Black deaths at hands of law enforcement down substantially each decade, but racial divide still exists

[Axulus]

Deaths by legal intervention (per 100,000) - black individuals

1965: 3.33
1975: 2.96
1985: 1.25
1995: 1.21
2005: .94

68% decline since 1965.

However, the 2005 rate for whites was .37, indicating 2.5 death rate for blacks vs. whites.

Given that blacks have far more encounters with police (from 2011-2013 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black, while they make up 13.1 percent of the population, for a 2.93 rate), this data is not indicative of racism in the way police respond to encounters with blacks vs. whites (i.e. does not indicate that police are more likely to kill a black on any given encounter vs. a white today, but were far more likely in the past, especially in the 60's and 70's).

http://harvardpublichealthreview.org/190/

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, that's good. The question behind the data, however, is dependent upon whether the police have stopped shooting black people or if advances in sneaker technology have allowed the blacks to run away faster while the cops are stuck trudging along in their outdated dress shoes and can't catch them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Deaths by legal intervention? Several of the deaths recently if they happened 10 years ago would have been "legal intervention".

Personally, I'm interested in the number of deaths from police incidents overall.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Deaths by legal intervention (per 100,000) - black individuals

1965: 3.33
1975: 2.96
1985: 1.25
1995: 1.21
2005: .94

68% decline since 1965.

However, the 2005 rate for whites was .37, indicating 2.5 death rate for blacks vs. whites.

Given that blacks have far more encounters with police (from 2011-2013 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black, while they make up 13.1 percent of the population, for a 2.93 rate), this data is not indicative of racism in the way police respond to encounters with blacks vs. whites (i.e. does not indicate that police are more likely to kill a black on any given encounter vs. a white today, but were far more likely in the past, especially in the 60's and 70's).

http://harvardpublichealthreview.org/190/

Thou shalt not derail a crusade with an application of facts.

Shut up!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Deaths by legal intervention (per 100,000) - black individuals

1965: 3.33
1975: 2.96
1985: 1.25
1995: 1.21
2005: .94

68% decline since 1965.

However, the 2005 rate for whites was .37, indicating 2.5 death rate for blacks vs. whites.

Given that blacks have far more encounters with police (from 2011-2013 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black, while they make up 13.1 percent of the population, for a 2.93 rate), this data is not indicative of racism in the way police respond to encounters with blacks vs. whites (i.e. does not indicate that police are more likely to kill a black on any given encounter vs. a white today, but were far more likely in the past, especially in the 60's and 70's).

http://harvardpublichealthreview.org/190/

Thou shalt not derail a crusade with an application of facts.

Shut up!

The stats indicate that blacks are shot more often than whites. The numbers are encouraging, indicating that the disparity between whites and blacks being killed by cops is dropping. That is good. But personally, I don't like it when a white or black man is unduly killed by an officer.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Thou shalt not derail a crusade with an application of facts.

Shut up!

The stats indicate that blacks are shot more often than whites. The numbers are encouraging, indicating that the disparity between whites and blacks being killed by cops is dropping. That is good. But personally, I don't like it when a white or black man is unduly killed by an officer.

The thing is most people aren't at any real risk of being shot by the police. It's almost always criminals and crazies that get shot. You seem to be ignoring the fact that Axulus showed--blacks are shot less often than their proportion of the criminal community. That says it's unlikely that it's racism at work.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

their proportion of the criminal community

???

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The stats indicate that blacks are shot more often than whites. The numbers are encouraging, indicating that the disparity between whites and blacks being killed by cops is dropping. That is good. But personally, I don't like it when a white or black man is unduly killed by an officer.

The thing is most people aren't at any real risk of being shot by the police.

Or winning the lottery.

It's almost always criminals and crazies that get shot.

And terrorists. Don't forget terrorists and how the Bill of Rights indicates that there are no protections from overly aggressive police force if someone is a criminal or a "crazy". Nice language there. Good to know that "crazies" aren't people.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that Axulus showed--blacks are shot less often than their proportion of the criminal community.

Except the people recently shot were not involved in committing any violent crimes. The worst was fleeing an officer during a stop. No, wait, one guy was selling individual cigarettes.

 

[Rhea]

Deaths by legal intervention (per 100,000) - black individuals

1965: 3.33
1975: 2.96
1985: 1.25
1995: 1.21
2005: .94

68% decline since 1965.

However, the 2005 rate for whites was .37, indicating 2.5 death rate for blacks vs. whites.

Given that blacks have far more encounters with police (from 2011-2013 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black, while they make up 13.1 percent of the population, for a 2.93 rate), this data is not indicative of racism in the way police respond to encounters with blacks vs. whites (i.e. does not indicate that police are more likely to kill a black on any given encounter vs. a white today, but were far more likely in the past, especially in the 60's and 70's).

http://harvardpublichealthreview.org/190/

Can you please explain the control that proves blacks are not arrested at a higher rate for the same crime than their white counterparts? It's not clear from the data here. This seems to indicate that arrest rate = perpetration rate. But we know already from other data that white perps are less often arrested for the same crime as black perps. Starting with easy ones like drug use; marijuana is used at teh same frequency in each population but blacks are X times more likely to be arrested for doing it. Where X was, I forget, 2 or 5 or 30?

So if criminals who are white tend to get off, and criminals who are black tend to get arrested, then stating how much more criminal the black population is has no truth or merit.

We also know that for the same crime, people who are black are convicted more often.

We also know that for the same conviction, people who are black have harsher sentences.

 

[Axulus]

Can you please explain the control that proves blacks are not arrested at a higher rate for the same crime than their white counterparts?

I never made such a claim. I'm not sure one way or the other. My claim was that once an encounter with law enforcement has begun, there is no evidence of racism in how the encounter proceeds that results in a death (i.e. police do not seem more likely to kill the suspect if they are black vs. white on any given encounter). Whether a cop chooses to begin an encounter with someone for racist reasons is still a possibility.

It's not clear from the data here. This seems to indicate that arrest rate = perpetration rate. But we know already from other data that white perps are less often arrested for the same crime as black perps. Starting with easy ones like drug use; marijuana is used at teh same frequency in each population but blacks are X times more likely to be arrested for doing it. Where X was, I forget, 2 or 5 or 30?

I'm not surprised. I'd be interested in the data you have in mind. Also keep in mind that this in and of itself doesn't necessarily indicate racism. It could be the case that neighborhoods with higher crime also have greater police presence. Therefore, any particular lawbreaker (drug user, for example) will be more likely to be caught in a high crime neighborhood than a low crime one, simply due to more police on the lookout for criminal activity (and not due to the color of the skin).

So if criminals who are white tend to get off, and criminals who are black tend to get arrested, then stating how much more criminal the black population is has no truth or merit.

We also know that for the same crime, people who are black are convicted more often.

We also know that for the same conviction, people who are black have harsher sentences.

I'm not making any other claims about racism throughout the criminal justice system. I'm certain it still exists in several other areas.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

their proportion of the criminal community

???

Don't play stupid.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Deaths by legal intervention (per 100,000) - black individuals

1965: 3.33
1975: 2.96
1985: 1.25
1995: 1.21
2005: .94

68% decline since 1965.

However, the 2005 rate for whites was .37, indicating 2.5 death rate for blacks vs. whites.

Given that blacks have far more encounters with police (from 2011-2013 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black, while they make up 13.1 percent of the population, for a 2.93 rate), this data is not indicative of racism in the way police respond to encounters with blacks vs. whites (i.e. does not indicate that police are more likely to kill a black on any given encounter vs. a white today, but were far more likely in the past, especially in the 60's and 70's).

http://harvardpublichealthreview.org/190/

Can you please explain the control that proves blacks are not arrested at a higher rate for the same crime than their white counterparts? It's not clear from the data here. This seems to indicate that arrest rate = perpetration rate. But we know already from other data that white perps are less often arrested for the same crime as black perps. Starting with easy ones like drug use; marijuana is used at teh same frequency in each population but blacks are X times more likely to be arrested for doing it. Where X was, I forget, 2 or 5 or 30?

So if criminals who are white tend to get off, and criminals who are black tend to get arrested, then stating how much more criminal the black population is has no truth or merit.

We also know that for the same crime, people who are black are convicted more often.

We also know that for the same conviction, people who are black have harsher sentences.

White perps are less likely to be arrested for drug crime. This is a socioeconomic effect, not a racial effect. At the bottom drugs are a bigger threat (the addict that mugs people is a lot more dangerous than the person who can earn enough to pay for their drugs) and they're also much easier to catch. Thus the cops concentrate on catching poor users. Their stats look better and the overall crime rate will be lower.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's not clear from the data here. This seems to indicate that arrest rate = perpetration rate. But we know already from other data that white perps are less often arrested for the same crime as black perps. Starting with easy ones like drug use; marijuana is used at teh same frequency in each population but blacks are X times more likely to be arrested for doing it. Where X was, I forget, 2 or 5 or 30?

I'm not surprised. I'd be interested in the data you have in mind. Also keep in mind that this in and of itself doesn't necessarily indicate racism. It could be the case that neighborhoods with higher crime also have greater police presence. Therefore, any particular lawbreaker (drug user, for example) will be more likely to be caught in a high crime neighborhood than a low crime one, simply due to more police on the lookout for criminal activity (and not due to the color of the skin).

Another factor here: Cops normally do not look for marijuana users. Marijuana use busts are almost inevitably incidental to other undesirable acts. Thus you would expect the possession busts to follow the racial makeup of criminal/antisocial behavior, not the racial makeup of users.

Also: "Possession" convictions are often plea-bargains from possession-for-sale arrests. Again, not representative of the community of simple users.