[Vt71fcAqt7]

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-de...

Police killing black people for being black as some sort of racist unwritten policy is a myth. The rates shown here make perfect sense. And most (99%?) were armed. Also consider that there are hundreds of millions of Americans. It's difficult to fully grasp just how large that is. The media likes selling stories but that doesn't change the facts. A dozen news articles won't change that.

[mcguire]

First, those are cases of black people being arrested or detained, sometimes violently, by police. Not killed. Further, many of them resulted in a successful lawsuits against the police, which should tell you something about the quality of police actions.

Second, keep in mind that data about police violence, including deaths, are complete shit because police are not required to report data and no one has an incentive to do so. (I don't know what Statista's data sources are, but did you notice how the number of "unknown" race deaths increased in 2020 and 2021?)

"Across all races and states in the USA, we estimate 30 800 deaths (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 30 300–31 300) from police violence between 1980 and 2018; this represents 17 100 more deaths (16 600–17 600) than reported by the NVSS. Over this time period, the age-standardised mortality rate due to police violence was highest in non-Hispanic Black people (0·69 [95% UI 0·67–0·71] per 100 000), followed by Hispanic people of any race (0·35 [0·34–0·36]), non-Hispanic White people (0·20 [0·19–0·20]), and non-Hispanic people of other races (0·15 [0·14– 0·16]). This variation is further affected by the decedent's sex and shows large discrepancies between states. Between 1980 and 2018, the NVSS did not report 55·5% (54·8–56·2) of all deaths attributable to police violence. When aggregating all races, the age-standardised mortality rate due to police violence was 0·25 (0·24–0·26) per 100 000 in the 1980s and 0·34 (0·34–0·35) per 100 000 in the 2010s, an increase of 38·4% (32·4–45·1) over the period of study." (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6..., https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-more-half-pol...)

Here's another good article: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z I'd suggest following the endnotes. "About 1,000 civilians are killed each year by law-enforcement officers in the United States. By one estimate, Black men are 2.5 times more likely than white men to be killed by police during their lifetime. And in another study, Black people who were fatally shot by police seemed to be twice as likely as white people to be unarmed."

[Vt71fcAqt7]

>By one estimate, Black men are 2.5 times more likely than white men to be killed by police during their lifetime.

That is because they commit more violent crimes. Did you know that?

>Black people who were fatally shot by police seemed to be twice as likely as white people to be unarmed.

See the last point.

In 99.9% of cases, people killed by police are commiting crimes.

Also note that asians have the lowest rate of being killed by police. I suppose it was asians that were the real whites all along? Or perhaps you simply can't make sweeping conclusions from this data.

[mcguire]

I don't think you read this one:

"Black people who were fatally shot by police seemed to be twice as likely as white people to be unarmed."

[Vt71fcAqt7]

I did read it. Being killed by police is a function of police encounters while commiting crimes. Additionaly, there will be more police in higher crime areas in the first place. What is the rate when no crime is being commited, and what is the total amount of cases? My guess is the rate is the same and the sample size is really low. Although who knows what the "estimates" your study has "found" are. Also, why do asians have more white privelage than whites? At least under your definition.