WaPo's year-long study of roughly 1000 fatal shootings by police

[Atreus21]

564 were armed with guns
281 armed with other weapon
90 unarmed

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/in...f-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/

Nearly a thousand times this year, an American police officer has shot and killed a civilian.

When the people hired to protect their communities end up killing someone, they can be called heroes or criminals — a judgment that has never come more quickly or searingly than in this era of viral video, body cameras and dash cams. A single bullet fired at the adrenaline-charged apex of a chase can end a life, wreck a career, spark a riot, spike racial tensions and alter the politics of the nation.

In a year-long study, The Washington Post found that the kind of incidents that have ignited protests in many U.S. communities — most often, white police officers killing unarmed black men — represent less than 4 percent of fatal police shootings. Meanwhile, The Post found that the great majority of people who died at the hands of the police fit at least one of three categories: they were wielding weapons, they were suicidal or mentally troubled, or they ran when officers told them to halt.

The Post sought to compile a record of every fatal police shooting in the nation in 2015, something no government agency had done. The project began after a police officer shot and killed Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., in August 2014, provoking several nights of fiery riots, weeks of protests and a national reckoning with the nexus of race, crime and police use of force.

Race remains the most volatile flash point in any accounting of police shootings. Although black men make up only 6 percent of the U.S. population, they account for 40 percent of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year, The Post’s database shows. In the majority of cases in which police shot and killed a person who had attacked someone with a weapon or brandished a gun, the person who was shot was white. But a hugely disproportionate number — 3 in 5 — of those killed after exhibiting less threatening behavior were black or Hispanic.

Fatal shootings of UNARMED CIVILIANS sparked much of the national debate over police use of deadly force. The Post found that they account for one shooting in 10.

Confusing. Armed whites get killed more than armed blacks. Yet unarmed blacks get killed more than unarmed whites? That's a head-scratcher.

 

[DrPizza]

Confusing. Armed whites get killed more than armed blacks. Yet unarmed blacks get killed more than unarmed whites? That's a head-scratcher.

Let's say there were 1000 people, 6% were black males. 44% were white males. (Not actual percentages, but for illustrative purposes). So, let's say there's a population of 1000 people: 60 of those 1000 people are black male, 440 of those 1000 people are white males. 30 of the black males are shot by police, 44 of the white males are shot by police. That's more whites shot than blacks. But, 30/60 is half the black population, which is a much, much higher rate than 44 out of 440, or 10% of the white males. Now re-read the article for the actual percentages.

 

[Subyman]

Exactly Dr. Pizza. Remember blacks only make up roughly 15% of the population.

 

[DrPizza]

But a hugely disproportionate number — 3 in 5 — of those killed after exhibiting less threatening behavior were black or Hispanic.

I'm not sure that data is necessarily meaningful without context for the frequency by race of how often such behaviors occurred without being shot. That 3 in 5 rate nearly matches the murder rate by race. That is, and perhaps I'm reading this data wrong,*
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...f_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls
roughly 3 in 5 murders in the US in 2013 were committed by blacks or Hispanics. Does the rate of ("less threatening behavior" and shot) match the rate of stops by the police, as it does match the rate of murders?

*Hispanics appear to be grouped in with whites, and then separated out by ethnicity, subtracting them from the whites committing murders, and adding them to create a black and hispanic total, results in the roughly 3/5 rate.

 

[HomerJS]

564 were armed with guns
281 armed with other weapon
90 unarmed

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/in...f-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/



Confusing. Armed whites get killed more than armed blacks. Yet unarmed blacks get killed more than unarmed whites? That's a head-scratcher.

When was the last white guy shot and killed for possessing a toy gun. There have been at least 2 black males in the last 1.5 years

 

[Jaskalas]

When was the last white guy shot and killed for possessing a toy gun. There have been at least 2 black males in the last 1.5 years

How many Asians? Oh sorry, that minority does not count.
It appears there's another reason for that fear. Perhaps it's physical size and intimidation. Perhaps it's a learned history and recognizable pattern of poverty, drugs, and violence. Perhaps it's people on the wrong side of town and others know to be scared.

Maybe that's simply the racial disparity of inner city life and if locations / poverty levels were reversed so too would the statistics.

 

[x26]

How many Asians? Oh sorry, that minority does not count.
It appears there's another reason for that fear. Perhaps it's physical size and intimidation. Perhaps it's a learned history and recognizable pattern of poverty, drugs, and violence. Perhaps it's people on the wrong side of town and others know to be scared.

Maybe that's simply the racial disparity of inner city life and if locations / poverty levels were reversed so too would the statistics.

Yep. Add Bad Attitudes, Bad Behaviors, Problems with Authority Figures and combative Violent behaviors to that and you have it: Police Shootings.

ETA: Add to that Blacks being the Most Violent Demographic-By Far-in the US.

 

[x26]

When was the last white guy shot and killed for possessing a toy gun. There have been at least 2 black males in the last 1.5 years

When was the Last time a White Guy Pointed a Toy Gun at a Cop??

 

[ivwshane]

When was the Last time a White Guy Pointed a Toy Gun at a Cop??

Does it count if it's a bb gun and the guy actually shot at officers?

http://m.wmur.com/news/police-man-arrested-after-shooting-bb-gun-at-officers/28219706

What about two white guys shooting bb guns in a Walmart?

https://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/1...hoot-bb-guns-at-a-Wal-Mart-and-live-of-course

What was your point again?

Oh not current enough for you?
https://www.rt.com/usa/327296-woman-gun-police-survives/

Your ignorance doesn't make your opinion valid, dumb ass!

 

[glenn1]

Does it count if it's a bb gun and the guy actually shot at officers?

http://m.wmur.com/news/police-man-arrested-after-shooting-bb-gun-at-officers/28219706

What about two white guys shooting bb guns in a Walmart?

https://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/1...hoot-bb-guns-at-a-Wal-Mart-and-live-of-course

What was your point again?

Oh not current enough for you?
https://www.rt.com/usa/327296-woman-gun-police-survives/

Your ignorance doesn't make your opinion valid, dumb ass!

The first and third are fortunate to be alive and I doubt anyone would convict the police officers if they had shot back. In the second case there was little doubt that the persons involved were shooting BB guns so that no doubt helped the police tailor their actions accordingly.

Let's be honest at least, it would be nice if police had perfect awareness and could always choose the 100% correct action in real time but it rarely works that way in real life. The overwhelming majority of citizens understand a few basic rules of thumb about interacting with the police - you stand a vastly higher chance of having a police officer use a weapon of some sort against you (gun, taser, nightstick, pepper spray, etc.) if you: (A) are holding or especially point a weapon of any kind at them, regardless of type or ammunition (bullet, BB, pellet, spitball, whatever); (B) you act erratically or repeatedly disobey when given lawful orders like "drop your weapon" or "put your hands on your head"; (C) you use bodily force of any kind against an officer.

 

[Ackmed]

While technically "unarmed" when someone is trying to take away the cops gun or get another weapon from them, and they get shot I don't see what else is supposed to happen. They needed to use deadly force in most cases, complaining about that is silly.

 

[fskimospy]

Yep. Add Bad Attitudes, Bad Behaviors, Problems with Authority Figures and combative Violent behaviors to that and you have it: Police Shootings.

ETA: Add to that Blacks being the Most Violent Demographic-By Far-in the US.

What do you have to say about this?

 

[glenn1]

What do you have to say about this?

Blacks have more interactions with the police so thus more "opportunity" to have a violent encounter with them. The statistics on shootings by race seem to scale with the fact that blacks represent 40% of the prison population while being ~13% of overall U.S. population. This seems to reflect more about the generally higher level of policing that occurs in black neighborhoods, rather than blacks being disproportionately targeted by police officers. Whether the level of policing should be adjusted is probably the more proper argument to make IMHO.

 

[HomerJS]

When was the Last time a White Guy Pointed a Toy Gun at a Cop??

The guy killed in Walmart pointed a gun at the cop??

BTW - Some people are allowed to point real guns at cops.

 

[Chryso]

When was the last white guy shot and killed for possessing a toy gun. There have been at least 2 black males in the last 1.5 years

So you really think they were shot because they were black and not because they were pointing the guns at police?

 

[fskimospy]

Blacks have more interactions with the police so thus more "opportunity" to have a violent encounter with them. The statistics on shootings by race seem to scale with the fact that blacks represent 40% of the prison population while being ~13% of overall U.S. population. This seems to reflect more about the generally higher level of policing that occurs in black neighborhoods, rather than blacks being disproportionately targeted by police officers. Whether the level of policing should be adjusted is probably the more proper argument to make IMHO.

While black people having more interactions with the police makes sense to a certain extent, implicit racism is definitely at play here too, as shown by numerous studies on the issue. For example:

http://www.npr.org/2015/08/29/43583...pull-trigger-when-target-is-black-study-finds

 

[woolfe9998]

564 were armed with guns
281 armed with other weapon
90 unarmed

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/in...f-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/



Confusing. Armed whites get killed more than armed blacks. Yet unarmed blacks get killed more than unarmed whites? That's a head-scratcher.

I cited this WaPo study and another from the Guardian here:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=37841873&highlight=washington#post37841873

It actually isn't all that confusing. The proportions of being shot while armed v. unarmed are different depending on race. As I said in my earlier post, from the guardian study:

If you were black and killed by the cops, there is a 33% chance you were unarmed.

If you were hispanic and killed by the cops, there is a 25% chance you were unarmed.

If you were white and killed by the cops, there is a 15% chance you were unarmed.

The problem with statistics like this is that they are difficult to explain with differential crime rates between the two ethnic populations. That would explain a disproportionate number of blacks being killed by police. It doesn't explain why unarmed blacks are killed in higher percentages than unarmed whites, or why unarmed Hispanics are killed more than white but less than blacks.

Another problem statistic coming out of these studies, at least as of mid year, only 3 police had been charged with anything, in spite of there having been about 500 killings with a quarter of them being unarmed.

 

[glenn1]

While black people having more interactions with the police makes sense to a certain extent, implicit racism is definitely at play here too, as shown by numerous studies on the issue. For example:

http://www.npr.org/2015/08/29/43583...pull-trigger-when-target-is-black-study-finds

Explained by the "stereotype-consistentcy" mentioned in the article. Blacks are hugely over-represented in homicides both as victims and perps. Therefore it's statistically much more likely that a black person WILL be an actual threat than someone of another race. Sorry if you dislike the implications of that, but they represent reality. You'd likely see an even more pronounced effect if the study further showed images differentiated by sex and age as well as race since males around 17-18 exhibit the highest crime rates of all.

 

[fskimospy]

Explained by the "stereotype-consistentcy" mentioned in the article. Blacks are hugely over-represented in homicides both as victims and perps. Therefore it's statistically much more likely that a black person WILL be an actual threat than someone of another race. Sorry if you dislike the implications of that, but they represent reality. You'd likely see an even more pronounced effect if the study further showed images differentiated by sex and age as well as race since males around 17-18 exhibit the highest crime rates of all.

Actually it's not, as "stereotype-consistency" in the article referred to armed black people, not black people in general. Regardless, saying that police shoot more innocent and unarmed black people because they expect them to be criminals is pretty much exactly the problem. Glad you agree.

 

[glenn1]

Actually it's not, as "stereotype-consistency" in the article referred to armed black people, not black people in general. Regardless, saying that police shoot more innocent and unarmed black people because they expect them to be criminals is pretty much exactly the problem. Glad you agree.

The expectation is based upon observable reality as I pointed out in the exact post you quoted. You simply observing seven times as many dead bodies per capita and summing it up as "exactly the problem" shows that you want test subjects to ignore that reality.

 

[fskimospy]

The expectation is based upon observable reality as I pointed out in the exact post you quoted. You simply observing seven times as many dead bodies per capita and summing it up as "exactly the problem" shows that you want test subjects to ignore that reality.

You realize that your position is the one that ignores reality, right? An unarmed person who is not attacking anyone is not a threat that merits shooting them. Period. That black people might be more likely to commit crimes in general does literally zero to change this fact.

So basically, we both seem to agree that police shoot black people who pose no threat to them because of internal biases they have that make them perceive them as threatening even when they aren't. Again, this is exactly the problem.

Glad we solved that one, haha.

 

[Jaskalas]

While black people having more interactions with the police makes sense to a certain extent, implicit racism is definitely at play here too, as shown by numerous studies on the issue. For example:

http://www.npr.org/2015/08/29/43583...pull-trigger-when-target-is-black-study-finds

Since we're speaking of race here and they looked at the color of the victim, what about the color of the shooter? It can't be racist motive if a black officer is also more likely to shoot black men.

I'm hoping we realize there are other motives, ones to ID, assess, and then deal with.

 

[glenn1]

You realize that your position is the one that ignores reality, right? An unarmed person who is not attacking anyone is not a threat that merits shooting them. Period. That black people might be more likely to commit crimes in general does literally zero to change this fact.

So basically, we both seem to agree that police shoot black people who pose no threat to them because of internal biases they have that make them perceive them as threatening even when they aren't. Again, this is exactly the problem.

Glad we solved that one, haha.

Race is simply a Heuristic method used by persons needing to make quick decisions. The standard for police (or anyone really) isn't one where the person must completely establish the person as a threat before they are allowed to use force. Rather it's whether a reasonable person could have felt threatened given the circumstances at the time. And guess what, reasonable people take into account factors like "blacks are 7x more likely to commit homicide" when forming snap judgments about whether someone is a threat. I'm sorry that you are unsettled that the "stereotype consistency" about black violence coincides with the actual reality of black violence evidenced by the homicide statistics, but the way to fix that is for blacks to lower their homicide rates so the stereotype is no longer valid. Or are cops in Great Britain just racists also?

 

[fskimospy]

Race is simply a Heuristic method used by persons needing to make quick decisions. The standard for police (or anyone really) isn't one where the person must completely establish the person as a threat before they are allowed to use force. Rather it's whether a reasonable person could have felt threatened given the circumstances at the time. And guess what, reasonable people take into account factors like "blacks are 7x more likely to commit homicide" when forming snap judgments about whether someone is a threat. I'm sorry that you are unsettled that the "stereotype consistency" about black violence coincides with the actual reality of black violence evidenced by the homicide statistics, but the way to fix that is for blacks to lower their homicide rates so the stereotype is no longer valid. Or are cops in Great Britain just racists also?

I'm not unsettled by that at all. What gave you such a silly idea?

I'm sure that people do take propensity for crime into account when forming snap judgments, but that doesn't change the fact that this is leading police officers to shoot nonthreatening black people at much higher rates than others. It is amusing to me that you are attempting to shift the blame from the person doing the shooting to the unarmed, nonthreatening people being shot though.

Let's keep it super simple. The people who shoot unarmed, nonthreatening people are the ones to blame for shooting unarmed, nonthreatening people. They appear to be doing this because of biases that lead them to make bad decisions. Let's focus on fixing that.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that police in the UK are racist. (not that your chart has anything to do with that)

 

[glenn1]

I'm not unsettled by that at all. What gave you such a silly idea?

I'm sure that people do take propensity for crime into account when forming snap judgments, but that doesn't change the fact that this is leading police officers to shoot nonthreatening black people at much higher rates than others. It is amusing to me that you are attempting to shift the blame from the person doing the shooting to the unarmed, nonthreatening people being shot though.

Let's keep it super simple. The people who shoot unarmed, nonthreatening people are the ones to blame for shooting unarmed, nonthreatening people. They appear to be doing this because of biases that lead them to make bad decisions. Let's focus on fixing that.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that police in the UK are racist. (not that your chart has anything to do with that)

Juries seem to consistently disagree about it being a "bad decision" however. Maybe you can ponder why that is for a moment and rethink the "blame," "biases," and "bad decisions" parts of your statement.