Article with studies claims police are biased against blacks in police shootings, can it be rebutted?

submitted by marc_gee from self.debatealtright

The article: https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/06/65309/?fbclid=IwAR3SfFEqiR014t1GBx2mgui3KCVk-rwKrESzDeqUEQpajvucVnxb-JPkr8M

This is a long article to read and rebut, but I would like to hear the alt-right's critiques of it. Media reports gathered by the Fatal Encounters database are used to determine the racial statistics of police killings. The resulting data seems to prove police are racially biased against blacks.

I know that police often abuse their power, but there are some doubts I have about this conclusion. Here are my thoughts and questions.

One problem is the media has a very anti-white bias. For example, George Zimmerman was portrayed as a white supremacist in the media. Can a systemically anti-white media be trusted to produce accurate results for the Fatal Encounters databse?

Another problem with FE database is “nearly 40% of the cases (38.9%) are missing information about decedents’’ race/ethnicity.“ Source: https://openhealthdata.metajnl.com/articles/10.5334/ohd.30/

They try to use a method called Bayesian-improved surname geo-coding to estimate the race of unknown victims, but who knows whether it or the researchers also have anti-white bias.

The article says, “Dividing each racial group’s share of police killings [from the Fatal Encounters database] by their share of violent offenders (as reported in the National Crime Victimization Survey) can provide a passable estimate of the extent to which police killings of a given racial group are disproportionate to their likely provocations of police officers.“

This number is supposed to show police are biased against blacks. Is there any possible rebuttal to this?

The article wrongly claims “only about 22 percent of violent offenders are black.“ But according to the FBI's Arrests by Race and Ethnicity 2018, as we know, blacks commit 53% of all murders, 54% of all robbery, and 37% of all violent crime.

Those FBI statistics only account for only 2018, but we wouldn't expect any of the past 20 years to have significantly different percentages from 2018. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/table-43

Apparently the statistics of black perpetrators from the National Crime Victimization Survey line up almost perfectly with black arrests, which shows the FBI's Arrests by Race and Ethnicity aren't affected by racial bias.

The FE database doesn't seem to indicate the racial breakdown of people resisting arrest. This could be an important statistic.

The article cites the following study that seems to prove police racial bias. Can it be refuted?

“Using the unpredictable and somewhat random patterns of 911 calls and what police happen to be dispatched in response as an approximation of a more formal randomized study, a team of economists recently demonstrated that white officers in particular are much more likely to use potentially lethal force against black citizens. When randomly dispatched into more heavily black neighborhoods, white officers’ odds of shooting someone quadrupled, while there was virtually no change for black officers. This study controlled for crime patterns at the time of day and in the neighborhood to which the officer was dispatched, and was able to observe black and white officers dispatched into the same neighborhoods, and the same officers dispatched into multiple different neighborhoods. It is by far the most robust study of racial bias in policing yet conducted, and found an enormous effect that can best be described as racial bias leading to excessive use of force, especially lethal force.”

Study: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26774

Fatal Encounters database: https://fatalencounters.org/

all 8 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]paranoid_android3 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

According to The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

We find no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities across shootings, and White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers.

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877

That is, cops may be biased against Blacks, but White cops are not more biased than other cops. That is Black cops are just as biased against Blacks as White cops. Hmm... Almost like experience makes you biased against Blacks no matter who you are. This is 100% consistent with Blacks not even wanting to live around Blacks.

[–]ChancellorMershekel 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was Andrew Yang, of all people, who held the very politically incorrect view that 'diversity' increases rather than decreases 'racism'. Trying to be a stereotypical 'evil genius' he thus convinced himself that to beat Trump, all he had to do was fool Whites in very White areas to vote for him—supposedly he had 'done all the math' and knew what percentage he had to convince. He outright claimed that Whites were at their least racist (the exact opposite of what good Leftists believe) in such areas, and thus there they would be easier to convince.

So why was Andrew Yang such a thoroughly evil bastard, effectively seeing the world like we do, but taking the opposite side to us on practically every issue? Well, his view was that Whites would lash out as they got closer to becoming a minority, and therefore that this transition needed to be managed very carefully to minimize the possibility that Whites might just go postal on his kind. He is an Asian tribalist, through and through, worried that Asians (specifically, mentioning his own kids) would be expelled by Whites angry about their impending minority status. Fearful of that scenario, he stooped down to ostensibly accepting all sorts of things he probably personally thinks are ludicrous, such as 'reparations', in order to keep this fragile non-White coalition (which the Left desperately need) intact. I suspect he even knows that he's in the moral wrong, but simply doesn't care—the White civilization is too great to risk losing the chance of capturing it. Non-Whites in our societies are too accustomed to comparatively high living standards to seriously accept going back to the third-world. Why would anyone want to give up such a 'privileged' life to live in a third-world cesspool? This is one of the reasons for why they seemingly hypocritically 'want the White Man's world, yet without him in it'. If you found something of immense value created by someone you could easily overpower, indeed, why not take the risk? This scenario is playing out writ large, with non-White 'activist politicians' using the baizuo as an instrument to help provide the rope to hang us all with.

You can see the same pattern in France. Southern France has far more RN support, yet most browns/blacks also live in the south (and they mostly vote PS or other Leftist parties). Living around such people makes one more race-conscious. It's for that same reason that Leftists observe that police are quite 'racist' (thus the whole BLM thing), ignorantly failing to understand that if one disproportionately deals with criminals of a certain race, then one's view of that entire race will become increasingly negative. They're literally problematizing simple pattern recognition.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The study is probably right, police are indeed biased against black people. Police across the board of all races. I wonder why?

[–]Fitter_HappierWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

TNB?

[–]AFutureConcern 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The study's name:

Does Race Matter for Police Use of Force? Evidence from 911 Calls

It doesn't seem like 911 calls would give the best evidence for this claim.

white officers use force 60 percent more than black officers, and use gun force twice as often

Seems wrong to me. This is a pretty wild claim.

white officers are five times as likely to use gun force in predominantly black neighborhoods

Again, seems completely wrong. No other studies give anything close to this. Five times? I'm not buying it.

Unfortunately the paper is behind a paywall so I can't check it.

[–]Salos10000 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I really wonder how this article would read if it were written by a Jew because imo its seems pretty reasonable and is willing to see both sides, we still can refute it of course.

[–]aukofthecovenantWhite man with eyes 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not going to pay for the paper, but:

Perhaps most strikingly, we show that while white and black officers use gun force at similar rates in white and racially mixed neighborhoods, white officers are five times as likely to use gun force in predominantly black neighborhoods. Similarly, white officers increase use of any force much more than minority officers when dispatched to more minority neighborhoods.

What is "gun force"? Is it merely unholstering a gun, pointing a gun at the suspect, firing the gun, firing the gun at the suspect, firing at and hitting the suspect, firing at and hitting and killing the suspect, or what? The difference might explain why the multipliers seem so high.

Based on the abstract, this paper unwittingly makes the case for race-matched policing - if black cops policed black areas, "gun force" (whatever that is) would be less, and there would be fewer cries of racism. Everyone wins.

[–]marc_gee[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good critiques. I will use some of them to redpill a pastor on faceberg.