Harvard Study: No racial disparity in police killings

[Underverse]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/up...ings.html?_r=0

A new study confirms that black men and women are treated differently in the hands of law enforcement. They are more likely to be touched, handcuffed, pushed to the ground or pepper-sprayed by a police officer, even after accounting for how, where and when they encounter the police.

But when it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias.

On shootings:

In shootings in these 10 cities involving officers, officers were more likely to fire their weapons without having first been attacked when the suspects were white. Black and white civilians involved in police shootings were equally likely to have been carrying a weapon. Both results undercut the idea of racial bias in police use of lethal force.

The study, a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper, relied on reports filled out by police officers and on police departments willing to share those reports. Recent videos of police shootings have led to questions about the reliability of such accounts. But the results were largely the same whether or not Mr. Fryer used information from narratives by officers.

On non-lethal force:

Black suspects were 18 percent more likely to be pushed up against a wall, 16 percent more likely to be handcuffed without being arrested and 18 percent more likely to be pushed to the ground.

I find this to be very interesting. But most interesting to me, perhaps, is the MASSIVE disparity in civilian perception compared to reality. For example; according to civilian accounts, blacks are 305% more likely to have a gun pointed at them than whites. In reality, blacks are 7% more likely to have a gun pointed at them than whites. I have no doubt that this is in part driven by a media frenzy. To take this thought further, it seems likely that the media is contributing to the commonly held perception of institutional racism in police killings.

Thoughts?

[sheggaro]

Racist hategroup preaching division, hate and racism is wrong.

More news later.

[Underverse]

Racist hategroup preaching division, hate and racism is wrong.

More news later.

What? I'm not sure what you're saying here.

[Tijuana]

The posters that are big in the BLM movement will ignore this and continue to use the discredited stats, like they always do.

[Dug]

What? I'm not sure what you're saying here.

He only read the title and it confirms his bias. Also, we had this thread a few days ago I believe but its an interesting topic nonetheless

[Bollocks]

After finishing reading the study I wanted to put some complaints:

Necessary caveats:
- We can't randomly assign race.
- Does not address possible racial disparity in probability that an interaction with police occurs at all.
- Shootings are very rare and the data represent only 4% of the U.S. population.

My complaint:

There's a selection issue in the sample. His data is from voluntary disclosure of police departments. It's not unreasonable to expect that the bad departments would avoid this.

[Underverse]

It was never just about shootings.

And neither should it be. But it certainly undermines the foundation of the BLM movement, for example - which is a movement explicitly founded on the idea that there's a racial bias in police shootings.

There are other movements that more generally target police brutality, and other areas of the criminal justice system. BLM is not one such movement, at its core.

(The reason I'm picking on BLM is because it's the most popular movement and is essentially founded on not only a lie, but a lie so twisted that it's embarrassing. It's not just that there's no racial bias in shootings (as reported in this unfortunately biased article) - it's that whites are 22% more likely to have lethal force used against them, whereas blacks are on average about 18% more likely to have non-lethal force used against them. I know which side of the fence I'd rather be on).

[Underverse]

After finishing reading the study I wanted to put some complaints:

Necessary caveats:
- We can't randomly assign race.
- Does not address possible racial disparity in probability that an interaction with police occurs at all.
- Shootings are very rare and the data represent only 4% of the U.S. population.

My complaint:

There's a selection issue in the sample. His data is from voluntary disclosure of police departments. It's not unreasonable to expect that the bad departments would avoid this.

That seems to have been investigated here:

But the results were largely the same whether or not Mr. Fryer used information from narratives by officers.

These data also don't just look at shootings. They look at all police interactions.

[Garnier Fructis]

This is a double edged result for people against BLM, because the study quite clearly says that there is racial disparity in police interactions on the whole.

[Underverse]

The movement focuses on it in their narrative. It is not exclusively what it is founded on.

I know you won't like this analogy, but this is kind of a 'the nazis had a few good ideas' argument. You can't justify a movement on one minority ideal.

- - - Updated - - -

This is a double edged result for people against BLM, because the study quite clearly says that there is racial disparity in police interactions on the whole.

Yes, there are clearly racial disparities. But I think it's important to note that these disparities go both ways. White are more likely to be killed, blacks are more likely to be beaten. Where does that leave us? Certainly not with a one-sided argument of institutional racism against African Americans.

I think it's important to keep in mind that racial disparities also don't necessarily mean that we have institutional racism in either direction - at least not in the way that people conventionally think about institutional racism.

[Underverse]

The posters that are big in the BLM movement will ignore this and continue to use the discredited stats, like they always do.

I mean, it's a study conducted by an African American Harvard professor. You don't get any more potentially biased in the opposite direction than this.

[Underverse]

We're not talking about some trivial idea buried deep within a broad and complex philosophy of many things. We're talking about the fact that it's not just about shootings and even if shootings were the spark of inspiration, that doesn't mean the group was founded just to complain about shootings. BLM is the inevitable end result of a shitty and ever deteriorating relationship between a great deal of law enforcement departments and black Americans. It is very much an expression of their unwillingness to tolerate the problems they perceive in how law enforcement as a whole interacts with black people. This is very much part of their core issue.

From the Black Lives Matter webite:

Black Lives Matter is an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise.

Patently false.

There are other movements that address real problems without all the bullshit. These are the movements that should be getting attention; BLM is only detracting attention from the real problems with emotional arguments founded on lies.

[Tijuana]

I mean, it's a study conducted by an African American Harvard professor. You don't get any more potentially biased in the opposite direction than this.

You are expecting them to argue from a position of honesty? Why? Have you met the MMO-C posters? (on both sides)

[Underverse]

This report also confirms that the police are more violent with black people.

Other report and investigations conclude the black people are 2.5x times as likely to have gunfire used against them.

Also, it's a bit inconsistent to on one hand have the report conclude the police are more violent, but with guns everything is equal.

"Just giving her a bit of a slappin' and shove her to the ground, cause she's black. But we won't shoot her."

The studies that cite the 2.5x number were probably using civilian reports and public perception, considering that this study found that according to civilians, black people were 305% more likely to have a gun pointed at them than white people - while in reality, the disparity is only 7% (according to this study).

Secondly, this report did not conclude that there is no racial bias in police shootings, as the title and the article claim (showing their clear bias). Whites are 22% more likely to be shot. Compared to the 18% more likely for blacks to be targets of non-lethal violence, this number if anything shows that you have a system biased against whites - but the difference is largely insignificant.

Also, if they are more violent with black people does that not also explain why black people might resist more often?

Kind of a chicken or egg question.

[Crissi]

As Nixx stated, we already have an existing thread thats only 2 days old here:

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post41322158

Closing