revoke the second amendment, then that fact isn't really going to change. If they want to ratify the Second amendment to only protect the right to shotguns and hunting rifles, then by all means, do it, but good luck getting the millions, if not billions of handguns and semi automatic rifles off the street, especially from criminals. Law abiding citizens will comply begrudgingly, but criminals will continue to carry guns, no matter the laws.