View Single Post
  #185  
Old 10-09-2018, 01:54 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
No, I don't. People can look at the anemic sample size and reach the conclusion that the sample size is too small to be able to say that 21::1 is a valid statistic. It might very well be the result of a violent turf war in Chicago or couple of violent drug/gang encounters in LA. The only ACTUAL study done has said the exact opposite of what you are saying. The only ACTUAL study done has said that cops don't shoot blacks at higher rates than white after adjusting for reasonable variables. What pro publica did was take a few very small subset of numbers and extrapolated something about society as a whole.

Based on this methodology, I could say that cops kill asians age 14-19 three times as frequently as they shoot whites.

Its bad math. The numbers are small and you are cherrypicking the data to reach those statistics. The fact remains that cops shoot blacks generally 3 times ore frequently than whites generally. P Hacking has been pretty prominent in the news recently and this sort of cherrypicking is a close relative. You get a big data set and look for anomalies that help prove your point.
If you're not a statistician, then your opinion on this is pretty meaningless to me -- believe it or not, statistics is a real discipline, and statisticians can determine from sample sizes and such whether a piece of data is large enough to be statistically likely to be valid or not, and in my understanding (again, I am not a statistician, but it doesn't appear you are either), this analysis by ProPublica meets those requirements.