Rashida Tlaib: "No more policing, incarceration, and militarization. "

[none]

from the linked pdf........

page 4....
direct, indirect? cause and effect? narrative? in other words?

What's so hard to understand?

Deadly force incident goes viral => BLM protests => cops become more passive => police shootings go down and crime goes up. More than 100x as many die because of the police passivity than because of the police actions.

eerck.
from the linked pdf...

...
Put plainly, the causal effect of the investigationsin these five cities – triggered mainly by the deaths of Freddie Gray, Laquan McDonald, Timothy Thomas, Tyisha Miller and Michael Brown at the hands of police – has resulted in 893 more homicides than would have been expected with no investigation and more than 33,472 additional felony crimes, relative to synthetic control cities.
...

but yeah, internet....err people talking.?

 

[lpetrich]

The alternative to brutal policing should not be no policing but non-brutal policing. Brutal policing vs. no policing should be a false dichotomy.

Policing the Police: The Impact of "Pattern-or-Practice" Investigations on Crime - w27324.pdf the authors state in their conclusion:

Despite the lack of welfare analysis, we hope these results encourage introspection on the trade-offs involved when we increase scrutiny on police departments, particularly in the midst of civil unrest. The social objective is to eliminate bias without causing police to retreat from activities that suppress crime, and save lives. A troubling possibility is that the types of police activities that keep crime rates low are inherently unconstitutional and hence we face a tradeoff between allowing uncomfortable amounts of police bias and reducing crime in the very communities which are most impacted by that bias.

One way forward is to design a set of incentives such that we increase the penalties of unconstitutional policing and, simultaneously, lower the probability of being wrongfully accused when controversial interactions occur. In this sense, we might keep the expected price of policing constant for officers. There is no free lunch. If the price of policing increases, officers are rational to retreat. And, retreating disproportionately costs black lives.

The authors of this paper find it a troubling dilemma, brutal policing vs. no policing, but certain people seem eager to embrace that dichotomy as a way of defending police brutality. Like the willingness of certain people to believe that targets of brutal policing are evil monsters who deserved their fate.

This paper provides the first empirical examination of the impact of federal and state "Pattern-or-Practice" investigations on crime and policing. For investigations that were not preceded by "viral" incidents of deadly force, investigations, on average, led to a statistically significant reduction in homicides and total crime. In stark contrast, all investigations that were preceded by "viral" incidents of deadly force have led to a large and statistically significant increase in homicides and total crime.

This seems to suggest that it may be possible to make policing less brutal. Cops would stay on the job, but with less brutality in their policing. A reduction in crime may even be a result of increasing trust in police forces from suffering less brutality from them.