2018 Study from Michigan State and Arizona State University concluded: "When adjusting for crime, we find no systematic evidence of anti-Black disparities in fatal shootings, fatal shootings of unarmed citizens, or fatal shootings involving misidentification of harmless objects. Multiverse analyses showed only one significant anti-Black disparity of 144 possible tests. Exposure to police given crime rate differences likely accounts for the higher per capita rate of fatal police shootings for Blacks, at least when analyzing all shootings. For unarmed shootings or misidentification shootings, data are too uncertain to be conclusive."
2016 Study from Washington State University via American Society of Criminology concluded: "We found that, despite clear evidence of implicit bias against Black suspects, officers were slower to shoot armed Black suspects than armed White suspects, and they were less likely to shoot unarmed Black suspects than unarmed White suspects. These findings challenge the assumption that implicit racial bias affects police behavior in deadly encounters with Black suspects."
2016 Study from Harvard via the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded: "On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account. We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings."
2018 Follow-up Study from Harvard via the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded: "In stark contrast, Fryer (forthcoming) finds that, conditional on a police interaction, there are no racial differences in OIS on either the extensive or intensive margins. Using data from Houston, Texas – where I have both OIS and a randomly chosen set of interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified but was not used – I find, after controlling for suspect demographics, officer demographics, encounter characteristics, suspect weapon and year fixed effects, that blacks are 27.4 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to non-black, non-Hispanics. Investigating the intensive margin – who shoots first in an encounter with police or how many bullets were discharged in the endeavor – there are no detectable racial differences."
2018 Study from Rutgars University and Kookmin University and Purdue College concluded: "This article aims to answer this question: are white police officers more likely to use lethal force on minority suspects or people of a specific race? To answer this question, the authors construct a data set of all confirmed uses of lethal force by police officers in the United States in 2014 and 2015. They find that although minority suspects are disproportionately killed by police, white officers appear to be no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers"
2016 Study from the Pacific Institute of Research and Evaluation, Curtin University, University of Columbia found: "On average, an estimated 34 people were killed or medically treated for injury by law enforcement per 10 000 stops/arrests. That ratio is surprisingly consistent by race/ethnicity. Blacks have high arrest and stop rates, and per capita are much more likely than whites to die at the hands of police. However, when blacks are stopped or arrested, they are no more likely than whites to be injured or die during that incident.Consistent with our findings, simulation studies find police are no more likely to fire on unarmed blacks than unarmed whites, and high rates of black speeding citations per capita result from high violation rates. A systematic review identified 10 studies that found suspect race/ethnicity did not predict use of force or its escalation. However, one study found blacks were more likely than whites to face force during compliance checks. The PPCS survey also found that blacks were more likely to experience physical force and to perceive the threat of force during a stop, although few respondents actually were injured by the force applied. The large majority of incidents that those stopped perceived as undue force was stops where officers shouted at or threatened people, presumably to deter resistance." ht
The few suggest "war" to deceive the many to consent to "want or not want" the suggested war; which a) causes want vs not want division among those consenting to the suggestion and b) is what allows wars to be utilized to racketeer all the want vs not want conflicts caused by simple suggestions.
Over half a century and counting of suggested "abortion" is running smoothly only because the majority consents to want (pro-choice) versus not want (pro-life) the suggested abortions.
Instead of consenting to anything "anti" vs "pro"; why not use choice to sustain self; while resisting the temptations suggested by others. In other words...instead of choosing want vs not want (imbalance); why not choosing need over want (balance)?
I gave up trying to explain to people that the “cops are hunting down black people” narrative is false
I just show them this and if they keep insisting, I disengage.
The Vice President of Research & Innovation at Michigan](https://www.thecollegefix.com/scholar-forced-to-resign-over-study-that-found-police-shootings-not-biased-against-blacks/) was forced to resign partially due to his contrary findings that stated there was no racism in police shootings, which was among his other "racist science" that some faculty and students found offensive.
2018 Study from Michigan State and Arizona State University concluded: "When adjusting for crime, we find no systematic evidence of anti-Black disparities in fatal shootings, fatal shootings of unarmed citizens, or fatal shootings involving misidentification of harmless objects. Multiverse analyses showed only one significant anti-Black disparity of 144 possible tests. Exposure to police given crime rate differences likely accounts for the higher per capita rate of fatal police shootings for Blacks, at least when analyzing all shootings. For unarmed shootings or misidentification shootings, data are too uncertain to be conclusive."
2016 Study from Washington State University via American Society of Criminology concluded: "We found that, despite clear evidence of implicit bias against Black suspects, officers were slower to shoot armed Black suspects than armed White suspects, and they were less likely to shoot unarmed Black suspects than unarmed White suspects. These findings challenge the assumption that implicit racial bias affects police behavior in deadly encounters with Black suspects."
2016 Study from Harvard via the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded: "On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account. We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings."
2018 Follow-up Study from Harvard via the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded: "In stark contrast, Fryer (forthcoming) finds that, conditional on a police interaction, there are no racial differences in OIS on either the extensive or intensive margins. Using data from Houston, Texas – where I have both OIS and a randomly chosen set of interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified but was not used – I find, after controlling for suspect demographics, officer demographics, encounter characteristics, suspect weapon and year fixed effects, that blacks are 27.4 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to non-black, non-Hispanics. Investigating the intensive margin – who shoots first in an encounter with police or how many bullets were discharged in the endeavor – there are no detectable racial differences."
2018 Study from Rutgars University and Kookmin University and Purdue College concluded: "This article aims to answer this question: are white police officers more likely to use lethal force on minority suspects or people of a specific race? To answer this question, the authors construct a data set of all confirmed uses of lethal force by police officers in the United States in 2014 and 2015. They find that although minority suspects are disproportionately killed by police, white officers appear to be no more likely to use lethal force against minorities than nonwhite officers"
2016 Study from the Pacific Institute of Research and Evaluation, Curtin University, University of Columbia found: "On average, an estimated 34 people were killed or medically treated for injury by law enforcement per 10 000 stops/arrests. That ratio is surprisingly consistent by race/ethnicity. Blacks have high arrest and stop rates, and per capita are much more likely than whites to die at the hands of police. However, when blacks are stopped or arrested, they are no more likely than whites to be injured or die during that incident.Consistent with our findings, simulation studies find police are no more likely to fire on unarmed blacks than unarmed whites, and high rates of black speeding citations per capita result from high violation rates. A systematic review identified 10 studies that found suspect race/ethnicity did not predict use of force or its escalation. However, one study found blacks were more likely than whites to face force during compliance checks. The PPCS survey also found that blacks were more likely to experience physical force and to perceive the threat of force during a stop, although few respondents actually were injured by the force applied. The large majority of incidents that those stopped perceived as undue force was stops where officers shouted at or threatened people, presumably to deter resistance." ht
Thanks! I have heard this but now I have it ready to send to those who argue about it.
Anyone I don’t like is a (too many things to list anymore).
The democrats and other swamp scum are doing their best to destroy this country before the midterms. It would be lovely to get some McCarthyism.
Shame that Kevin fellow won't live up to his namesake...
The few suggest "war" to deceive the many to consent to "want or not want" the suggested war; which a) causes want vs not want division among those consenting to the suggestion and b) is what allows wars to be utilized to racketeer all the want vs not want conflicts caused by simple suggestions.
Over half a century and counting of suggested "abortion" is running smoothly only because the majority consents to want (pro-choice) versus not want (pro-life) the suggested abortions.
Instead of consenting to anything "anti" vs "pro"; why not use choice to sustain self; while resisting the temptations suggested by others. In other words...instead of choosing want vs not want (imbalance); why not choosing need over want (balance)?
The regime is getting ready to purge the opposition.