[dljsjr]

The fact that a certain demographic might be more likely to respond to the LEO with violence doesn’t matter because this isn’t a discussion about causation and correlation, it’s just a discussion about the fact that non-white people are more likely to be subject to LEO violence.

You can’t use a stereotype to excuse LEO’s treating people like stereotypes. Especially when there’s a tremendous amount of evidence that shows that those stereotypes are externally enforced (systemic racism, for example). I don’t want to debate whether or not that is a thing, that’s a separate discussion, and it’s totally unrelated to the one we’re having here.

> If a certain demographic were 2x more likely to die in an encounter, but 4x more likely to respond to a benign pullover with violence, then they're actually 2x more likely to be treated with less force than their actions require.

This is some insanely racist bullshit that you’ve just said so I don’t think that there’s going to be a productive end to this debate and this will be my final comment in the discussion. That’s as civil as I’m willing to be about it.

[beaner]

You understand that I am not saying that black skin is the cause of the way people respond in police interactions, right?

When I say "If a certain demographic were ... 4x more likely to respond to a benign pullover with violence", that is a post-fact observation, with the demographic being the specific collection of people pulled over.

Why would you interpret it the way you did? Holy shit. I feel like we're going into the "math is racist" territory.

> it’s just a discussion about the fact that non-white people are more likely to be subject to LEO violence

There are answers, but you're ignoring them.