General Discussion

anigbrowl

(13,889 posts)

49. that does not contradict the headline at all.

Tue Jul 12, 2016, 05:27 PM

Jul 2016

It says that police are more likely to draw a gun on a black suspect. But drawing a gun on someone is not the same as shooting them (although it is needlessly intimidating and indicative of bias). The third paragraph goes on to distinguish between the bias that the author did find and the surprising lack of bias in actual shootings. The conclusion is that while a police officer is more likely to draw a gun on a black suspect, s/he is not more likely to pull a trigger on one race than another; or put another way, while a police officer is more likely to draw a gun on a black suspect, s/he is also more likely to put it away unfired.

I'm not trying to have a go at you but you are just not reading it carefully enough. It simply does not say what you claimed it did.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

178 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Study shows, "No racial bias in police shootings". [View all] Separation Jul 2016 OP

Yup..no racism at all HipChick Jul 2016 #1

There is no way in hell you even read my post let alone the study Separation Jul 2016 #2

Black people experience... HipChick Jul 2016 #8

Um the lead researcher is black, jack_krass Jul 2016 #34

irrelevant, plenty of blacks in America who don't have the experience other blacks or poor whites uponit7771 Jul 2016 #61

lololololol. nt clarice Jul 2016 #149

The author of this study is black. anigbrowl Jul 2016 #36

He also admits that there are serious flaws with the data, and the results should not be Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #114

Come on, we all know multiple results can be arrived at from the same research brush Jul 2016 #116

The plural of anecdote... TipTok Jul 2016 #92

LOLOLOLOLOL. You're batting 1000.nt clarice Jul 2016 #150

Did you miss the sarcasm gif? brush Jul 2016 #113

I wonder why I just can't seem to believe this? merrily Jul 2016 #3

This guy probably has some alterior motive, Im guessing. Separation Jul 2016 #11

Please tell me that you are not trying to say that Mr. Fryer can't possibly have an ulterior motive merrily Jul 2016 #17

Then what's his motive? puffy socks Jul 2016 #101

I never said he had one. merrily Jul 2016 #105

Then why try to imply he puffy socks Jul 2016 #106

I didn't try to imply it. merrily Jul 2016 #109

Yes you did puffy socks Jul 2016 #110

Bull. I negated the implication of the OP in Reply 11 that a photo proves something. merrily Jul 2016 #111

Its right here for everyone to see puffy socks Jul 2016 #112

It isn't an issue of motive gollygee Jul 2016 #108

What's your point? Clarence Thomas, Stacey Dash, etc., are also black. n/t JustinL Jul 2016 #30

I wonder why you can't seem to believe it too anigbrowl Jul 2016 #37

Because Republican lie constantly... scscholar Jul 2016 #44

+1, Because there are 2 blaring defects in the study see post #59 uponit7771 Jul 2016 #62

Well the second paragraph directly contradicts your headline. giftedgirl77 Jul 2016 #4

Its not my headline Separation Jul 2016 #5

& it shows that POC are more likely to have force used against them. giftedgirl77 Jul 2016 #12

"Blacks are three times more likely to report use of force by police in the raw data" The Wielding Truth Jul 2016 #57

No it doesn't anigbrowl Jul 2016 #38

.... giftedgirl77 Jul 2016 #43

that does not contradict the headline at all. anigbrowl Jul 2016 #49

Still can Suggest Bias Masked Dissident Jul 2016 #55

As I said: "although it is needlessly intimidating and indicative of bias" anigbrowl Jul 2016 #56

Why is it so important to so many puffy socks Jul 2016 #102

The same reason why it is so important to many to prove that racism and racial bias DOES NOT exist Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #115

OK, that's a 3rd blaring defect (post 59)... so weapons are drawn but there's less shootings? Some uponit7771 Jul 2016 #63

This is just one of those bullshit studies white folks like giftedgirl77 Jul 2016 #66

+1, there have be national studies (not just 4 states) that show the opposite of this study and the uponit7771 Jul 2016 #68

To any person living in the real world not wearing blinders giftedgirl77 Jul 2016 #98

Exactly. And it's NOT just on the political right. I'm seeing people who call themselves liberals Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #117

I've said it before, those like that on the left are even more giftedgirl77 Jul 2016 #148

+1,000,000,000...!!!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #142

"Shootings" confusing to you??? Nt Logical Jul 2016 #89

No, it doesn't Recursion Jul 2016 #104

I would have to examine the study before I endorsed the findings, Vattel Jul 2016 #6

You touched on it, imo, with your word "timely" being the reason for this report brush Jul 2016 #125

To be fair... Glassunion Jul 2016 #137

Now that you mention it. Exactly. brush Jul 2016 #138

ABSOLUTELY!!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #141

It's not clear yet what happened in Minnesota. Vattel Jul 2016 #151

Maybe it's doesn't seem clear to you but the millions of people who saw the live streamed . . . brush Jul 2016 #152

I am happy to wait until all the evidence is in. Vattel Jul 2016 #153

Try reading between the lines of the right wing media you seem to be ingesting . . . brush Jul 2016 #154

I think you should read the DOJ report on the Michael Brown case. Vattel Jul 2016 #155

What about the entry points of the wounds, and the fact that . . . brush Jul 2016 #156

The DOJ report assessed each witness's credibility very carefully. Vattel Jul 2016 #159

Clever little tricky word play there but I caught it. brush Jul 2016 #161

Sorry, I meant "unarmed." Vattel Jul 2016 #163

And it's even more laughable, in light of all the videos of cops murdering unamred . . . brush Jul 2016 #164

have you read the DOJ report? If yes, did you understand it? Vattel Jul 2016 #165

The only thing that saved that murdering cop is that fact that there was no video . . . brush Jul 2016 #166

The DOJ report disagrees with you. Vattel Jul 2016 #167

Even you have conceded that the DA was bias towards the cop. brush Jul 2016 #168

What the DA did has nothing to do with the DOJ report. Vattel Jul 2016 #169

But it had everything to do with the verdict. The DOJ report . . . meh! brush Jul 2016 #170

I guess your assessment of the evidence is much more careful than theirs. Vattel Jul 2016 #171

Like I said, the crooked DA purposedly manipulated the grand jury into not indicting brush Jul 2016 #172

I didn't ignore it. The grand jury proceedings were a joke. We agree on that. Vattel Jul 2016 #175

& kids�Tamir Rice was 12. His 10yo sister treated as a felon for rushing to her dying brother's blm Jul 2016 #176

People are going to believe what the MSM says and Lurks Often Jul 2016 #7

It seems more important to some that a study shows that blacks are shot more, for some reason. puffy socks Jul 2016 #33

Just as it is important to many that a study shows that blacks are NOT discriminated against. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #118

Sure puffy socks Jul 2016 #123

Maybe, but again, the researcher/author himself admitted the flaws inherent in the study. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #130

nope, not one person until you were talking about puffy socks Jul 2016 #132

Other factors like what? If there could be other factors, then let's pursue alternative hypotheses Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #140

And visa versa. It seems important to you that black people are not shot . . . brush Jul 2016 #128

It already has been challenged pinboy3niner Jul 2016 #9

I really wish people would quit taking one study and going "see? done." nemo137 Jul 2016 #10

Your putting words into my mouth that I never said Separation Jul 2016 #14

I explicitly did not. nemo137 Jul 2016 #119

Maybe they hired the Klan to do it. They work cheap. Warpy Jul 2016 #13

The Klan did this study? Dont let facts get in the way of your emotion Separation Jul 2016 #15

"Maybe" Warpy Jul 2016 #16

We definately agree with each other Separation Jul 2016 #19

Not how I read that line. Igel Jul 2016 #24

Total nonsense anigbrowl Jul 2016 #39

Please remember when you are reading these statistics:remember these statistics psychmommy Jul 2016 #18

He stated the controls in the study. Separation Jul 2016 #21

i read it and I still don't know what the controls were. psychmommy Jul 2016 #124

Is "% of the pop" the whole story? Nye Bevan Jul 2016 #29

you can conclude whatever you would like. psychmommy Jul 2016 #126

You don't think the author of this study took that into account? jack_krass Jul 2016 #35

I don't assume and they don't say. psychmommy Jul 2016 #127

Stop lying anigbrowl Jul 2016 #40

data sets are just that sets of data- psychmommy Jul 2016 #131

He was very careful to describe both his methodology and acknowledge caveats. Gormy Cuss Jul 2016 #160

How are differences in population proof of the racism? eom yawnmaster Jul 2016 #70

because if 78% of the population-over half of the population psychmommy Jul 2016 #133

not necessarily. Statistics may support that claim, but rarely can you get a cause/effect from... yawnmaster Jul 2016 #135

After, and only after a thorough peer-review, it, as with all research, will be considered. LanternWaste Jul 2016 #20

I agree Separation Jul 2016 #22

+1 on the peer review there are 3 blaring defects 1.) anomalous states, 2.) the corelations between uponit7771 Jul 2016 #64

Well, there's this: If there's a cop already pointing a gun at me, John Poet Jul 2016 #157

+1, I'm sure unarmed whites are shot too but I'd like to see something contrary or ... well NOT... uponit7771 Jul 2016 #158

I once heard an economist (faculty member at MU) present his research loyalsister Jul 2016 #23

So all economists are liars anigbrowl Jul 2016 #41

okay loyalsister Jul 2016 #45

Of course it is, but you haven't shown that to be the case here anigbrowl Jul 2016 #48

I responded with an anecdote that influences my skepticism loyalsister Jul 2016 #50

Skepticism is more than reflexive dismissal anigbrowl Jul 2016 #53

Only because they talk about % of people stopped by police. Mass Jul 2016 #25

+1, that's another thing... why only correlate arrest with shootings... hmmmm uponit7771 Jul 2016 #69

I read the study, and the paper definitely has a garbage in garbage out problem with their data. La Lioness Priyanka Jul 2016 #26

Another reason we need a properly funded CDC study of guns that includes rigorous data on police anigbrowl Jul 2016 #51

Two words. paleotn Jul 2016 #27

Two more words: bull shit anigbrowl Jul 2016 #42

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #74

I've already debunked the Vox article. It's obvious the author never read the study anigbrowl Jul 2016 #79

+1, the sample states were the most diverse in the union and not a national study uponit7771 Jul 2016 #65

Large city PD stats are probably very different from Ilsa Jul 2016 #28

Mass posted an OP here on Vox's questioning of the study: pinboy3niner Jul 2016 #31

The Vox article is laughable bullshit anigbrowl Jul 2016 #46

This is false, there was no study on whether or not the arrest of blacks are do to bias in the study uponit7771 Jul 2016 #67

No it isn't anigbrowl Jul 2016 #71

Strawman, I said arrest you said stops... good try though uponit7771 Jul 2016 #72

Liar. You said 'arrest or stops' in the body of your message. Shall I post screenshots? nt anigbrowl Jul 2016 #80

The title of my reply had only arrest in it and for the sake of this point its only arrest and I... uponit7771 Jul 2016 #83

So what? I responded to the entirety of your post, not just the headline anigbrowl Jul 2016 #86

The context of my reply was about arrest seeing the study correlated arrest with shootings... uponit7771 Jul 2016 #100

Are you saying they cherry picked the data? True Earthling Jul 2016 #107

It wasn't cherry picked gollygee Jul 2016 #120

And the more important point: The media and cheerleaders who don't want to admit racism and bias Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #144

Slight problem ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2016 #32

I am not troubled by this anigbrowl Jul 2016 #47

I agree on the mandatory reporting thing; but, completely disagree with ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2016 #52

I think we're arguing over semantics here anigbrowl Jul 2016 #54

Perhaps we are ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2016 #58

No he's not anigbrowl Jul 2016 #60

Okay. We'll have to agree to disagree. 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2016 #75

Exactly! And the NYT should be ashamed of itself. If the author himself admits that there are Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #121

I blame the author of the study for drawing the conclusion, in the first place ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2016 #136

I'm a researcher myself, so I know that my credibility would be shot if I passed off flawed results Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #139

2 HUGE problems with the study 1.) it does NOT acknowledge the arrest are from a bias it ... uponit7771 Jul 2016 #59

That is completely untruthful anigbrowl Jul 2016 #77

The study did not cherry pick only non-biased, non racially motivated encounters... True Earthling Jul 2016 #103

Vox: Here's why I'm skeptical of Roland Fryer's new, much-hyped study on police shootings gollygee Jul 2016 #73

Debunked anigbrowl Jul 2016 #81

You need to re-read the response to your post. Nt gollygee Jul 2016 #84

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #87

Regardless of the to and fro in the comments matt819 Jul 2016 #76

was Charles Murray the co-author? Gabi Hayes Jul 2016 #78

I think posting this study was censored on reddit. mr_liberal Jul 2016 #82

Why do you think this? I found 5 Reddit threads on it with a simple google search anigbrowl Jul 2016 #88

Looks like those in r/news were labeled "analysis/opinion" and removed. mr_liberal Jul 2016 #90

No it does not look like that at all. They have not been removed. anigbrowl Jul 2016 #94

No they were tagged with that. mr_liberal Jul 2016 #95

Clearly you have made up your mind. nt anigbrowl Jul 2016 #96

And you have too. You have put a lot of emotion and passion into this. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #122

Thom Hartmann covered this: SalviaBlue Jul 2016 #85

Not too concerned about the information Dan Jul 2016 #91

Here are the simple facts, ContinentalOp Jul 2016 #93

Tell me Another One! Night Watchman Jul 2016 #97

If you believe that you will believe my mother was a mack truck! yuiyoshida Jul 2016 #99

Bold all you wish...this is horse chit laserhaas Jul 2016 #129

The Democratic Party Has Been On the Road Jul 2016 #134

So essentially the study is saying police are much more likely to beat the crap out of PoC ismnotwasm Jul 2016 #143

...AND that cops are more likely to draw their guns on black people BUT NOT SHOOT!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #145

Yeah--I couldn't read that thing until now ismnotwasm Jul 2016 #146

Maybe? marle35 Jul 2016 #173

Figures don't lie. But liars do figure. Glassunion Jul 2016 #147

A well-reasoned assessment. Thank you. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2016 #162

and what about the number of women shot? Skittles Jul 2016 #174

Exactly Sgt. Glassunion Jul 2016 #178

It's a typical RW coverup of the real facts by emphasizing cherry-picked data and ignoring details blm Jul 2016 #177