You’re 55 Times More Likely to be Killed by a Police Officer than a Terrorist

[ReverendHellh0und]

[h=2]You’re 55 Times More Likely to be Killed by a Police Officer than a Terrorist[/h]
You


The Guardian reports today:

An average of 545 people killed by local and state law enforcement officers in the US went uncounted in the country’s most authoritative crime statistics every year for almost a decade, according to a report released on Tuesday.
The first-ever attempt by US record-keepers to estimate the number of uncounted “law enforcement homicides” exposed previous official tallies as capturing less than half of the real picture. The new estimate – an average of 928 people killed by police annually over eight recent years, compared to 383 in published FBI data – amounted to a more glaring admission than ever before of the government’s failure to track how many people police kill.
The revelation called into particular question the FBI practice of publishing annual totals of “justifiable homicides by law enforcement” – tallies that are widely cited in the media and elsewhere as the most accurate official count of police homicides.
​

As shown below, that means that you’re 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.You’re Much More Likely to Be Killed By Brain-Eating Parasites, Texting While Driving, Toddlers, Lightning, Falling Out of Bed, Alcoholism, Food Poisoning, Choking On Food, a Financial Crash, Obesity, Medical Errors or “Autoerotic Asphyxiation” than by Terrorists

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no?

 

[americanwoman]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

Interesting especially when you consider how different the reaction is when you want to defend yourself from a terrorist vs a cop.

 

[joG]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

Maybe we should change that.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

Even the Romans knew that more laws equated to less justice, and they ignored their own warnings too.

"Law applied to its extreme is the greatest injustice"
- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 44 BC.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

In order for something to be a "crime statistic" it must be found to be caused by a crime. Of those police "homicides" cited in your link, how many were considered crimes? All acts of terrorism would be likely considered a crime, perhaps even a hate crime, but a police officer shooting a bank robber or crazed moron electing to attack them is likely not to be considered a crime. Pretending that all police homicides are, in fact, crimes is not a valid assumption.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

In order for something to be a "crime statistic" it must be found to be caused by a crime. Of those police "homicides" cited in your link, how many were considered crimes? All acts of terrorism would be likely considered a crime, perhaps even a hate crime, but a police officer shooting a bank robber or crazed moron electing to attack them is likely not to be considered a crime. Pretending that all police homicides are, in fact, crimes is not a valid assumption.

Let's pretend you are right for arguments sake. You are still more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist. agree?

 

[SMTA]

Maybe we should change that.

Increase personal safety - embrace terrorists, screw the cops!

 

[HonestJoe]

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no?

No, not ironic at all. Entirely expected given the relative numbers of US police officers and active terrorists operating in the USA and the fact the police routinely encounter violent and hostile criminals who sometimes require deadly force to stop.

The statistical comparison presented here tells us absolutely nothing about police or terrorists, though might tell us a little about those promoting it as relevant.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Let's pretend you are right for arguments sake. You are still more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist. agree?

I would agree with that simply because there are more criminal/officer encounters than citizen/terrorist encounters. You are more likely to be killed by a criminal than a terrorist as well. When you subtract justified (non-criminal) police "homicides" then how does that affect your odds? To be killed by a police officer you generally must first attract their attention - that is not the case for most of those killed by terrorists. I spend far more time on ladders, scaffolds and roofs than I do in proximity to police - my chances of being killed by a fall greatly exceed my chances of being killed by police and terrorists combined.

 

[soot]

In order for something to be a "crime statistic" it must be found to be caused by a crime.

Fortunately for law enforcement, and not really surprisingly at all, that's pretty much the one and only crime-related statistic they don't keep.

Since there's really no oversight at all when it comes to cop-related crime it isn't possible for any other organization to accurately keep records of it either.

 

[Goshin]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

They cited two numbers there, 545 and 900-some-odd... which is correct?

Do we have any idea how many of these shootings were in some way wrongful? Mistaken Identity, wrong house, subject took out his wallet at the wrong moment, bystander, etc?

That latter stat would tell us a lot....

 

[Declan]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

We do need more law enforcement. I maintain that you are less likely to be shot if there are 20 cops on the scene than one (you might be more likely to be beaten down, but less likely to be shot) because the cop that shoots first might have to explain why the 19 others didn't fire if it was justifiable, among other reasons.

 

[HonestJoe]

They cited two numbers there, 545 and 900-some-odd... which is correct?

The claim is that 545 were not formally recorded. If they're added to the 383 which were formally recorded, the total would be around 900.

Do we have any idea how many of these shootings were in some way wrongful? Mistaken Identity, wrong house, subject took out his wallet at the wrong moment, bystander, etc?

The tertiary source quoted by the OP isn't very clear on that point but I think the comparison they're trying to establish is meaningless either way. It's clearly an vital distinction regarding the question of police officers killing people but that's not the subject being raised here.

 

[Andalublue]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

Ironic, unsurprising and highly illuminating. Who is the real threat to the ordinary citizen, 'terrorists' or the security services? The answer seems all too clear.

 

[11Bravo]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

That's why we are currently fighting OVERSEAS. The terrorists are THERE, not here. Law enforcement does a great job keeping them from getting here. I thank god for their hard work.

This is the dumbest statistic I've ever read.

Stop breaking the law.

 

[joG]

Increase personal safety - embrace terrorists, screw the cops!

Well, it does seem odd that, when you meet one, you must fear the cop more than the terrorist. That just does not feel right.

 

[Goshin]

The claim is that 545 were not formally recorded. If they're added to the 383 which were formally recorded, the total would be around 900.

The tertiary source quoted by the OP isn't very clear on that point but I think the comparison they're trying to establish is meaningless either way. It's clearly an vital distinction regarding the question of police officers killing people but that's not the subject being raised here.

I think it is very relevant to assessing the threat level of LE to the average citizen, as part of making any reasonable comparison between the two things.


As someone who has, on at least three occasions, been the subject of attention of police officers who were either angry, agitated or fearful, or all the above, I understand the concern about police shootings. (All the incidents in question were either mistaken identity or misunderstandings, btw, no charges.)

As a former LEO who observed the beginnings of the militarization of police and the elevation of Officer Safety to idolatry, while I understand the LE perspective as well I think there is legitimate concern about how ready LE is to shoot these days. As a parent of a teenager, I felt compelled to coach my son in "how to interact with nervous armed cops without getting shot" and to operate under the assumption that they'd love to shoot him dead given half a reason, both from inside knowledge and from information in recent years on so many questionable LE shootings.


So I'd really like to know what percentage of police shootings are in some way questionable.... 1%? 10%? 20%?

I think it is very important.

 

[What if...?]

In order for something to be a "crime statistic" it must be found to be caused by a crime. Of those police "homicides" cited in your link, how many were considered crimes? All acts of terrorism would be likely considered a crime, perhaps even a hate crime, but a police officer shooting a bank robber or crazed moron electing to attack them is likely not to be considered a crime. Pretending that all police homicides are, in fact, crimes is not a valid assumption.

Its probably offset by the attacks labeled "terrorist" that are actually asymmetrical warfare.

 

[Paschendale]

In both the violence from police and the violence from terrorists, we need to change our approach in how we handle them. For police it's much simpler. Use the force of law. Take away a lot of police discretion and actually punish cops who transgress. It's a position that entails a great responsibility and authority. We need to purge and prosecute who can't handle the responsibility or abuse the authority.

 

[Thrilla]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

well, on it's face it's a bit ironic, sure.... but it's really a matter of proximity and interaction, rather than simple numbers.

if we had as many terrorists running around the country interacting with us as we do cops, i'd argue we'd have a very different statistic to look at.
luckily for us, the vast majority of terrorists are overseas

 

[reinoe]

We do need more law enforcement. I maintain that you are less likely to be shot if there are 20 cops on the scene than one (you might be more likely to be beaten down, but less likely to be shot) because the cop that shoots first might have to explain why the 19 others didn't fire if it was justifiable, among other reasons.

Wrong. With 20 cops on the scene your more likely to get a heard mentality of everyone corroborating the first officer's story.

 

[Helix]

You’re 55 Times More Likely to be Killed by a Police Officer than a Terrorist

you're even more likely to be killed by your car or by your hamburger.

 

[Declan]

Wrong. With 20 cops on the scene your more likely to get a heard mentality of everyone corroborating the first officer's story.

Wrong. The reason you do not see a lot of these LA high speed chases end in a hail of bullets is because they can put so many officers on that scene when the stop happens that they can surround and take a person down in seconds. They don't shoot them for failing to respond to officer directions and other such nonsense.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

That's why we are currently fighting OVERSEAS. The terrorists are THERE, not here. Law enforcement does a great job keeping them from getting here. I thank god for their hard work.

This is the dumbest statistic I've ever read.

Stop breaking the law.

The statistic doesn't say that only criminals are 55 times more likely to be killed by cops than terrorists, but that ALL CITIZENS are 55 times more likely. That is where the problem is. If it were only violent criminals being shot there wouldn't be a problem, but violence is being used against non-violence, and cops are using their guns more often than they ever have, even against innocent people.

You can not deny the militarization of our police over the past few decades. You have SWAT teams doing raids on petty offenses. When you walk around dressed as a hammer, everything looks like a nail. This article was supposed to show that maybe we should stop freaking the **** out over "terrorism" and should focus more attention on the issues that actually effect us.

 

[DaveFagan]

Some of the bull**** we hear from the law enforcement community and politicians is we need more laws. more law enforcement, and that they are here to protect us from "the terrorists"...

AS it turns out, the police are 55 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist. Ironic, no? [/B][/FONT][/COLOR]

I don't think it is ironic. It represents the Police State. It is the USA method of handling citizen protestors dating from Kent State and before that Union protestors. OWS showed the Police defending Wall Street and the big Banks. Time for a wake up call in America. I don't remember the Police arresting or shooting any of the CROOKED bankers in the past eight years and multi billion dollar crimes became public knowledge and the Bankers got their pinkies slapped.