Study shows no bias in deaths regarding police action (1 Viewer)

[ksu_aviator]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/u...e-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?_r=0

The study shows that there is no bias against blacks in police shootings. It doesn't exist. If anything, white people are more likely to be shot. But it wasn't statistically significant enough to make that claim.

We are victims of a media narrative that is designed to drive up ratings and create political bias. Don't fall for it. The reality doesn't follow the narrative.

 

[ajn678]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/u...e-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?_r=0

The study shows that there is no bias against blacks in police shootings. It doesn't exist. If anything, white people are more likely to be shot. But it wasn't statistically significant enough to make that claim.

We are victims of a media narrative that is designed to drive up ratings and create political bias. Don't fall for it. The reality doesn't follow the narrative.

Shhh, facts are racist.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/u...e-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?_r=0

The study shows that there is no bias against blacks in police shootings. It doesn't exist. If anything, white people are more likely to be shot. But it wasn't statistically significant enough to make that claim.

We are victims of a media narrative that is designed to drive up ratings and create political bias. Don't fall for it. The reality doesn't follow the narrative.

If you'd read the article you referenced, you'd have noticed some problems. For instance, when it came to the killings,

The cities Mr. Fryer used to examine officer-involved shootings make up only about 4 percent of the nation’s population, and serve more black citizens than average.

The article continues:

Moreover, the results do not mean that the general public’s perception of racism in policing is misguided. Lethal uses of force are exceedingly rare. There were 1.6 million arrests in Houston in the years Mr. Fryer studied. Officers fired their weapons 507 times. What is far more common are nonlethal uses of force.

And in these uses of force, Mr. Fryer found racial differences, which is in accord with public perception and other studies.

In New York City, blacks stopped by the police were about 17 percent more likely to experience use of force, according to stop-and-frisk records kept between 2003 and 2013. (In the later year, a judge ruled that the tactic as employed then was unconstitutional.)

Hey - it gets better!

That gap, adjusted for suspect behavior and other factors, was surprisingly consistent across various levels of 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.

Even when the police said that civilians were compliant, blacks experienced more force.

Then the last paragraph of your reference is a statement by the study's author:

“Who the hell wants to have a police officer put their hand on them or yell and scream at them? It’s an awful experience,” he said. “Every black man I know has had this experience. Every one of them. It is hard to believe that the world is your oyster if the police can rough you up without punishment. And when I talked to minority youth, almost every single one of them mentions lower-level uses of force as the reason why they believe the world is corrupt.”

You're so eager to believe that blacks are blowing things out of proportion when it comes to the killings. Now, how about addressing the REST of the study - the part that clearly shows that yeah, blacks - and especially black men - routinely face a level of aggression by police that we whites normally don't.

 

[Caine]

If you'd read the article you referenced, you'd have noticed some problems. For instance, when it came to the killings,

The cities Mr. Fryer used to examine officer-involved shootings make up only about 4 percent of the nation’s population, and serve more black citizens than average.

The article continues:

Moreover, the results do not mean that the general public’s perception of racism in policing is misguided. Lethal uses of force are exceedingly rare. There were 1.6 million arrests in Houston in the years Mr. Fryer studied. Officers fired their weapons 507 times. What is far more common are nonlethal uses of force.

And in these uses of force, Mr. Fryer found racial differences, which is in accord with public perception and other studies.

In New York City, blacks stopped by the police were about 17 percent more likely to experience use of force, according to stop-and-frisk records kept between 2003 and 2013. (In the later year, a judge ruled that the tactic as employed then was unconstitutional.)

Hey - it gets better!

That gap, adjusted for suspect behavior and other factors, was surprisingly consistent across various levels of 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.

Even when the police said that civilians were compliant, blacks experienced more force.

Then the last paragraph of your reference is a statement by the study's author:

“Who the hell wants to have a police officer put their hand on them or yell and scream at them? It’s an awful experience,” he said. “Every black man I know has had this experience. Every one of them. It is hard to believe that the world is your oyster if the police can rough you up without punishment. And when I talked to minority youth, almost every single one of them mentions lower-level uses of force as the reason why they believe the world is corrupt.”

You're so eager to believe that blacks are blowing things out of proportion when it comes to the killings. Now, how about addressing the REST of the study - the part that clearly shows that yeah, blacks - and especially black men - routinely face a level of aggression by police that we whites normally don't.

Black men routinely resist arrest and assault law enforcement at levels that whites normally don't.

 

[countryboy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/u...e-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?_r=0

The study shows that there is no bias against blacks in police shootings. It doesn't exist. If anything, white people are more likely to be shot. But it wasn't statistically significant enough to make that claim.

We are victims of a media narrative that is designed to drive up ratings and create political bias. Don't fall for it. The reality doesn't follow the narrative.

Gee, never saw that one coming.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Black men routinely resist arrest and assault law enforcement at levels that whites normally don't.

Ah. To you, it's all about the color of the skin. 'Cause they've got more melanin, they "routinely resist arrest and assault law enforcement", huh? See, they're a different kind of human being, huh?

Noted.

 

[Caine]

Ah. To you, it's all about the color of the skin. 'Cause they've got more melanin, they "routinely resist arrest and assault law enforcement", huh? See, they're a different kind of human being, huh?

Noted.

No... its because its a fact.

But of course, facts are racist too I guess.

 

[sangha]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/u...e-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?_r=0

The study shows that there is no bias against blacks in police shootings. It doesn't exist. If anything, white people are more likely to be shot. But it wasn't statistically significant enough to make that claim.

We are victims of a media narrative that is designed to drive up ratings and create political bias. Don't fall for it. The reality doesn't follow the narrative.

I look forward to watching all the right wingers celebrate a study that shows the police are more likely to use force against black people

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Gee, never saw that one coming.

Then address what I pointed out in #2 - the REST of what the same study said.

 

[sangha]

Black men routinely resist arrest and assault law enforcement at levels that whites normally don't.

They took the civilians behavior into account and there still was a racial disparity

Accounting for baseline demographics such as age and gender, encounter characteristics such as
whether individuals supplied identification or whether the interaction occurred in a high- or lowcrime
area, or civilian behaviors does little to alter the race coefficient

For instance,if police officers are pure statistical discriminators then as a civilian’s signal to police regardingtheir likelihood of compliance becomes increasingly deterministic, racial differences will disappear.To test this, we investigate racial differences in use of force on a set of police-civilian interactions in which the police report the civilian was compliant on every measured dimension, was not arrested,and neither weapons nor contraband was found. In contrast to the model’s predictions,racial differences on this set of interactions is large and statistically significant

http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

 

[Glen Contrarian]

They took the civilians behavior into account and there still was a racial disparity

Hey! Don'tcha know that the racism by whites doesn't exist? That the only real racism is on the part of those who point it out? It's just like the "rape problem" - it was never a problem when it wasn't reported...and only became a problem once women started reporting it!

 

[sangha]

Hey! Don'tcha know that the racism by whites doesn't exist? That the only real racism is on the part of those who point it out? It's just like the "rape problem" - it was never a problem when it wasn't reported...and only became a problem once women started reporting it!

You left something out - the ever-present "It's black people's fault!" (see post #4)

 

[countryboy]

Then address what I pointed out in #2 - the REST of what the same study said.

Not going to waste my time with your leftist drivel.

 

[Caine]

They took the civilians behavior into account and there still was a racial disparity




http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf

I am not denying that police use force on black people more often than white people.

I am stating that police do not use DEADLY force on black people more often than white people.

I am stating that black people assault police and resist arrest more often than white people.

I am not denying that police statistically use force against compliant blacks more often than whites.

I am, however, stating that statistics cannot explain for WHY that is. A number of these specific subjects that had force used upon them while they were compliant at the time of this incident could have been known the specific officer from previous encounters which caused that officer to use force when it was not called upon because of a previous encounter.

I am not stating that the above IS the singular reason for the statistical disparity.... yet I am stating that there are a lot of factors in play that can result in statistical disparities apart from just "racism".

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Not going to waste my time with your leftist drivel.

'Course not. You were happy to see the part that you wanted to believe, and were happy to publicly agree with it...but when the REST of the same study was pointed out - and showed information that you didn't want to hear, well, all of a sudden "Not going to waste my time"!

That's what I've found about conservatives - they love to hear what they want to hear, but are flatly unwilling to discuss facts that draw their beliefs into question. You just provided a great example of precisely that.

 

[countryboy]

'Course not. You were happy to see the part that you wanted to believe, and were happy to publicly agree with it...but when the REST of the same study was pointed out - and showed information that you didn't want to hear, well, all of a sudden "Not going to waste my time"!

That's what I've found about conservatives - they love to hear what they want to hear, but are flatly unwilling to discuss facts that draw their beliefs into question. You just provided a great example of precisely that.

It's not the study, it's your decidedly leftist slant I'm not going to waste my time with. I've already heard from another researcher who has debunked the "killer racist cop" screed. So naturally, I wasn't surprised about another study that came to a similar conclusion. :shrug:

 

[ksu_aviator]

I look forward to watching all the right wingers celebrate a study that shows the police are more likely to use force against black people

I look forward to liberals ignoring the fact that black men are killed at the same or lower rate than white men while espousing the false narrative that there is a systemic race problem in law enforcement.

 

[ksu_aviator]

If you'd read the article you referenced, you'd have noticed some problems. For instance, when it came to the killings,

The cities Mr. Fryer used to examine officer-involved shootings make up only about 4 percent of the nation’s population, and serve more black citizens than average.

Given the media narrative, that should mean every day there is a black man dying at the hands of an officer.

The article continues:

Moreover, the results do not mean that the general public’s perception of racism in policing is misguided. Lethal uses of force are exceedingly rare. There were 1.6 million arrests in Houston in the years Mr. Fryer studied. Officers fired their weapons 507 times. What is far more common are nonlethal uses of force.

No...the public's view that only black men are killed by the police isn't misguided. Yes, it is true that there is no bias in the killings, but that doesn't mean the perception there is is false [/sarcasm]

I love how you are trying to tap dance around this. You can move the goal posts if you like, but the original narrative that black men are being targeted for death by the police is busted.

And in these uses of force, Mr. Fryer found racial differences, which is in accord with public perception and other studies.

In New York City, blacks stopped by the police were about 17 percent more likely to experience use of force, according to stop-and-frisk records kept between 2003 and 2013. (In the later year, a judge ruled that the tactic as employed then was unconstitutional.)

Hey - it gets better!

That gap, adjusted for suspect behavior and other factors, was surprisingly consistent across various levels of 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.

Even when the police said that civilians were compliant, blacks experienced more force.

Then the last paragraph of your reference is a statement by the study's author:

“Who the hell wants to have a police officer put their hand on them or yell and scream at them? It’s an awful experience,” he said. “Every black man I know has had this experience. Every one of them. It is hard to believe that the world is your oyster if the police can rough you up without punishment. And when I talked to minority youth, almost every single one of them mentions lower-level uses of force as the reason why they believe the world is corrupt.”

You're so eager to believe that blacks are blowing things out of proportion when it comes to the killings. Now, how about addressing the REST of the study - the part that clearly shows that yeah, blacks - and especially black men - routinely face a level of aggression by police that we whites normally don't.

Now that we got the goal post moving out of the way. You do understand that the original narrative is debunked...right? You must, because you never once addressed it.

 

[sangha]

I look forward to liberals ignoring the fact that black men are killed at the same or lower rate than white men while espousing the false narrative that there is a systemic race problem in law enforcement.

I don't see anyone ignoring that but I do see you ignoring the systemic racial disparity in the police's use of force

 

[Caine]

I don't see anyone ignoring that but I do see you ignoring the systemic racial disparity in the police's use of force

I think you have yet to actually prove the "systemic" part.

 

[sangha]

I think you have yet to actually prove the "systemic" part.

I think you still have to explain why you lied about so many things. You can start with explaining how you can say you're going to wait for a trial *after* you speculated about the victim having reached for a weapon.

 

[Caine]

I think you still have to explain why you lied about so many things. You can start with explaining how you can say you're going to wait for a trial *after* you speculated about the victim having reached for a weapon.

A. I think you are getting your threads mixed up.

B. The officer has clearly stated that "I TOLD HIM NOT TO REACH FOR IT." very shortly after the shooting. Clearly indicating that the officer believed that he reached for his weapon as the basis of his reason to shoot. Im not sure how many more times I have to point that **** out to you. I guess you want to keep ignoring it.



BTW (This makes time number 3.... or 4... even I lost count).

 

[sangha]

A. I think you are getting your threads mixed up.

I've got my posters straight. You're the one who speculated, and then claimed you were going to wait for the trial and actual evidence

B. The officer has clearly stated that "I TOLD HIM NOT TO REACH FOR IT." very shortly after the shooting. Clearly indicating that the officer believed that he reached for his weapon as the basis of his reason to shoot. Im not sure how many more times I have to point that **** out to you. I guess you want to keep ignoring it.

That is speculation; not actual evidence.

Meanwhile, the officer's own lawyer says the reason he shot the victim was because of the presence of a gun. There was no mention of the victim reaching for a gun.

 

[ksu_aviator]

I don't see anyone ignoring that but I do see you ignoring the systemic racial disparity in the police's use of force

The topic is killing, not use of force. I'm staying on topic.

 

[sangha]

The topic is killing, not use of force. I'm staying on topic.

No, the topic is a study which reports the use of force by police