37 thoughts on “Data Undercuts Myth of ‘Racism’ in Police Killings”

  1. The evidence that there IS “systemic racism” in policing and the administration of justice is not just persuasive, it is compelling. For starters here is a compilation of studies across multiple areas of policing, prosecutions and sentencing that show exactly that.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/opinions/systemic-racism-police-evidence-criminal-justice-system/#Policing

    For those who do not subscribe to WAPO the following study of about 100 million traffic stops is all the evidence anyone would need to admit the existence of “systemic racism.” Not only did it find that black motorists are stopped far more frequently than whites it showed that the disparity was much less at night when the race of the driver was harder to determine.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0858-1

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. While I am opposed to anyone being stopped by police absent probable cause or on a pretense, the statistics in that article don’t necessarily mean what is implied.

      If more Blacks are stopped for equipment or license issues, does that mean that Blacks are being singled out or does it mean Blacks are more likely to neglect upkeep and renewals on their cars? Could be either.

      If more Blacks are injured or subjected to force when arrested, could that be because they have more of a tendency to resist?

      Numbers alone don’t necessarily tell the story.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I will not respond to your hypotheticals except to note – typical.
        But, okay, explain why the disparity in traffic stops is much less at night when the police cannot see the race of the driver.

        Beyond that one article the WAPO article contains links to study after study on policing, prosecutions, sentencing etc. ALL showing the same pattern. I understand that to be a “conservative” in good standing you have to flatly deny the existence of systemic racism ANYWHERE but as President Biden might say . . . “Come on, man.”

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

    2. RE: “The evidence that there IS ‘systemic racism’ in policing and the administration of justice is not just persuasive, it is compelling.”

      I don’t find it so, mainly because disparate outcome studies as a rule reveal correlations, not causes. The problem with correlations is that no matter how many times you find the same correlation, the correlation itself doesn’t tell you anything useful about reality.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Okay, lets see YOU explain why the disparity between white and black traffic stops is significantly less at night when the race of the driver is harder to know.

        And, by the way, your last sentence is absolute nonsense.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. RE: “Okay, lets see YOU explain why the disparity between white and black traffic stops is significantly less at night when the race of the driver is harder to know.”

          I don’t have a hypothesis. On the other hand, a hypothesis is all you have. Also, it seems you have succumbed to the gambler’s fallacy.

          Like

          Reply

          1. You don’t have a hypothesis? Really? You mean that try as you might you cannot even think of one besides the obvious one which is – the probability of a vehicle being stopped goes up if the police can see a black person driving. In fact, it is the only explanation for the observed difference between day and night. So, we have a hypothesis with evidence to support it. That is how science works. All you have is goofy denial. I have a hypothesis AND evidence that supports it.

            By the way, let’s add the Gamblers Fallacy to the many things that you clearly do not understand but try to pretend that you do. There is no way it applies to the observed evidence.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “So, we have a hypothesis with evidence to support it. That is how science works.”

            No we don’t, and no it isn’t. A correlation may inspire a hypothesis, but the hypothesis then must be tested. There can be no evidence to support the hypotheses until the experiment is completed.

            Like

        2. Why should Mr Roberts or anyone else have to explain a correlation?

          In each case, there are alternate explanations. If you want to make the case that systemic racism is the only cause, it is your burden to prove it. Correlation by itself proves nothing.

          As far as night is concerned, do you think the demographics and intentions of nighttime and daytime drivers is the same? Is it not possible that the portion of nighttime drivers involved in illegal activities is different from those driving in daytime, especially after midnight?

          Like

          Reply

          1. Mr. Roberts began this discussion with a categorical statement . . .

            “There is no “systemic racism” in America.”

            I provided two links to significant evidence that there is, in fact, statistically significant evidence across a wide variety of metrics that says there is. I could have provided dozens more.

            Your argument about the difference between night and day having other explanations is a gigantic and, I would add, laughable fail. The study is of traffic stops not arrests for criminal behavior. Leaving that aside, you are saying that more white bad people come out at night to even things up or black bad guys call it a day when the sun goes down. Either “theory” is patently ridiculous.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. RE: “I provided two links to significant evidence that there is, in fact, statistically significant evidence across a wide variety of metrics that says there is.”

            No, you didn’t. That’s the problem.

            Like

          4. RE: “He still doesn’t get the correlation/causation thing.”

            It is worse than that. He doesn’t get the scientific process.

            Like

          5. “He still doesn’t get the correlation/causation thing.”
            “He doesn’t get the scientific process”

            LOL!

            That is funny coming from diehard supporters of our first anti-science President and a couple climate science deniers. It simply shows that you have no answer for the overwhelming evidence that does not fit your preconceived ideas.

            There is massive statistical evidence that bad things happen to black people compared to white people in every aspect of our society, culture and economics. The people who study such things do their best to eliminate causes such as socio-economic status that might explain the differences observed. They are left with differences that need an explanation and the obvious, indeed the only, explanation is “systemic racism.” It is real and is an ugly fact of life for every non-white person in this country. Here, for example, is the testimony of Senator Tim Scott . . .

            https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/13/tim-scott-senate-floor-speech-racism-police-shootings

            Liked by 1 person

      2. “I don’t find it so”..

        Big surprise there. You go out and find material to back your argument and ignore or denigrate that which disagrees with your preconceived views. Anytime someone posts data to disprove what you have posted, you give it the short shrift, call the information or the writers idiotic or an idiot, and prattle on that only you have access to the great knowledge of the universe and only you can provide us with universal truths.

        You only see what you want to believe

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. RE: “Anytime someone posts data to disprove what you have posted, you give it the short shrift…”

          Mr. Murphy’s two articles don’t prove or disprove anything. If you think they do, you are welcome to explain how.

          Like

          Reply

          3. RE: “You proved the point that you only see that which you wish to see.”

            Mr. Murphy’s two articles don’t prove or disprove anything because disparate outcome studies don’t prove or disprove anything. If you can think of some way to show that they do, it would be better for you to share it. Criticicing me is a waste of time that doesn’t help you a bit.

            Like

          4. I can’t convince you of that which you have already decided. If that were possible, you would stop posting anti-vax bs, allegations that systemic racism does not exist, or that the sky is green

            Like

  2. I also note that the author of the “analysis” was part of the DOJ until last month. Translated, he worked in the 45-era Justice Department. Not exactly a bastion of non-biased thinking.

    Also, I note that the police involved shooting in Columbus was legitimate use of force at the time. Even REP Val Demmings (D-FL) said the same.

    Like

    Reply

        1. Did you forget the Russia hoax that affected the mid term election? The one that the Obama DOJ knew was a farce the whole time it kept the pretenses of an investigation?

          Or the effort to avoid Congressional Subpoenas on Fast and Furious?

          There has never been a more politicized DOJ
          befire or after

          Like

          Reply

          3. Very? AND Both?

            “You don’t get to write your own [history].”

            Uh, neither do you.

            Legitimate investigation into Trump’s Russia connections began in 2016. And to avoid the investigation affecting the 2016 election its existence was kept secret. Meanwhile the DOJ was publicly excoriating Hillary Clinton over her emails thus handing the election to Donald Trump. The next mid-term election was in 2018 and that would be two years after Donald Trump and his appointees had control of the DOJ. If the investigation was continuing, that would be the result of Trump’s stonewalling. So basically, you are once again, full of it and deliberately ignore the findings of the GOP controlled Senate Intelligence Committee which reported that this was no “hoax.”

            Click to access report_volume5.pdf

            Like

        2. LoL, Eric holder said he was Obama’s wing man. James coney admitted using entrapment to incoming potus. A huge is of why ppl believe things like this in my opinion is almost all the major media/news that ppl are getting their info from or beliefs are gov propaganda. The reason I say this is because look at coverage of boarder during last admin when you had weeks of non stop coverage everyday. The boarder now is n what’s happening now is historic never seen in the history of this country yet media has given it literally close to if not zero coverage. Same places that coverage n boast about historical events for no logical explanation has no interest in ethically informing their viewer of boarder historical event taking place. I literally racked my brain putting myself in opposing views shoes to try n think of logical reason for this and nothing except one. Also it’s not the first time in this country media/news was used to feed Americans propaganda same thing Russia n China does. Project mocking bird exposes this not only is possible but in fact has happen. Information It’s a form a control and I feel it’s why country so divided and is intentional. Why do You firmly believe what your saying ? We’re you ever interested in the topic of cops being racist or looking at so called info supplied showing this conclusion before, I would bet not. Subconsciously your being told what’s important and information they want you to see as illusion to make you believe you came to this conclusion and why your defending so hard. Ppl are being unknowingly being told what’s important and what to focus on which at same time distracts and keeps you not focus on what’s really important and that’s always the things happening that their informing ppl about. It’s why no one essentially knows about treaty recently signed with world health organization. I know you really believe what you currently think is true but your were unknowingly told to believe that. Data and info is so easy to manipulate one way or the other as u only focus on 1 small variable which is the day/night point. However it’s not showing thounsands of other variables needed to make a more educated opinion such as number of stops n location of them which is extremely important or demographics of locations where data was taken n the list goes on n on. I know for instance in Paterson NJ at night if you are driving in certain parts or particular streets at night you and are white your way more likely to get pulled over b/c I’m aware it’s a notorious drug street n demographics in area are basically everything except white so it look outrageously suspicious driving a nice care and being white at 1am n that’s nothing but logic n common sense where you know data n details such as that. However the data your using to make conclusion is outrageously lacking important variables for you to make any conclusion either way. Ppl are being used to push agenda n narratives and important question you should always ask is who’s

          Like

          Reply

  3. A more simple premise would be that this country was founded on indigenous genocide and African slavery, and to the extent that these atrocities have hardly been acknowledged, let alone atoned for or corrected, makes this a structurally and systemically racist country.

    But, again, we’re speaking at cross purposes here. The right members of this board are not going to see systemic racism anywhere because it is antithetical to their world view. Theirs is a world comprised solely of individuals acting in their own rational self-interest. This is why the “few bad apples” argument is so popular. They see apples, not the orchard that produced them. There may be individual racists, but they are ideologically incapable or unwilling to think about society as composed of systems and structures.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Not hardly, the problem with you people is you stroke a very broad brush that makes those that have just lived their lives harmoniously as culpable of some evil myth and those that were never affected a victim of said myth. You even paint yourself in the same myth so repent all you want, give away your money to a myth and be happy wallowing in a myth. The vast majority lives and breathes normalcy. Funny why you dopes don’t hold black africans culpable of slavery since they are the ones who captured and sold slaves to a anyone willing to buy and still do to this day.

      Like

      Reply

      1. First, slavery and indigenous genocide are not “myths.” They happened.

        Second. I don’t hold “black [A]fricans culpable” because I do not live in Africa. I live here, in the United States; so it is the actions of the United States that primarily concern me.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Well there you go. The truth doesn’t fit your lame narrative so give the slave dealers and modern slave holders a pass. You must sleep well at night.

          Like

          Reply

      2. You seem to take the reality of “systemic racism” personally. You shouldn’t. It does not mean that all – or even most – white Americans are racists nor that there is some sort of conspiracy against non-whites. Most of the “systemic racism” is driven by unconscious biases that developed over centuries and are difficult to expunge. People of color are not immune. They share many of the same unconcious biases. None other than Jesse Jackson once famously acknowledged that he breathed a sigh of relief when a group of young men walking towards him on a DC street turned out to be white.

        Systemic racism is real. The first step in eliminating it is to acknowledge that it exists.

        Like

        Reply

        1. Every ill is explained away with “systemic racism” as the cause these days by the left. It is often blamed on white males as a whole so don’t try to water it down. You guys need to get together and get your story straight before yelling systemic racism all of the time. It has become personal and rightfully so.

          Like

          Reply

Leave a reply to Dqniel Cancel reply