| One possible explanation is that's what the accepted narrative is based on media coverage. Also you have to get a bit specific when you consider what kind of killings are rare. US Police shoot and kill quite a few people to be sure. But statistically, shooting of unarmed black males is less than 4% of fatal police shootings. > "A new study confirms that black men and women are treated differently in the hands of law enforcement. They are more likely to be touched, handcuffed, pushed to the ground or pepper-sprayed by a police officer, even after accounting for how, where and when they encounter the police. But when it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias." https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evi... http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf > "The conventional thinking about police-involved shootings, and some scientific research, has been that black suspects are more likely to be shot than white suspects because of an implicit racial bias among police officers. But now a new study has found exactly the opposite: even with white officers who do have racial biases, officers are three times less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white suspects." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/04/27... |
Lastly, we're setting a low bar if our standard for police mistreatment is killing as opposed to inappropriate behavior, writ large.
I do see your point, but I'm not sure this data undercuts the importance of a movement like BLM.
EDIT: For the second link, I'm not sure how much I believe a psychology experiment in this setting - I don't know this literature but my a priori bias is that the individuals who would do this type of study in Seattle are not representative of the median US police officer