zlacker

>>mwseib+(OP)
Police brutality is a real issue. It's less clear that racial bias in policing is a statistically significant issue, however, when accounting for obvious things. If someone has numbers that tell a different story I am all ears. Here are mine when I attempted to find it for myself:

    black arrests (all crimes) a year: 2.2 million
    white arrests (all crimes) a year: 5.6 million

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-...

    black deaths by police: 4.5 per 100k
    white deaths by police: 1.5 per 100k

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793

    USA black population: 13%
    USA white population: 75%

Given a black committing an average black crime, and a white committing an avg white crime, the black person is 16% more likely to die in a police altercation. Whether or not this is statistical error or a real difference is harder to tell, but this difference is not nearly as large as most media outlets lead people to believe.

Again, If someone has numbers that tell a different story I am all ears

>>randyr+Qv1
Laws are disproportionately overenforced on black communities. Your numbers are collected after a large amount of the bias is already baked in and collected by the people perpetrating the bias. Maybe that didn't occur to you.

You're just asking questions right?

>>danhar+Uw1
I welcome more data that has less sampling bias, but without some attempt to quantify the amount of sampling bias here we don’t know if it has a big impact on this data.

>>randyr+sy1
It's presupposing a negligible effect of racial bias on arrest data. That's a very good reason to not use it in showing a negligible effect of racial bias on another scenario involving police. I'm struggling to think of a better example of a circular argument.