Stats on Crime, Police, Black and White

[Artful Revealer]

People fatally shot by the police:

Source: Statista.com



* Will use data for 2017-2018 to comply with data from Crime Data Explorer.
* White will consistently include Hispanics / Latinos.
* 'Unknown' will be adjusted according to known ratios, calculated by subtracting the unknown from the total and comparing it to the respective shares of blacks and whites.

Total victims of fatal police shooting in 2017-2018: 1,983

White victims in 2017-2018: 457 + 399 + 179 + 148 = 1,183
Black victims in 2017-2018: 223 + 209 = 432

Unknown= 288. Total 1,983 - unknown 288 = 1,695 known.
White: 1,183 of 1,695 = 69.79%. Therefore 69.79% of 288 = 201
Black: 432 of 1,696 = 25.49%. Therefore 25.49% of 288 = 73.

Total whites including unknown estimates: 1,384.
Ratio whites shot dead by police vs white population distribution => 69.79% vs 73% = 0.96

Total blacks including unknown estimates: 505
Ratio blacks shot dead by police vs black population distribution => 25.49% vs 12.7% = 2.01


Crime stats with reported race for 2017-2018:

*Crime types include:

Violent Crime: murder, r*pe, robbery and aggravated assault.
Property Crime: arson, burglary, larceny theft and motor vehicle theft.



Victims

Total violent and property crime victims: 428,316 + 2,029,856 = 2,458,172.

White victims: 258,992 + (unknown: 62.73% of 15,478 =) 9,709 + 1,489,814 + (unknown: 78.67% of 136,175 =) 107,128 = 1,865,643 of 2,458,172 = 75.9%
Ratio: 75.9% on 73% population distribution = 1.04

Black victims: 142,539 + (unknown: 34.53% of 15,478 =) 5,345 + 346,698 + (unknown: 18.31% of 136,175 =) 24,934 = 519,516 of 2,458,172 = 21.13%
Ratio: 21.13% on 12.7% population distribution = 1.66

Offenders

Total violent and property crime offenders: 432,256 + 1,778,617 = 2,210,873.

White offenders: 199,533 + (unknown: 50.45% of 36,776 =) 18,553 + 870,327 + (unknown: 70.7% of 547,552 =) 378,119 = 1,466,532 1,466,532 of 2,210,873 = 66.33%
Ratio: 66.33% on 73% population distribution = 0.91

Black offenders: 187,123 + (unknown: 45.33% of 36,776 =) 16,670 + 394,264 + (unknown: 32.03% of 547,552 =) 175.380 = 773,437 773,437 of 2,210,873 = 34.98%
Ratio: 34.98% on 12.7% population distribution = 2.75


Victim vs Offender Ratio

White: 1.04 / 0.91 = 1.14
Black: 1.66 / 2.75 = 0.60


Victim/Offender Ratio vs Shot Dead By Police Ratio

White: 1.14 / 0.96 = 1.19
Black: 0.60 / 2.01 = 0.30


Conclusion

According to these numbers, blacks are shot dead by the police 4 times less than whites, compared to their proportionate offender-to-victim ratio in the following crimes: murder, r*pe, robbery, aggravated assault, arson, burglary, larceny theft and motor vehicle theft.

------------------------------------------------------------​

PS: This is NOT about narratives, but about raw data. The raw data is not limited to what's been represented in the OP either. Additional stats pertaining to this topic (ie. Crime, Police, Black, White) are welcomed! If mistakes have been made, I encourage you to highlight them and bring corrections where necessary. Proven mistakes WILL be rectified.

 

[Hermes]

We use data on police-involved deaths to estimate how the risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States varies across social groups. We estimate the lifetime and age-specific risks of being killed by police by race and sex. We also provide estimates of the proportion of all deaths accounted for by police use of force. We find that African American men and women, American Indian/Alaska Native men and women, and Latino men face higher lifetime risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. We find that Latina women and Asian/Pacific Islander men and women face lower risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. Risk is highest for black men, who (at current levels of risk) face about a 1 in 1,000 chance of being killed by police over the life course. The average lifetime odds of being killed by police are about 1 in 2,000 for men and about 1 in 33,000 for women. Risk peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for all groups. For young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death.

Violent encounters with the police have profound effects on health, neighborhoods, life chances, and politics (1⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–9). Policing plays a key role in maintaining structural inequalities between people of color and white people in the United States (1, 10). The killings of Oscar Grant, Michael Brown, Charleena Lyles, Stephon Clark, and Tamir Rice, among many others, and the protests that followed have brought sustained national attention to the racialized character of police violence against civilians (11). Social scientists and public health scholars now widely acknowledge that police contact is a key vector of health inequality (3, 6) and is an important cause of early mortality for people of color (12).

Police in the United States kill far more people than do police in other advanced industrial democracies (13). While a substantial body of evidence shows that people of color, especially African Americans, are at greater risk for experiencing criminal justice contact and police-involved harm than are whites (14⇓⇓⇓⇓–19), we lack basic estimates of the prevalence of police-involved deaths, largely due to the absence of definitive official data. Journalists have stepped into this void and initiated a series of systematic efforts to track police-involved killings. These data enable a richer understanding of the geographic and demographic patterning of police violence (17) and an evaluation of the magnitude of exposure to police violence over the life course.

Prior research has clearly established that race, sex, and age are closely correlated with exposure to the criminal justice system (20⇓–22). Age, race, and gender are also central to the logics that police and legal systems use to decide who to target, how to intervene, and how much force should be applied in the process of policing (5, 23⇓⇓–26).

That's the abstract to link below.

Link: https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793

 

[Artful Revealer]

I went through this study, but all of it is basically per capita dying by police relative to nothing except white people.

Take Figure 2 for example:



This shows the ratio between blacks and whites in lifetime risks of getting killed by police. According to this graph the ratio is almost 2.5, which is not far from what is presented in the OP:

Total whites including unknown estimates: 1,384.​

Ratio whites shot dead by police vs white population distribution => 69.79% vs 73% = 0.96​

​

Total blacks including unknown estimates: 505​

Ratio blacks shot dead by police vs black population distribution => 25.49% vs 12.7% = 2.01​

​

Ratio black vs white = 2.01 / 0.96 = 2.09​

​

​

The 0.4 difference might stem from the fact that I only used data from 2017-2018 opposed to 2013-2018, but the difference between the OP and this study is that the OP doesn't stop there, but puts this data against the groups' respective roles in crime as offender or victim.

I will use this 2.5 ratio and look up the respective crime rates for 2013 to 2018 to see if the end result is that much different than the OP's conclusion.

 

[Hermes]

I went through this study, but all of it is basically per capita dying by police relative to nothing except white people.

Take Figure 2 for example:

View attachment 37856

This shows the ratio between blacks and whites in lifetime risks of getting killed by police. According to this graph the ratio is almost 2.5, which is not far from what is presented in the OP:

Total whites including unknown estimates: 1,384.​

Ratio whites shot dead by police vs white population distribution => 69.79% vs 73% = 0.96​

​

Total blacks including unknown estimates: 505​

Ratio blacks shot dead by police vs black population distribution => 25.49% vs 12.7% = 2.01​

​

Ratio black vs white = 2.01 / 0.96 = 2.09​

​

​

The 0.4 difference might stem from the fact that I only used data from 2017-2018 opposed to 2013-2018, but the difference between the OP and this study is that the OP doesn't stop there, but puts this data against the groups' respective roles in crime as offender or victim.

I will use this 2.5 ratio and look up the respective crime rates for 2013 to 2018 to see if the end result is that much different than the OP's conclusion.

Difference is art they're actually comparing within the same data sets. For instance, you are looking at civilians shot per race vs violent crime per race. But comparing this with 2 different data sets.

To get accurate data you would actually need to look at the civilians shot per race and see how many of those were actually committing violent crimes per race. That is misuse of stats.

I'm going to see if I can find something that perhaps looks at police use of force and whether violent offenses were committed prior to it and see if I can find something that breaks it by race. Would just need time is all.

You also have to keep in mind that you're relying on underreported data which is a well known fact. Even though reporting was mandated, lack of cooperation from local /state authorities and no enforcement has led to AG office generally not tracking it. The FBI also tracks but is based on voluntary submission from local/state agencies.

So again you're trusting the alphabet boys to tell you the truth in a nutshell. Kind of stupid no?

 

[justjess]

Difference is art they're actually comparing within the same data sets. For instance, you are looking at civilians shot per race vs violent crime per race. But comparing this with 2 different data sets.

To get accurate data you would actually need to look at the civilians shot per race and see how many of those were actually committing violent crimes per race. That is misuse of stats.

I'm going to see if I can find something that perhaps looks at police use of force and whether violent offenses were committed prior to it and see if I can find something that breaks it by race. Would just need time is all.

You also have to keep in mind that you're relying on underreported data which is a well known fact. Even though reporting was mandated, lack of cooperation from local /state authorities and no enforcement has led to AG office generally not tracking it. The FBI also tracks but is based on voluntary submission from local/state agencies.

So again you're trusting the alphabet boys to tell you the truth in a nutshell. Kind of stupid no?

Thursday afternoon provided a data set like what your referencing. 35% of black people shot Dead by police were not a threat to law enforcement according to that source. Compared to 33% of white people shot dead by police. Of course gunshots not resulting in death are not included and deaths caused by means other then gunshot aren’t included but it’s a start.

 

[Artful Revealer]

To get accurate data you would actually need to look at the civilians shot per race and see how many of those were actually committing violent crimes per race. That is misuse of stats.

I'm going to see if I can find something that perhaps looks at police use of force and whether violent offenses were committed prior to it and see if I can find something that breaks it by race. Would just need time is all.

You have my blessing.

So again you're trusting the alphabet boys to tell you the truth in a nutshell. Kind of stupid no?

Have no idea what you mean.

 

[Artful Revealer]

Thursday afternoon provided a data set like what your referencing. 35% of black people shot Dead by police were not a threat to law enforcement according to that source. Compared to 33% of white people shot dead by police. Of course gunshots not resulting in death are not included and deaths caused by means other then gunshot aren’t included but it’s a start.

If it's 35% vs 33% than we're talking about a ratio of 1.06 which is peanuts compared to the ratios I've put forward.

 

[justjess]

If it's 35% vs 33% than we're talking about a ratio of 1.06 which is peanuts compared to the ratios I've put forward.

You’ve been running statistics a lot lately... why don’t you run the difference in means and see if it’s statistically significant. I have the software to do so but no clue how to enter the dataset. You need to run a t test I think, possibly an ANOVA if you include the data for other races that is provided. If it is 1.06 as you’ve stated then that’s a statistically significant positive correlation. Finding out the significance of that requires more then the correlation score though.

 

[Hermes]

You have my blessing.



Have no idea what you mean.

What I mean is that police force of use data is provided by police themselves. This is voluntary and wholeheartedly relies on the trust of the institutions to share accurate data.

Outside of that, data has been collected over time by journalists and 3rd party agencies not affiliated with the police. These groups cannot get accurate data because of the sources they rely on are also incomplete.

Hence why I said it's pretty stupid to rely on the institutions themselves to accurately report this.

 

[Artful Revealer]

You’ve been running statistics a lot lately... why don’t you run the difference in means and see if it’s statistically significant. I have the software to do so but no clue how to enter the dataset. You need to run a t test I think, possibly an ANOVA if you include the data for other races that is provided. If it is 1.06 as you’ve stated then that’s a statistically significant positive correlation. Finding out the significance of that requires more then the correlation score though.

If you find the 1.06 ratio statistically significant, then you should find the ratios in the OP even more significant.

1.06 ratio between blacks and whites who posed no threat killed by police.

1.14 ration between white crime victims and white crime offenders. This is 0.6 for blacks.

1.19 is the ratio for whites being shot dead by police compared to the 1.14 ratio mentioned above. This is 0.3 for blacks.

 

[Artful Revealer]

What I mean is that police force of use data is provided by police themselves. This is voluntary and wholeheartedly relies on the trust of the institutions to share accurate data.

Outside of that, data has been collected over time by journalists and 3rd party agencies not affiliated with the police. These groups cannot get accurate data because of the sources they rely on are also incomplete.

Hence why I said it's pretty stupid to rely on the institutions themselves to accurately report this.

It's still better to rely on data that exists than data that doesn't exist. The data from the Crime Data Explorer is from over 7,000 law enforcement agencies for 2017 and over 16,000 law enforcement agencies for 2018. While I have no problem with skepticism, not all of these law enforcement agencies consist of white people who try to hide things and even if it is, their alleged deliberate withholding or manipulation of data is mere speculation, and to be honest, a manifestation of prejudice against whites.

 

[thursdayafternoon]

I went through this study, but all of it is basically per capita dying by police relative to nothing except white people.

Take Figure 2 for example:

View attachment 37856

This shows the ratio between blacks and whites in lifetime risks of getting killed by police. According to this graph the ratio is almost 2.5, which is not far from what is presented in the OP:

Total whites including unknown estimates: 1,384.​

Ratio whites shot dead by police vs white population distribution => 69.79% vs 73% = 0.96​

​

Total blacks including unknown estimates: 505​

Ratio blacks shot dead by police vs black population distribution => 25.49% vs 12.7% = 2.01​

​

Ratio black vs white = 2.01 / 0.96 = 2.09​

​

​

The 0.4 difference might stem from the fact that I only used data from 2017-2018 opposed to 2013-2018, but the difference between the OP and this study is that the OP doesn't stop there, but puts this data against the groups' respective roles in crime as offender or victim.

I will use this 2.5 ratio and look up the respective crime rates for 2013 to 2018 to see if the end result is that much different than the OP's conclusion.

the answer here is just two words: "crime rates". Although they threaten the police with guns, knives or cars, they expect to be untouchable. just a diversion. and they never stop lying.
even in unarmed cases, the police can see the criminal as a threat. because we don't know how they escaped from the police or how to resist. moreover, blacks are not more, even in unarmed cases.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1269270437873070080

 

[justjess]

If you find the 1.06 ratio statistically significant, then you should find the ratios in the OP even more significant.

1.06 ratio between blacks and whites who posed no threat killed by police.

1.14 ration between white crime victims and white crime offenders. This is 0.6 for blacks.

1.19 is the ratio for whites being shot dead by police compared to the 1.14 ratio mentioned above. This is 0.3 for blacks.

I never denied significance artful. I said your comparing apples and oranges, unless you can prove that police killings only occur during violent episodes but they don’t.. Thursday afternoons data proves that.

 

[Artful Revealer]

I never denied significance artful. I said your comparing apples and oranges, unless you can prove that police killings only occur during violent episodes but they don’t.. Thursday afternoons data proves that.

That was never a premise of mine. The difference between blacks and whites who were killed by police while posing no threat is 6% (1.06). I would have to acknowledge racial discrimination based on this 6% ratio while ignoring the 397% ratio in the OP?

You're trying to obfuscate by saying I'm comparing apples and oranges, but I'm not comparing apples and oranges. If more apples are being eaten than oranges, then it's perfectly reasonable to look at how many apples are being produced vs how many oranges are being produced. In the same way is it perfectly reasonable to put civilian deaths by police relative to civilian participation in crime. What other cause for people ending up in law enforcement situations is there that is more relevant than participation in crime? Is it all-inclusive? No, never claimed it was. Is it indicative? Very much so!

I'm all for that t-test, so if anyone has the means to do it and knows how, please do.

 

[justjess]

That is precisely the argument you are making and you can’t prove it. Police aren’t only killing people involved in violent crime so the violent crime rate disparity between races is irrelevant. Unless you are going to concede that cops are killing people based on prejudices - “looks like” they might be a violent criminal. Without that this isn’t a logically consistent argument.

my argument - the entire time - has been police shouldn’t be killing anyone or brutalizing anyone of any color period.

 

[Artful Revealer]

The stats in the OP are based on the 4 major violent crimes AND the 4 major property crimes !

 

[George Clinton]

Man Arrested and Charged with Attempting to Use a Weapon of Mass Destruction and to Destroy an Energy Facility in Nashville

Skyler Philippi, 24, of Columbia, Tennessee, was arrested by federal agents and charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction and attempting to destroy an energy facility.

www.justice.gov

They just busted one of your buddies trying to do a terrorism