Thank You!!!

Thanks for your comment. I intentionally narrowed my article to the specific claim that police are shooting black men at a higher rate than similarly situated white men. It is important that we address every claim independent of each other so that we can isolate which ones to focus policy changes.

You make a good point that the data I found was on convictions and not the arrests that lead up to the conviction. Let's hypothetically say that the conviction rate for a black person is 20% higher. If the number of convictions is 3.5x (as the data shows), then the arrest rate would still be 0.8 * 3.5 = 2.8. This is still accounts for the police shooting ratio of 2.5.

If the data doesn't support "black men being pulled off the streets (TARGETED) for "being black" and then killed (at a higher rate than other races)", then why use that to incite protests? We can still support police reforms to further reduce deaths of both armed and unarmed people.

@Admin again, the data DOES support that black men are TARGETED for "being black" in ways that lead to their death/serious injury. Why do you keep repeating an obvious falsehood?

I believe we are one the same page here. 38.3% convicted / 13.4% of the population = 4.1 ... which would mean the number of times a black person could be shot by police is higher than other races. We're also in agreement that we should make sure that convictions rates are not biased. I agree with you that especially for drug-related crimes, there appears evidence that there may be bias in convictions and sentencing. However, the most violent of crimes, murder, is still 4x more likely to be done by a black person (per capita). It would hard to believe that the conviction rate for murder would be 4x, right?

I also agree with you black people are much more likely to be the victim of murder (93% of murders of blacks are done by other blacks). Only 0.1% of black shooting deaths come from police.

I intentionally narrowed my article to the specific claim that police are shooting black men at a higher rate than similarly situated white men. It is important that we address every claim independent of each other so that we can isolate which ones to focus policy changes.

BTW, the very first sentence of the Harvard study you cited, says

"Although racial discrimination emerges some of the time at some stages of criminal justice processing-such as juvenile justice-there is little evidence that racial disparities result from systematic, overt bias."

@Admin First off, academic study from the 1970's: From the article: MANY STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT BLACKS ARE MORE VULNERABLE TO ARREST THAN WHITES; OTHERS HAVE SHOWN THAT EVEN AFTER CONVICTION BLACKS ARE THE OBJECTS OF DISCRIMINATION, AS THEY RECEIVE LONGER PRISON SENTENCES AND LESS OFTEN RECEIVE THE BENEFITS OF PROBATION AND PAROLE. IN THE 10 YEARS SINCE 1967, THE PRISON SYSTEM'S POPULATION HAS SHIFTED FROM A MAJORITY OF WHITES TO A MAJORITY OF BLACKS. THE AUTHOR ASSERTS THAT A NEW STRATEGY HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT WHEN A BLACK OFFENDER RETURNS TO THE COMMUNITY HE IS WORSE THAN WHEN HE WAS COMMITTED. All caps are the author's emphasis, not mine. [ncjrs.gov]

@Admin Here is another collection of multiple studies: [washingtonpost.com] I find it of particular interest to note: A 2019 study of police stops in Cincinnati found that black motorists were 30 percent more likely to be pulled over than white motorists. Black motorists also comprised 76 percent of arrests following a traffic stop despite making up 43 percent of the city’s population. It’s worth noting, again, that multiple studies have shown that searches of white motorists are slightly more likely to turn up contraband than searches of black motorists.

@Admin A 2018 report to the United Nations: [sentencingproject.org] From the report: The United States criminal justice system is the largest in the world. At yearend 2015, over 6.7 million individuals1) were under some form of correctional control in the United States, including 2.2 million incarcerated in federal, state, or local prisons and jails.2) The U.S. is a world leader in its rate of incarceration, dwarfing the rate of nearly every other nation.3)
Such broad statistics mask the racial disparity that pervades the U.S. criminal justice system, and for African Americans in particular. African Americans are more likely than white Americans to be arrested; once arrested, they are more likely to be convicted; and once convicted, and they are more likely to experience lengthy prison sentences. African-American adults are 5.9 times as likely to be incarcerated than whites and Hispanics are 3.1 times as likely.4)

@Admin This is just a small sampling of what's available on the topic.

@Admin And if you read the reports, because apparently I have to point this out, the discrepancies are not due to blacks committing significantly more crime than whites.

@Admin Please read the reports. And it might also be worthwhile to google how crime stats are collected & reported in the U.S. if you're not familiar with the perfect shit storm that it is. This is why most scholars have resorted to collecting their own data in independent studies.

@Admin I had no idea what you were talking about when you referred to "the Harvard study." I just clicked on it - that was a study I had pulled off of google & was completely horrified by due to it's overt racism. I obviously attached it in error. It was written in the 1990's with data mostly from the 1980's. I'm not even going to start an argument about why data from this era was inherently biased. But I have removed it from the reply as it represents everything that is wrong about how white America has collected & manipulated statistics over the years to fit a convenient narrative. I am leaving this comment here to show why I removed it. Here is the link where you can access multiple studies over the years on official crime victim statistics: [bjs.gov]

Thank you for the comment. I believe we are in agreement with the math.

67.4% / 13.6% = 4.95 (my census data had it at 4.8 as I mentioned AND USED in my article).

1. The data I used has this pretty close at 2.5x (vs 3). (1.9 to 2.4) / (.6 to .7) is about 2.7 to 4 (vs 2.5 in paper). We are in agreement.

2. I believe the answer is two fold. First, the perceived black/white killing-per-incident inequality is part of a basket of other issues contained in the idea of "systematic racism". The death of Floyd was a powerful symbol of this and a catalyst for protests. When unarmed white people are killed by police, I believe that white people do not consider that a symbol and therefore more often side with the police.

3. Since our data is in agreement, does that make the article less "racist"? Is it possible to have an article that has a race component and not be considered "racist"?

4. My goal is to help people recalibrate their anger to evidence and be able to get people who disagree with them to hear them out. Both sides of the political spectrum are increasing unable to peacefully communicate with each other. We must be aware that conservatives know the data I present here and use it to discount the overall message of the Left. Our country has to find common ground or violence will escalate and civil war likely.

5. The math is just division. People are killed at about the same proportion as they interact with police.

6. How so, we agree with the data.

Thanks for your comment. I've addressed some of the concerns other members had in the number in their comments below (before yours).

I completely agree that drug laws need to be reformed and resentencing for those impacted. This was a pretty good historical video on historical issues:

@Admin However what we believe is that the police interact disproportionately with Blacks. That we saw police throwing KKK signs at the rallies was horrifying. (That low "OK" sign is a Klan sign. (You can Google that and find references).

It makes us question - as white people - what our police force is up to in their off time and what their agenda is.

Is does not put us on their side.

I've actually worked with cops who were trained in the way we'd want police trained going forward. They were taught about racism - how different races may react in different ways due to cultural influences and upbringing - and they were taught about the Mental Health issues and the issues that having drugs on board can cause - so they could respond appropriately.
These cops did not strike me as brutish thugs. They were intelligent people who were trainable - I'm pretty sure a lot of cops hit the academy that way - and than the conditioning begins. (And it's not pretty in some States). We're fortunate here it seems mostly better...

I see little that makes me hope some of these Gestapoesque thugs we've been seeing on the news beating protestors and even the folks offering First Aid - could ever be taught such ways.
It does not mean I am without hope - just that in this time - at this juncture - hope seems very limited.

It may indeed come to Civil war to change things to be fairer to all.
It's been a very unjust system for far too long. The serfs are angry - and rightfully so.
And Black People? They've had it badly since our forefathers dragged them from their homes. (Well not mine exactly they were still in France). But still I take on the white guilt of the whole thing. Who doesn't?

We have even had a female MP and an Olympic athlete stopped for no valid reason, driving on the streets of London in recent weeks, and guess what ...they were black.

Do you know the context of any of the non-black people who have been killed? We have learned the context of the recent string of black victims and they seem to have been doing more than driving a car. Yes, I am aware of the rookie cop who shot a black man who had gun permit while he was in his car. This article was focusing solely on if there is a racial bias in police shootings.

What do you base your belief that "White people shot and killed are usually already in the act of, or have been caught immediately after committing a criminal act (compared to races)"? I'm happy to take a look at that data as well if you can help provide it.

"If it is true that blacks come into contact with police more often than whites, what are the possible causes of that?"

Based on the previous comments and the multiple implications in your comment, I am aware that if I say anything other than it's solely caused by racism, both current and historical, I will be called a "racist".

One way to answer you constructively is to list out some things which might reduce the number of times black men come in contact with police:

• reduce policing in black neighborhoods
• train police to reduce their interactions with black people (especially if bias exist)
• reduce causes of crime as it is a fact that, per capita, black people are involved in more crime (e.g., 4x more likely to commit murder)

You asked me THREE times in your comment if I believe that black people are involved in more criminal behavior per capita than other races BECAUSE of their race.

While I am not an expert on criminality, I believe that poverty rates, peers, graduation rates, role models/fathers, access to jobs, cultural influences, and the way one perceives their relationship with society at large all have impact on rates of criminality. There are many countries, such as Venezuela, where the crime rate of non-blacks are much higher than the crime rates of blacks in the US so this implies that there are many factors at play that have a bigger impact that race.

@Admin
Thanks for clarifying.

Though I can't guarantee others wouldn't, I'm really not into name-calling. And I'm definitely not trying to get you to say it's solely caused by racism, because I wouldn't claim that myself. Rarely is any social phenomenon ever so simple as being caused by only one thing.

I'm just trying to understand exactly what you are arguing for in your article. I realize you narrowed it to one point, but why is that one point so salient for you?

You categorically state early on that these men have been driven, by stories from the media, educators, and activists, to believe that police are disproportionally killing blacks.

This appears to assume that there could be nothing else driving them. Upon what evidence do you make this assumption? Do you assume that every activist is able to accurately articulate the reasons they feel what they feel, even when legitimate reasons do exist? Do you assume that the word "disproportionate" only applies to numbers and ratios, and has nothing to do with fairness?

You then go on to make the "All Lives Matter" argument, while assuming, without supporting evidence, that the media's motivation is for economic and political gain. Can you think of any other possibilities?

Can you steelman the activists' argument to their satisfaction? Do you know what it is? Do you know what's wrong with the All Lives Matter argument? Do you know what's energizing your anger?

In your response to my first comment, you sidestep the question I asked three times by mentioning other, very reasonable possible contributions to the problem and some reasonable possible solutions. I won't ask the fourth time, but I feel the need to note the absence of a denial. I wouldn't call you crazy for wanting to avoid the wrath of the mob - it can really be insane and destructive. But it won't come from me. If there is well-established scientific evidence supporting substantial racial differences, I would not blame the messenger. But without that, it just looks like unconscious emotional bias. We humans are like that.

I hope my questions will be received in the same spirit in which they are offered - just getting at the facts. My intentions are not to crucify anybody for their beliefs, no matter what they happen to be. I'm as likely to be mistaken as anyone. I'm just very curious to know if there is information or insights out there that I have overlooked.

We all like to believe that our political or religious or philosophical positions are based in reality instead of unconscious emotional reactions. That is what I love about dialogue - it has the potential to help us see the world through others' eyes, and perhaps thereby see it a tiny bit more accurately than we could alone. I am very grateful for this free platform for doing just that.

Several of my favorite members of this very lovely site have now abandoned it, believing it's creator to be secretly using it, and them, to further an extremist right-wing agenda (my words, not theirs - but that's the gist). I haven't seen sufficient evidence to support that suspicion, and it wouldn't make me want to leave if I did. I tend to hold everyone innocent, even if proven guilty. It would only make me more curious why people might hold such positions to begin with.

But I have to say... this article, even after your clarifications... opens more questions than it closes.

I wonder why there are not any green kids there

In the US, 85% of white are killed by whites and 93% of blacks are killed by blacks. In the US, blacks have less than a 1 in a million chance of being killed by police per year. About the same as dying in a plane crash. Avoiding police and not flying improves the odds of living.

"I wonder why there are not any green kids there "

I like that.. It shows you understand. ☺

" In the US, blacks have less than a 1 in a million chance of being killed by police per year."

How does one avoid the police when the police target you?

the need to reform the mentally warped among the police is a valid but somewhat separate issue. the sociopaths among the cops need to be weeded out. but one thing all cops have in common is the desire to go home alive at the end of their shift. it is rational for them to "profile" and the only honest way to fix that is to reduce criminality among blacks. its the blacks who need to fucus their energy on weeding out the criminals among them.

My sole claim rests on the fact that Blacks, per capita, commit more crimes that involve violence (such as murder) at rates proportional to the rate per capita at which they are being shot by police. I have not commented or made any claim as to why the crime rates are different.

May I ask why you feel that the disproportionate rates that different groups commit crime SHOULD NOT be factored in to police shooting bias?

Regarding your three bullets

1. The majority of police shootings happen as a result of a call to the police by the public as was the case for most of the highly publicized ones. I agree with you that for the relatively few cases where a shooting happens as the result of patrolling that proximity would result in more shootings (but proportionately more arrests).

2. These are red herrings. The sole question I am discussing is "Are police disproportionally killing (unarmed) black men?"

3. Again, not relevant to the question.

Do you think "Black Lives Matter" would go along with you on this?

Perhaps we can get the Daily Beast to just use "man/woman" or even "person"?

@Admin Thanks for the response. Probably not. And I do think there's a problem, however I think it's one created artificially by our own perceptions and insecurities. To me a perfect solution would be to wipe the very concept away, that race is real and somehow determinant of behavior. From my readings it didn't exist as a social classification until the 1800s (references above address this). But it's not an idea that going away - it's become so ingrained that it often serves as a proxy for cultural classifications (rap, early rock n roll referred to as "race music" ), despite artists and works always " crossing- over". The child whose parents consider themselves "black" will often grow up with the music and shows both familiar to his parents and which reflect their reality, which is effected by the perceptions others have of them. So it's often created by those effected by the same perceptions. Perceptions based upon an artificial classification. And the classification becomes synonymous with the art engendered by its perceptions. So you get "black music", "black TV shows", "black movies", etc and the artificial classification is now culturally entrenched (although the ultimate commonality of the human experience guarantees an appeal to everyone). The perceptions and belief in its reality have helped create something that reinforces itself, despite having no real, scientifically verifiable basis (science says the opposite). At least that's my idea of how it works.
I think the best thing to expect of anyone is to accept absolute racial equality and pay attention to the complaints of others. I think that's something we can agree on. I also think that, since negative perceptions not rooted in fact may be driving behavior, whether it's likely or not to agree upon fundamental issues, we can at least address the negative perceptions.
Of course these are just my opinions- I offer no sources.

He is an Air Force Veteran. Never been in trouble with the law.

In no way do I believe that it's ok to shoot ANYONE regardless of the circumstances. By accusing me of this from reading my article suggests that I clearly didn't communicate well with you.

Here are some points where I have failed to communicate well:

1. There is a difference between police disproportionately interacting with black people and disproportionately killing them when they do interact. My article was focusing on the chances of being killed during a single interaction, not on how black people have more interactions with police... which I believe are a combination of they being more likely involved in violent crimes and police bias that comes, in part, from this. By considering the increased number of interactions black people have with the police, the disparity in the number of police killings can have more context.

2. I think unnecessary death of anyone by the police is a tragic situation.

3. By solely promoting evidence that black men are being killed (and not white men), Left-leaning media is showing a skew view of reality... which leads to spikes of anger which could have been constructively mitigated. If the media would ALSO show some unarmed white men being killed by police, there would be more consensus for police reform and black people would see that this problem affects all people.

I do disagree with your statement that "there is ZERO correlation between the people committing violent crimes and the unarmed black people killed by police.". People involved in violent crimes are more likely to be involved in non-violent crime. Being involved in any crime increases the chances of being involved with the police and being involved with the police increases the chances of being killed by the police. George Floyd, Jacob Blake, and Michael Brown all are recently examples of being killed by police in connection with criminal activity.

100% agree with you that police need even more training, including bias training, to help reduce the use of deadly force.

@Admin If black cops were killing unarmed white men we'd have country wide lynchings. To suggest that the media is the cause or that white men get shot too is just an attempt to diminish the racism problem. Like the right saying more people die in car accidents or by the flu each year than by COVID-19 so therefore it's not a big deal. No way to justify or to diminish racism.

@lerlo As black officers are 13% of the total and white officers at 65% and say 20 unarmed white people are killed per year, the ballpark chance that all of those white people were killed by white officers is 0.65 times itself 20 times = 1 chance in 5517. In general, white people don't protest these things.

@Admin Thanks for trying to diminish that comment. The key word there was IF it whites were being killed by black officers at the same rate as blacks are killed by white officers there would be lynchings and no one would bat an eye, no waiting for them, to be charged.

@lerlo I don't think any of the BLM protestors care about the percentage of times that these unfortunate/tragic events occur as it happens about 1:1000000 encounters. It's more that each one is treated like the 1996 Challenger explosion. Why is it that the media doesn't show even one white unarmed person being shot by any police officer, regardless of race. My guess is white conservatives would be supportive of a black police officer shooting a white suspect who disregards orders and goes open a car door. They support the police and give them some benefit of doubt. Do you think that every time a white person is killed by police it was a justified use of force? There are many departments where white officers are the minority such as LA. BTW: some if this reply is devil's advocacy

@Admin wow you think it's ok to shoot someone for opening a car door...you are the devil. Great, police departments need to be reformed , period.
You like to do research find out how many b.s. calls to the police about a white man holding a gun in a car with an unknown color from across the street. Why doesn't the media cover those!!!
[news.yahoo.com]

@lerlo If you ask that question of me while disregarding the fact that that someone just sexually abused a woman who called police, resisted arrest, and then opened a car door to get his knife (presumably to use against the officer), would I be wrong to assume it was disingenuous?