<< Bucklew Teleforum Podcast | Main | News Scan >>

News Scan

Just 10% View Police as Racist:  A national poll released on April 11, found that 10% of adults interviewed consider the police racist.  The Rasmussen poll, which interviewed 1,000 American adults between April 8-9 found that 70% of those responding to the question "Are most police officers racist?" said no, leaving 20% undecided.  The poll, which we could not find reported in any newspaper or news source other then Rasmussen itself, seems to indicate that most adults do not accept the "police are racist" narrative relaunched prominently in 2008 by then Attorney General Eric Holder and parroted without skepticism by the national media over the past decade. 

Social Justice Prosecutors:  An article with that title in the American Thinker by scholar and author Derrick Wilburn details the rise of the graduates from prominent law schools, steeped in progressive dogma, which are "Now finding themselves in positions of power..."  Wilburn notes that "these social justice warriors have a deep-rooted belief in the fundamental unfairness of America in general, and our judicial system in particular."  The behavior of Cook County Illinois State's Attorney Kim Foxx and recently elected Suffolk County (MA) District Attorney Rachel Rollins suggest that declining to prosecute crimes disproportionately committed by minorities is the correct approach to bring about social justice. "While they publicly state a belief that their reforms are `making communities safer,' it's difficult to see how.  What they are really doing is enabling criminal behavior in the name of `fairness and equality.'"


The fact that people don't think the police are racist is not evidence they are not. Indeed, over 50% of American's don't believe in evolution, so public opinion is often unrelated to factual reality. The overwhelming factual evidence is that racism is endemic throughout the criminal justice system. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/09/more-studies-showing-racial-disparities-criminal-justice-system/?utm_term=.6c9af9a9b74a

In “factual reality” 57% of Americans believe in evolution, though 38% believe that “God guided this process”.

Your comparison of evolution deniers to LEO racism deniers makes you look sillier than those you attempt to insult.

There is plenty of evidence to the contrary. Perhaps read some information not put out by the American Jacobin Party media outlets.

It’s an obvious case of confirmation bias.


My point was that public opinion is not a good proxy for reality. Also I linked to over 120 studies that show racism in the criminal justice system, including law enforcement. Maybe read them before commenting.

Also it is pretty comical to call someone else "silly" while referring to the "American Jacobin Party."

So called studies that use only aggregate numbers to show a disproportionate number of a race are stopped, arrested, convicted or imprisoned, mean zero. People of different races and genders commit different volumes of crime. Read Professor Barry Latzer's "The Rise and Fall of Violent Crime in America," for genuine data on racial disparities and valid policy approaches to crime. If you are truly hungry for the truth, we can refer you to several additional, peer reviewed studies on this subject.

Did you actually bother to look at any of the studies I linked to? Because they are not as simplistic as you describe. For example, this study of over 100 million traffic stops showed bias in who was stopped, by showing that blacks were more likely to be stopped during the day, when officers are able to see the driver's race. This controls for possible differences in driving habits. It also shows bias in searches, based on the fact that searches of whites are more likely to turn up contraband and yet blacks and hispanics are more likely to be searched.


This is one of the over 140 studies collected at the link I provided. I did not cherry pick, it just happens to be the first one on the page linked to.

I would add that anyone serious about crime prevention should be determined to root out this kind of bias. Law enforcement is not able to be effective when the communities being policed are alienated by the behavior of the police.

Regrettably, in America today academic opinion is also not a good proxy for reality. In The Coddling of the American Mind, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt document how the diversity of viewpoint of faculties has slipped below a critical point, where studies that have an orthodox (PC) bottom line are not challenged and those that might produce an unorthodox (un-PC) bottom line are not funded.

They estimate that a 2/1 left/right ratio prevailed through the 1990s, and that disparity was tolerable, but by 2011 it was 5/1, with grave implications for the integrity of academia.

Do either of you have any criticisms of the actual studies I pointed to?

Not sure if that's intended to be a response to my 1:26 or not. If it is, it completely missed the mark. The absence of a criticism in contemporary academia has no probative value, for the reason I indicated.

In Sherlock Holmes/Silver Blaze terms, if no one was home to hear whether the dog barked or not, the fact that no one heard it bark would not be a curious incident.

To analyze studies myself would take a considerable amount of time, more than I have at the moment.

Heather MacDonald, Prager U.:
"A recent deadly force study by Washington State U. researcher Lois James found that police officers were less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white or hispanic ones in simulated threat scenarios."

"a police officer is more than 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male,
than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer."

"An analysis of federal police crime statstics and the Washington Post police shooting database shows that fully 12% of all whites and hispanics who
die of homicide are killed by cops.
In contrast, only 4% of black homicide victims are killed by cops."

"In Houston .. blacks were 24% less likely
to be shot be officers, even when the suspects were armed or violent."
~ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/23/heather_macdonald_ on_black_lives_matter_does_the_truth_matter.html

Roland G. Fryer, Jr., Harvard U.:
".. with serious offenses like attempting to murder an officer, or evading or resisting arrest.He also considered suspects shocked with Tasers. Mr. Fryer found that in such situations, officers in Houston were about 20% less likely to shoot if the suspects were black.

"On the most extreme use of force –officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account."

“It is the most surprising result of my career,” said Roland G. Fryer Jr., the author of the study and a professor of economics at Harvard.
~ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html

Well, I did read the findings in the article. Randomly choose one to find a poorly constructed study. I mean, a telephone survey? Puhlease. Not to mention, I doubt you read many (any?) of the full studies either.

Here is another, which suffers from the same flaw as many.:

“A 2015 county-level study of police shootings from 2011 to 2014 found “a significant bias in the killing of unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the probability of being black, unarmed, and shot by police is about 3.49 times the probability of being white, unarmed, and shot by police on average.” The study also found “no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime rates.””

Did they bother to ascertain as to which race may be more violent towards the police officers in these incidents? Perhaps it is in the full study but it sure is not in the WaPo description of it. That would be a good thing to know, right?

As to the “American Jacobin Party,” I believe it is at least as accurate as describing Trump and his administration as “Nazis.” In fact, even “Nazi” describes many of his detractors who attack conservative speakers on campus, people eating dinner, better than him. Thank you, but I’ll stand behind it.

I’m not even a Trump fan. I voted third party in 2016 and likely will again.

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives