I’ve brought up the statisticsin various threads about possible excessive police force towards young black men. This disparity is huge – far larger than the differences in crime statistics.
Are there any possible explanations besides that, on average, US police are more likely to feel threatened/twitchy/etc. because the suspect is black?
EDIT: the link shows that young black men are 21 times more likely to be killed by the police than young white men. I left out the “by the police” part in the thread title.
Well, if poor whites are more likely to be killed by the cops than wealth whites, some of it is gong to be explained by poverty. That is, one would expect poor people to be more likely to commit crimes than rich people. Further, I think our drug laws have an inherent racial bias to them, and so blacks are going to be on the short end of that.
But in the end, I suspect the major factor is going to be the sense that many people have that young black men ore dangerous.
What is the context of the statistic? Is it that a confrontation with the police is 21x more likely to end in a fatal shooting for young black men? Or that overall the killed-by-police rate is 21x higher? If the latter, than you would have to adjust for the rate of criminal activity in the two populations.
I’m thinking that it’s largely an artifact of math and cherrypicking. If you continue to read through the article, it looks like the percentage of incidents of black teens being shot is something like 70% of all incidents, which is a lot closer to the sort of rate we would expect based on crime statistics. Still disproportionate, but not ungodly.
The risk assessment that they did, however, amplifies that disproportion and when you’re looking at something which happens at a rate of 1 per tens of millions of people, just a handful more deaths than average could greatly inflate the number even more. If you did the same math over a 2 decade period instead of a 2 year period, the rate would probably drop drastically.
So basically, I’d say that there is a real issue, but that number is not a particularly meaningful one.
About the only positive thing you can say about racism in America is that it used to be a lot worse. Nowadays a black man is twenty-one times more likely to be killed by the police than a white man is. But the figure probably used to be over a hundred or even a thousand times more likely.
Great. It would still be a misleading number. White teens are probably 8000x more likely to drown in a pool than a black teen. Maybe technically true, but not a particularly useful metric.
It might be that the police’s likelihood to use violence is exponentially related to a suspect’s likelihood to be criminal; that is, for a suspect to be marginally more likely to be a criminal, the officer’s marginal propensity to use force would be greater.
Black population is about 13% but account for about 46% of violent crime. It’s common knowledge that large percentages of black male youths intentionally emulate gangster, thug-life habits and attitudes which naturally put law enforcement on a somewhat higher state of alert when dealing with them.
Please don’t insult our intelligence by trying to pretend that this is some offense by Whites against Blacks, or some continuation of historical racism.
More interactions (whether based on racism, underlying crime rates, etc) means more chances that lethal force will be used.
Possible differences in how the underlying populations react to the initial interaction. Escalation, even that which does not require deadly force, is more likely to result in it’s use during split second decision making.
Raw numbers don’t take into account whether a given use of force is justified or not. Granted it can be difficult if racial bias affects the determination of justified or not.
It’s based on data that’s self reported from state and local levels to a federal database. Potentially there’s a bias induced by which departments report vs not reporting. I haven’t seen anyone that’s done the math calculating the rates against the populations of the departments reporting. They just always assume the nationwide racial demographics match the database’s demographics.
Probably hard to control using black vs white female deaths (since those rates are even smaller)… I haven’t seen anyone try though. Maybe there’s an effect unique to black males that’s not specific to just being black.
Potentially there’s an effect based on health care (linked to demographic economic differences). This comparison is based on death rates not deadly force usage rates.
Now take it a step further. Why are black men more likely to commit crimes than white men?
Is it because of some innate characteristic in black men? Or is it because black men are more likely than white men to grow up in an environment that encourages crime?
If you’re arguing there’s something innately criminal about black men, then I’d call that a racist argument.
And if black men are more likely than white men to grow up in a bad environment, then how is racism a historical phenomena rather than something that’s still happening now?