Quote:
Originally Posted by wittynickname
http://www.propublica.org/article/de...lack-and-white
And this here sums up a lot of what bothers me about police in the US:
How is it even slightly acceptable that police departments aren't required to keep data on how many civilians are killed at their hands? How can you attempt to keep track of the "bad apples" among various police forces if you don't even keep track of cases of unnecessary and/or deadly force?
Police do a very hard job and there are tens of thousands of them in this country that are wonderful people doing their best to keep their communities safe. But there are also a whole lot of idiots using their authority to quite literally get away with murder, and this country needs some way to better weed out characters like that
|
Just as an aside, that article has received a lot of scrutiny. So much so, they followed up the article with an explanation:
Quote:
|
That finding has received criticism, as is often the case when a number draws a spotlight. As with any analysis, our analysis arose from a series of judgments.
|
Quote:
|
It was clear from the outset, for example, that the data from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Report, which underlies our assessment, is deeply flawed. This has been well-documented by us and others. In fact, we characterized the data as “terribly incomplete” and said its shortcomings were “inarguable.” But the FBI database stands as the most complete national record of deaths at the hands of police.
|
Quote:
|
There were, generally speaking, three arguments contesting our analysis: That we should have included men of all ages, that we should not have excluded Hispanics from our analysis, and that we should have calculated rates for a longer period of time.
|
Quote:
|
As a final note, many have pointed to our reporting as proof of police bias. That overstates our case; ProPublica found evidence of a disparity in the risks faced by young black and white men. This does not prove that police officers target any age or racial group – the data is far too limited to point to a cause for the disparity. We hoped that our analysis would spur further inquiry into why this disparity exists, which it has done, and we stand by it.
|
http://www.propublica.org/article/an...ly-force-story
I guess my point is, while the stats presented MAY raise some interesting questions, I am not so sure the analysis, by a couple of reporters could be considered an expert analysis. They use words like assumption and selection when they source their data. Again, I am not so sure it should be taken as gospel.
It was an interesting read none the less.