Police officers nationwide flagged for racist and violent social media posts

[carpedm9587]

You still haven't explained why you think the police are racists at a higher rate than the general population. The fact that there's a history of police racism doesn't mean anything in this argument, because there's also a history of people who aren't the police being racists. I'm merely stating that I imagine the police are racists at about the same rate as the general population -- certainly no more, and possibly less so.

After all, in large part the police are screened (think background investigations, criminal history checks, drug tests, multi-stage interview processes, psychological evaluations, polygraphs, etc.) pretty thoroughly . Even if you think the police are generally racist, you'd probably concede that most agencies are not AT ALL interested in the PR nightmare that results from their staff making racist statements in a public forum...and try to guard against that.

You're the one that hasn't made a coherent argument. I'm not sure why a random news article is anything other than anecdotal evidence at best, and you haven't offered anything else. I'm asking you to offer a logical argument about why the police are more racist than the general population as whole, since that's what you seem to be saying. Explain the logic behind your thinking, that's all.

I haven't been through this entire article, not to mention the entire list at the bottom, but what I have been through suggests it might provide answers to some of your questions. I don't know about the police vs. general population question. On the face of it, that would seem likely just because of the situation. But I didn't find any data in this explicitly about that (at least not yet).

[carpedm9587]

The fact Shuny, is that blacks for instance are more violent than whites, so they are going to have more interaction with police, and most likely more violent encounters. And these numbers hold for assaults and robberies as the link shows.

I strongly recommend that people divorce skin color from this discussion. It leaves the impression that blackness is somehow causally linked to violence. There is no evidence that violence is causally linked to skin color. Correlation is not causation. What evidence we have suggests that violence is causally linked to two things: poverty and education. Indeed, segment the racial populations by education and wealth, and the incidence of violence is roughly the same (percentage-wise) for each group across races. In the U.S., for a variety of historical reasons, black people are more likely to be poor and under educated than white people, so the incidence of violence is higher.

The message "black people are more violent than white people" is simply unjust and untrue.

[carpedm9587]

Body Cams are needed - why doesn't the ACLU want them?

The ACLU position is here.

Police body cameras have the potential to serve as a much-needed police oversight tool at a time of a growing recognition that the United States has a real problem with police violence. But if the technology is to be effective at providing oversight, reducing police abuses, and increasing community trust, it is vital that they be deployed with good policies to ensure they accomplish those goals. Without good policies, they risk becoming just another police surveillance device—and one with very real potential to invade privacy. Especially important are policies governing when the cameras are turned on, and who has access to the footage and under what conditions.

[carpedm9587]

According to a critique article in Lawenforcementtoday.com:

Source: Lawenforcementtoday.com

A “report” was just released that “proved” cops are racist. There’s only one problem with it. It’s a load of B.S.

© Copyright Original Source

The article claims that the total number of Law enforcement posters found to be posting something that was or could be construed as racist was 400....even assuming all were active officers that's 400 out of approx. 900,000 officers....so, nothing to see here...

Yeah, well both sides seem to be playing "fun with statistics." So if the claim of the original article was "cops are racist" on the basis of 400 found posting in that way, and no reference was made to how many of the total sampled the 400 represented, then the argument is unsubstantiated. But the same is true of the rebuttal. It is not 400 out of 2 million (unless the study examined all 2 million and only came up with 400). The question not answered (that I can find) is what was the size of their sample space.

If they sampled 400 officers and all 400 were behaving this way, that's bad (100%). If they sampled 1600 officers, and 400 were acting this way, that is also pretty bad (25%). Even 400 out of 4000 would be pretty ugly (10%). But I can't find the size of the sample space, and I can find the methodology for selecting. The problem with using Facebook is it is not random. For all we know, there is a social dynamic that results in racist people posting more on Facebook than those who are not. Anecdotally, that might make sense - but if someone is going to make a statistical claim, they should follow good statistical procedures.

FWIW...

[seer]

I strongly recommend that people divorce skin color from this discussion. It leaves the impression that blackness is somehow causally linked to violence. There is no evidence that violence is causally linked to skin color. Correlation is not causation. What evidence we have suggests that violence is causally linked to two things: poverty and education. Indeed, segment the racial populations by education and wealth, and the incidence of violence is roughly the same (percentage-wise) for each group across races. In the U.S., for a variety of historical reasons, black people are more likely to be poor and under educated than white people, so the incidence of violence is higher.

The message "black people are more violent than white people" is simply unjust and untrue.

Can you link the stats on that. And the reason why I brought race into it was because Shuny did. The higher rates of violence in the black community more than likely accounts for the higher rates of violence between blacks and cops.

[carpedm9587]

Can you link the stats on that. And the reason why I brought race into it was because Shuny did. The higher rates of violence in the black community more than likely accounts for the higher rates of violence between blacks and cops.

Unfortunately, no. I'm citing a study that I read about in an edition of the Harvard Review 3-4 years ago when I still had the subscription. The article was about addressing racism in the corporate environment, and one of the tactics listed by the article was, "replace false information with good information" and it stuck in my head because we were in the beginning of the Trump "truth doesn't matter" era, before that was normalized. I'll continue to look for it and post it if/when I find it.

I don't contest that there is a higher incidence of violence in the black community than the white community as a percentage, and I agree that this is likely one of the primary reasons we see racism in a segment of the police force (as well as the general population). I just think we have to start doing something about breaking the link in people's minds and language between "blackness" and "violence" and reinforcing the link to poverty and education. As long as the link is to "blackness," the question becomes, "what are we going to do about these black people." If the link were made where it belongs, perhaps we would start asking "what are we going to do about poverty and education?"


ETA: Tried a few difference search strings, and finally hit on this. It's not big on stats, and tracking the sources is proving difficult, but it at least discusses the association between socio-economic status (SES) and violence.

[seer]

I don't contest that there is a higher incidence of violence in the black community than the white community as a percentage, and I agree that this is likely one of the primary reasons we see racism in a segment of the police force (as well as the general population). I just think we have to start doing something about breaking the link in people's minds and language between "blackness" and "violence" and reinforcing the link to poverty and education. As long as the link is to "blackness," the question becomes, "what are we going to do about these black people." If the link were made where it belongs, perhaps we would start asking "what are we going to do about poverty and education?"

I wasn't saying that Carp! I was saying that is probably why we see higher rates of violence between blacks and cops, and that has nothing to do with racism but with policing a more violent community.

ETA: Tried a few difference search strings, and finally hit on this. It's not big on stats, and tracking the sources is proving difficult, but it at least discusses the association between socio-economic status (SES) and violence.

Carp I don't see how your claim would be valid. Blacks commit about 54 percent of the murders in this country for instance, and only about 27% of that the black population lives in poverty. Yet in shear numbers more whites are in poverty, so their murder rate should be higher...

[carpedm9587]

I wasn't saying that Carp! I was saying that is probably why we see higher rates of violence between blacks and cops, and that has nothing to do with racism but with policing a more violent community.

Again, violence is not causally linked with skin color. People who are impoverished and have a lower level of education tend to be more violent. It is important that we identify the right "community." The problem is not "blacks." It is "poor and/or under educated people."

Carp I don't see how your claim would be valid. Blacks commit about 54 percent of the murders in this country for instance, and only about 27% of that the black population lives in poverty. Yet in shear numbers more whites are in poverty, so their murder rate should be higher...

When you break up each race by socioeconomic class, the level of violence across the races, by socioeconomic class, is roughly proportionate. The problem is the higher incidence of poverty and lower education levels among minorities in general. I do not have access to the original numbers, but it is easy to show how that might work numerically.

Let's say we break the classes into five groups ranging from lowest to highest SES. Let's assume the incidence of violence is 10, 8, 6, 4, and 2% by class, lowest to highest. Then just using blacks and whites as two races, if the membership in each class (again lowest to highest) for blacks is 40%, 30% 15% 10% and 5%, but the breakdown for whites is 20%, 20%, 20%, 20%, 20%, then in a population of 1000 black people:

400 poorest, 40 violent
300 next poorest, 24 violent
150 mid-class, 9 violent
100 upper class, 4 violent
50 top class, 1 violent

In a population of 1,00 white people, you'd have:

200 poorest, 20 violent
200 next poorest, 16 violent
200 mid-class, 12 violent
200 upper class, 8 violent
200 top class, 4 violent

That's 78/1000 for blacks (7.8%) and 60 violent for whites (6%). The higher incidence in the black population is a function of their differing distribution in the SES groups. Obviously, I made these numbers up to illustrate a point, but there is no doubt there is a differing SES distribution between the races. When you factor in education, it magnifies the effect.

Unless you want to make the argument that the color of one's skin influences whether or not they are violent; that if two people of differing races were raised in identical socioeconomic and educational circumstances, the black one would always be more violent because he's black? I'm assuming that is not the argument you are trying to make?

ETA: A few numbers, though I cannot find a breakdown by SES yet. In 2016, the median income for blacks and Hispanics was about $43K. For whites and Asians it was in the low $70Ks. 10% of whites live in poverty, but 26% and 24% of blacks and Hispanics (respectively) do so. Although high school completion came near par (88 vs 89%), while 33% of whites went on to get college degrees, only 23% of blacks and 15% of Hispanics did so. Population statistics can be found here.

There's some additional crime stats here. Have not worked through them all.

The issue is education and poverty - not skin color.

[seer]

Again, violence is not causally linked with skin color. People who are impoverished and have a lower level of education tend to be more violent. It is important that we identify the right "community." The problem is not "blacks." It is "poor and/or under educated people."

Carp, I crunched the numbers last night. There about eight million blacks that live below the poverty line, and fifteen million whites in the US. Then why are violent crimes much higher among blacks? Why do they commit 51% of the total murders? Why don't the poor whites have that record - being that there are about twice as many whites in poverty? Your argument does not make sense. Then there is the subtle suggestion on your part that the poor can not be moral or good.

There's some additional crime stats here. Have not worked through them all.

Yes, that is one of the sources I'm using.

[shunyadragon]

He finally said he's not claiming the first part, and but seems to think he's proven the second.

There is no "proof" for anything, but yes those hiding from the facts of history are conveniently ignoring the second issue. They are getting sand in their ears.

[shunyadragon]

Carp, I crunched the numbers last night. There about eight million blacks that live below the poverty line, and fifteen million whites in the US. Then why are violent crimes much higher among blacks? Why do they commit 51% of the total murders? Why don't the poor whites have that record - being that there are about twice as many whites in poverty? Your argument does not make sense. Then there is the subtle suggestion on your part that the poor can not be moral or good.

Are you accusing the high crime rate among blacks because they are black?

Your one dimensional crunching numbers to justify your agenda is ENRON book keeping. Poverty alone in reality is not the issue concerning the history, which you choose to ignore of the history of violence against blacks by law enforcement and the history of the problems in the US legal system.

[Adrift]

Carp, I crunched the numbers last night. There about eight million blacks that live below the poverty line, and fifteen million whites in the US. Then why are violent crimes much higher among blacks? Why do they commit 51% of the total murders? Why don't the poor whites have that record - being that there are about twice as many whites in poverty? Your argument does not make sense. Then there is the subtle suggestion on your part that the poor can not be moral or good.



Yes, that is one of the sources I'm using.

There isn't anything inherent in black melanin or in black DNA that would make black people more prone to criminal behavior. Even if it could be demonstrated that there is something inherent in their DNA that would make them more prone to aggression (and I've never seen a study that suggested this) that wouldn't translate to criminality. I think one of the unstated causes that go beyond poverty is culture. I've read, for instance, that many poor Asian minority groups tend towards lower crime rates purely because those minority groups tend to be highly collectivist culturally, which means that committing crime will cause you to lose face, not only among those you know, but among your larger community.

Probably negative cultural trends can be lumped under lack of education. Again, going back to Asian culture, a number of Chinese Youtube channels I follow maintain that in mainland China there is a culture of committing what most Westerners would consider impolite behavior. For instance, mainlanders will often loudly hack and clear their throat and/or spit huge gobs in the street. There are also higher incidences of urinating in the street, and if from the countryside, letting one's children defecate on the street or into street trashcans. Slowly as China becomes more modernized and (in a sense) Westernized, this behavior is being curtailed, especially when mainlanders make contact with Chinese in Hong Kong, where British cultural influence has reinforced Western ideas of polite behavior. The reason mainlanders clear their throat and spit on everything is because of old cultural views that clear sinuses/throats are linked to better health. It's an education issue.

That said, I think it goes without saying that poverty can be, and often is the catalysis for criminal behavior. So it isn't wrong, exactly, to point out that poverty and education are largely responsible for criminal behavior.

[Mountain Man]

Are you accusing the high crime rate among blacks because they are black?

seer never speculated about why. He's just pointing out the simple fact that blacks in America are disproportionately more likely to be perpetrators of violent crime.

[carpedm9587]

Carp, I crunched the numbers last night. There about eight million blacks that live below the poverty line, and fifteen million whites in the US. Then why are violent crimes much higher among blacks? Why do they commit 51% of the total murders? Why don't the poor whites have that record - being that there are about twice as many whites in poverty? Your argument does not make sense. Then there is the subtle suggestion on your part that the poor can not be moral or good.

Yes, that is one of the sources I'm using.

OK - I have a question. Do you believe a person is intrinsically more or less violent on the basis of the color of their skin (i.e., their racial membership)?

[carpedm9587]

There isn't anything inherent in black melanin or in black DNA that would make black people more prone to criminal behavior. Even if it could be demonstrated that there is something inherent in their DNA that would make them more prone to aggression (and I've never seen a study that suggested this) that wouldn't translate to criminality. I think one of the unstated causes that go beyond poverty is culture. I've read, for instance, that many poor Asian minority groups tend towards lower crime rates purely because those minority groups tend to be highly collectivist culturally, which means that committing crime will cause you to lose face, not only among those you know, but among your larger community.

Probably negative cultural trends can be lumped under lack of education. Again, going back to Asian culture, a number of Chinese Youtube channels I follow maintain that in mainland China there is a culture of committing what most Westerners would consider impolite behavior. For instance, mainlanders will often loudly hack and clear their throat and/or spit huge gobs in the street. There are also higher incidences of urinating in the street, and if from the countryside, letting one's children defecate on the street or into street trashcans. Slowly as China becomes more modernized and (in a sense) Westernized, this behavior is being curtailed, especially when mainlanders make contact with Chinese in Hong Kong, where British cultural influence has reinforced Western ideas of polite behavior. The reason mainlanders clear their throat and spit on everything is because of old cultural views that clear sinuses/throats are linked to better health. It's an education issue.

That said, I think it goes without saying that poverty can be, and often is the catalysis for criminal behavior. So it isn't wrong, exactly, to point out that poverty and education are largely responsible for criminal behavior.

Thank you for your post. I should be clear that I don't think poverty and education are THE only factors. I agree with your observation about culture. A particular group can be more violent in response to real/perceived violence against them. They may be more violent in response to perceived injustices. Many studies have shown that the crime that results in parole for a white person often results in jail time for the black person. There are an array of factors at work. But skin color, as you note, is NOT one of them. The level of melanin, shape of the nose, type of hair, and all of the other physical manifestations of being black cannot be causally linked to a propensity for violence.