Chicago leaders are united to continue reforms, by saying in a joint statement by the mayor and police superintendent of Chicago, “We can only speak for our intentions, we can’t speak for the federal government’s. The reforms we have made over the past year are built on the principles of partnership and trust between our residents and our officers, and they laid the foundation for the 2017 reform plan we outlined just a few weeks ago.” While some reforms are needed, I laid out a case below that the DOJ report, and much of the criticism of Chicago police, is highly flawed.

An Evidence-Based Analysis of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Call to Review Obama-Era U.S. Justice Department Police Reforms

Attorney Generals Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder Missed the Mark and The Evidence Clearly Shows: There’s No Systemic Racism in U.S. Police Departments & Far Less Use of Force in Chicago’s Police Department than Nationwide (Also, Up to 4000 More People May Have Died by Violent Homicide in 2016 than in 2014)

Table of Contents:

  1. Introduction
  2. Purpose of Analysis
  3. Problems with DOJ Report: Part 1
  4. Problems with DOJ Report: Part 2 (Also: Evidence of No Racial Bias Against Blacks in Lethal Force, Including 5 Studies)
  5. Academic Research Points to No Racial Bias in Police Arrests
  6. 2016 Arrests in Chicago are Less than Nationwide Average
  7. The ACLU Gets Defensive, Crime Spikes (Chicago, Baltimore & St. Louis) & Past Medium Posts
  8. No Bias In Chicago Policing & the “ACLU Effect”
  10. Extra Info & Idea: Maybe Reform ALL Police Departments Nationwide
  11. Addendum: The Chicago Tribune “Conservative” No Longer
  12. Last Word: Why Trump Won
Hey, that’s my t-shirt! A similar image as the one above was on a t-shirt I received in a trade at the Rolling Thunder Democracy Tour featuring left-wing populist Jim Hightower in 2001 in Washington State. Only difference: The cop was shooting someone. I bought two “George W. Bush: Corporate Polluters Ate My Brain” that mocked the newly “elected” 43rd president, and some fellow radical saw me with them. After a chat about our corrupt new administration, we traded. I often wore both through the mid-2000s.


By David Shuey

I’m a progressive. It deeply troubles me that Trump is in the White House today. However, one of the only positions of President Obama’s administration I believe was totally wrong was their federal oversight approach in investigating local police departments. Not that I’m against federal oversight; if there’s a substantial problem, I want the feds to fix it. I even used to wear a t-shirt emblazoned with a traffic sign and a figure of a cop shooting someone that said, “WARNING: POLICE IN AREA.” There have been problems stretching back to the 1960s, when three times as many black lives were snuffed out by police. Indeed, few know that black killings dropped 70% since 1968 while the rate remains the same for most other racial groups.

But as I dived into the evidence found within consent decrees and U.S. Department of Justice reports, from Ferguson to Baltimore to Chicago, I saw some glaring omissions. They mention instances of excessive force, but they don’t show how prevalent that use of force was. They argue there’s a racial bias in terms of disproportionate stops, but they never contextualized these disparities to the demographics of crime — or even to behavior. This should be basic in any argument for or against systemic bias.

Instead, their prevailing arguments were anecdotes — many unsettling, some similar to those I’ve heard personally from Chicago’s African American community, or even experienced — and pointing out police interactions didn’t match municipality demographics. These were “systemic” problems because they said so. The U.S. Department of Justice under Obama spoke, just as Black Lives Matter did, and the mainstream media never questioned it. Especially when Eric Holder couldn’t show Darren Wilson was negligent in Michael Brown’s death, but he could argue the Ferguson Police Department was to its citizenry. Some FBI officials thought this was political. Frankly, I thought so, too.

There were Obama-era investigations of 25 law enforcement agencies, including my hometown of Chicago, and the U.S. Justice Department enforced agreements with 14 of them. Yet when the U.S. has possibly 3000-4000 more people dying by homicide in 2016 than in 2014 (homicide totals hovering around 19,000, half are African American), which I estimatebased on FBI, CDC, and left-leaning think tank data, one has to wonder: How is it morally justifiable not to question the dominant social justice narrative that police are out-of-control and need to be reigned in and take a second look? Even if it — gulp — leaves open the possibility of partially agreeing with Tweet-loving politicians and political parties you loathe.

Feel free to review or comment on my data-crunching. CONCLUSIONS: Whites and blacks in Chicago are treated about the same per arrest in Chicago. August 2017 & MAY 2018 UPDATE (row 61–96 of my spreadsheet) on HOW I GOT THE NUMBERS: I was able to tabulate a more accurate figure, as arrest totals lowered dramatically from 2009 to 2016, according to arrest data provided by the Chicago Sun Times in July 2017. I didn’t have those before when I calculated these percentages of use of force based on one year (2009 arrests): 2.4 per 100 arrests (whites in Chicago) and 2.8 per 100 arrests (blacks in Chicago). With those new arrest totals for each year that overlap the use-of-force data period, 2011–2016, I estimate use of force happened between 3.3 times per 100 arrests (whites in Chicago) and 4.0 per 100 arrests (blacks in Chicago). Arrest data after 2010 has not been publicly available on the CPD website, as the Chicago Police Department stopped issuing annual reports in 2010 and are set to return in 2017, according to the Chicago Tribune. Even with this update, the precise range of 3.33–3.99% is still far less than the 3.6–4.6% range in the national average, and the statistically significant difference between blacks and whites is smaller in Chicago (18%) than nationally (24%), too. Some could say this is a remarkable statistic considering violent crime in Chicago that police deal with daily is higher than average — and occurs predominantly in poor African American communities. For example, homicidal violence is 4–6 times higher in Chicago than nationally, roughly 30 per 100,000 residents compared to 5 per 100,000 in 2016, and almost 80% of the victims are black Chicagoans.
“Blacks, Latinos, and whites make up approximately equal thirds of the population in Chicago, but the raw statistics show that CPD uses force almost 10 times more often against blacks than against whites.” — January 2017 U.S. Department of Justice Investigative Report on the Chicago Police Department. (Guess what? The ARREST rate was almost 10 times higher, as well. They don’t mention this. Thus, the RATE of use of force is the same.)

For example, I crunched some numbers in a spreadsheet and found in Chicago that police use of force against African American citizens is nearly HALF that of the nationwide black rate, 2.8 per 100 vs. 4.6 per 100. The national rate was heavily publicized in the summer of 2016 by the Center for Policing Equity — and repeated by The New York Times as evidence of statistically significant racial bias, which I argued was an overblown conclusion. The rate difference between white and black Chicagoans per arrest is a mere 16.7%, 2.4 per 100 vs. 2.8 per 100. Nationally, the rate difference between white and black Americans per arrest is greater at 24.4%, 3.6 per 100 vs. 4.6 per 100. Thus, that data tells us cops are treating blacks and whites more equitably in Chicago than nationwide.

[Note: A more accurate use-of-force rate for Chicago: 3.3 per 100 (white) vs. 4.0 per 100 (black), according to my August 2017 & May 2018 UPDATE. This factors all arrests 2009-2016. I’ve updated in every area so this paragraph above is only one with rates of 2.4 and 2.8 out of 100. See caption above for details. The rate difference is still lower than the national average, at 18%.]

This is without controlling for types of arrests, just simply calculating use-of-force incidents against CPD arrest numbers in 2009 [Again, updated to include all arrests and use of force incidents, 2009-2016]. To my surprise, the rate was even lower in Chicago for blacks than whites nationally. The national white rate (3.6) isn’t really much different than the national black rate (4.6), and all these rates are between 3.3–4.6 per 100 arrests, which I’ll get to in Part 1 of this analysis. If these aren’t apples to apples comparisons because of the methodological differences of calculating Chicago stats to national ones, they’re at least apples to apple pears. All say use of force does NOT happen between 95.4% to 96.7% of the time no matter if you’re black or white.

But here’s what’s the most interesting part of all this: I did not find these requisite rates in the Loretta Lynch-led January 2017 U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) report on the Chicago Police Department. I did not see these rates in the media, or by a qualified statistician blogging somewhere. However, I did quantify this vastly more relevant reality-based conclusion using data found within the DOJ report. And it took me less than two hours using a handful of spreadsheet cells. Certainly, this data Lynch had at her fingertips when she said at her January 13 press conference, “On the basis of this exhaustive review, the Department of Justice has concluded that there is reasonable cause to believe that the Chicago Police Department engages in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.” Really? According to numbers mentioned in the DOJ report, use of force — which may or may not be excessive, and is often necessary based on non-compliance — occurs when arresting black Chicagoans in about 1 in 28 instances and for white Chicagoans 1 in 32 instances. Nationally for blacks it’s 1 in 22 arrests and for whites it’s 1 in 28 arrests.

Click through three tabs on my spreadsheet where 2009 arrest data and other years are given context. Some results are surprising. They were for me.

UPDATE April 6, 2017: I also crunched (and super-munched) some numbers in a different tab of my stats spreadsheet and I am presenting here the first public indication that Chicago police are likely arresting citizens overall at a rate LOWER than the national average. This would be a shocking revelation if reported in the mainstream press or presented in academic research. [Feel free to get in touch to work with me on this:]

As far as I know, I’m the first person to present such data and make clear comparisons — and I admit, it’s somewhat raw and could be refined with further information and methodological rigor. But the Justice Department, the media, and millions of people worldwide use far less to conclude that police are systemically racist. Or are regularly unnecessarily brutal. I’m here to question it — and hopefully save lives.

HOW THE MEDIA EXAGGERATES RACIAL BIAS IN POLICING. (DEPENDS ON POV.) ”The Washington Post headline to the above graph: “You really can get pulled over for driving while black, federal statistics show.” Look closely at the data and you clearly see that this heavily studied urban legend (a constant fixture in the ACLU’s fundraising mix) is mostly a myth — and the headline is deceitful. The conventional academic and media manner of presenting the data is to inflate the importance of select disparities. For example, they highlight that blacks are 1.8 times more likely to be pulled over without a reason (4.7% divided by 2.6%). Thus, The Washington Post writes with alarm, “Perhaps most troubling from a civil liberties perspective, nearly five percent of blacks weren’t given any reason for why they were stopped, compared with 2.6 percent of whites and 3.3 percent of Hispanics.” Another way of looking at the data that completely invalidates the headline and civil liberties narrative arc of The Washington Post story (and many like it) is the statistical reality that 95% of the time blacks ARE actually given a reason for being pulled over. By that token, and using the same data on the chart above, one could counter that whites are 4.0 times more likely to receive sobriety checks (1.6% divided by .4%). What you won’t see in today’s media landscape is the “reverse discrimination” click-bait headline, “It is true you can get a sobriety test for being white, federal statistics show.” Thus, I would argue mainstream media stories like this exaggerate the scale of the problem, and foment distrust between citizens and police. (One possibly negative result: Murder rates in the U.S. climbed 20% since the Ferguson unrest in 2014, which a criminologist in the NY Times said is “not trivial” and a “serious problem,” though the article fails to mention “The Ferguson Effect.”) Few talk about how there can be disparities based on actual citizen behavior and that the realities of patrolling high-crime areas looking for suspects can lead to “relatively more black drivers (12.8%) than white (9.8%) and Hispanic (10.4%) drivers pulled over in a traffic stop during their most recent contact with police.” Look at those percentages closely and you see they’re small statistical differences; and there are other surveys like the Police-Public Contact Survey (using data in 2005 and 2008) that show that 20.7% of whites, 17.5% of blacks and 17.1% of Hispanics have at least one contact with the police in any given year. Catch that? Whites have more police contact in some statistical categories, but those aren’t mentioned in The Washington Post and other major news outlets. Neither was an Obama-era report by the National Institute of Justice able to prove racial profiling traffic stops, which black conservative Larry Elder touted. This was due to 3 things: Differences in driving patterns, differences in exposure to the police, and differences in offending. Indeed, it’s true that not all demographic groups behave the same. For example, a 2002 study where researchers took photos of 38,747 freeway drivers, and determined 2.7% of photographed black drivers were speeders, compared with 1.4% of white drivers, which is 1.9 times higher.

There is not a single dominant statistical argument for overwhelming systemic and institutional racism within police departments. I’ll admit, there are minor arguments for how often complaints are sustained more favorably for whites in Chicago, and murky issues of disparities around stops and the discovery of contraband. For example, for all the talk of “Driving While Black,” when looking at disparities per stop the difference is nearly indiscernible, with 2011 Bureau of Justice statistics saying black people are given a reason for a stop 95.3% of the time, and for whites it’s 97.4%. The DOJ report for Chicago doesn’t deal in such statistics based on rate — they just data dump sum totals for blacks, whites, Asians and Hispanics, perhaps knowing that if they show “chances for X to happen per stop and/or arrest” that there would hardly be any difference based on race. Thus, I argue at a minimum many DOJ conclusions pose more questions than firm answers that would indicate racism is pervasive in America’s policing. More likely, Obama’s DOJ and others in media (from NPR to the New York Times) and social justice (from Black Lives Matter to the American Civil Liberties Union, a.k.a. the ACLU) expect equal outcomes, but know they don’t have a strong hand so they purposely focus on lump sum disparities and erase context. Much of what I write here I concluded after pouring over hundreds of pages of federal documents, academic studies, news reports, and countless indignant social media posts.

There are some questionable practices (over-ticketing), training, and budgetary issues in policing, for sure. And, of course, we have around 1000 annual shooting deaths at the hands of police nationwide — though I believe well over 90% are justified. (Roughly one-quarter are black, one-fifth are Latino/Hispanic, and one-half are non-Hispanic white.) Rarely in the context of police shootings is it pointed out we have a gun for every man, woman, and child in this country. Newsweek pointed out that in 2016 only 5% involved no weapon, 16 of which were unarmed black males who are one-third of the “unarmed” total. Few, if any, news outlets at the end of the year bothered to run the headline “Unarmed Black Victims are 2% of Total Fatal Police Encounters.” That is indisputably true, but doesn’t follow the media narrative that constantly plays up police hostility towards black Americans.

HOW TO DEBUNK THE NARRATIVE THAT CONTRABAND SEARCHES ARE RACIST. The Washington Post also writes stories about tiny disparities in searches for contraband in vehicles (headline: “Police are searching black drivers more often, but finding more illegal stuff with white drivers”) and claim, almost in willful denial of the evidence, that this is proof that “ineffectual, biased policing continues in many places. “ Focusing on data from a sensationalized New York Times study on racial bias, The Washington Post claims police are not only racially biased, but “inefficient.” Is not searching 98-99.6% of all vehicles stopped in Chicago racially biased and inefficient? These are the precise percentages I calculated myself while taking a skeptical look at the results published in two of the most prestigious newspapers in the country. None say it simply and clearly for the reader, as I would, “Evidence indicates that if you’re black, you’ll be searched in 2% of stops in Chicago and less than 1 in 200 stops in a mostly white Chicago suburb.” Why can’t mainstream media provide this “next step” to present data the average reader can visualize? For example, I found while reading The Washington Post story that in my nearby Chicago suburb of Hoffman Estates .25% of all stops for whites have a search take place. The search percentage is .4% of all stops for blacks. Usurping reason and skepticism, The Washington Post claims “biased policing” and their prime example is that 99.6% of the time if you’re black a cop isn’t searching your car compared to whites who aren’t searched 99.75% of the time. In Chicago blacks aren’t searched 98% of the time and whites aren’t searched 99.6% of the time — again, percentages I tabulated with their data — but the article’s focus is the 19% vs. 26% “found contraband” rate that somehow proves blacks are discriminated against for unnecessary stops. (And this Chicago data also shows blacks aren’t even twice as likely to be pulled over as whites, though arrest data indicates nearly 9 times more arrests.) I will concede: There is a black-white disparity of three times in Chicago, which is reflected in the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) on treatment by police nationally that show blacks and Hispanics are searched three times more often than whites (but oddly, at much higher percentages at 2% for whites, 6% for blacks, and 7% for Hispanics). Yet, let’s be honest — if you’re part of a group that by a wide margin has negative feelings about police than other groups, you’ll more likely to be non-compliant on average. This makes it more likely that a police officer will search your vehicle. Thus, even tiny percentage differences can be driven by citizen behavior more than the standard narrative of endemic police racial bias, corruption, and misconduct.

Let’s put it another way, and provide context for the landmark year 2016 — and do it in a way the mainstream media fails to acknowledge on a regular basis. Gunfire killings against police went up from 41 in 2015 to 64 in 2016, a significant increase of 56%. This includes five officers killed in ambush attacks in Dallas and three in Baton Rouge spanning 10 days in July, with both killersmotivated in part by rhetoric pushed from Midwest governorsto Black Lives Matter proteststhat police are killing black people indiscriminately. (This is a story only the conservative media tends to call attention to, such as The Washington Examiner reporting the following: “A FBI investigationinto the spike of attacks on law enforcement has determined that revenge, inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement, the media’s assault on police shootings, and criticism from politicians, is the what motivates a ‘majority’ of those targeting cops.”) As for police shootings tracked by The Washington Post the last two years, the unarmed total dropped nearly in half (9% to 5%), and overall shootings went down 3% from 991 in 2015 to 963 in 2016 . You could cut 100% of “unarmed” shootings, and the overall total number of people killed by cops would only lower 9%.

So, police killed slightly less people in 2016 than 2015, while vastly more police were being killed. Society killed possibly 13% more people in 2016 [Update: It was an 8.6% increase, the stats confusion lies with shoddy Brennan Center for Justice data presentation that led to shoddy Newsweek journalism.] This is on top of a 10.8% increase the year before, which was the largest homicide increase since 1971.

Little known fact: More black people died from the INCREASE in homicides alone in Chicago, St. Louis, and Baltimore after protests than shot and killed by police total in all 50 states (233). Chicago alone had 300 additional people killed in 2016, at least three-quarters of the victims were black.

Frankly, on the whole, I find the blame for society’s ills far too often is squarely placed on police. Pardon the pun, but it’s an easy cop-out. Yes, I once thought many were racist power-trippers myself. Not so much anymore, even though some are certainly jerks, sexists, and racists. There’s just not enough police acting upon overt or implicit biases to skew the data to indicate structural racism or widespread, arbitrary violence. One has to evolve their thinking with facts and new information, after all.



“If Chicago doesn’t fix the horrible ‘carnage’ going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24% from 2016), I will send in the Feds.”

I wrote an analysis on that controversial Trump Tweet back in January, and wrote the following:

“There’s also a double-digit growth in the homicide rate nationally for two consecutive years nationally — a 31.5% increase from 2014 to 2016, says the Brennan Center. With nearly 16,000 homicides per year in 2014, this averages out to 1500–2000 more people killed each year than the year before. Half of those are black lives. Why the hell isn’t this being discussed as a national emergency? How are those numbers wrong or this isn’t “carnage”?


Purpose of Analysis

The 161-page DOJ Report:

Key Purpose of this Analysis & Post:

To highlight how the U.S. Department of Justice Report (DOJ) on the Chicago Police in Jan 2017, like other reports and media stories before it, does not contextualize to actual crime rates in the areas the police are working.

Mistreatment of citizens and suspects of diverse backgrounds is the linchpin to systemic racism, and systemic racism is the main critique of police within these reports. There’s no denying there are several distinct civil rights violations and improvements are needed, including police oversight, greater transparency, and training. I do believe 5–10 times more police officers nationally should be held accountable for shootings, because in recent years less than 1% are ever deemed unjustified. But much of the most damning parts of these reports are anecdotal, as U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions stated and was criticized for. If the police were stopping black people (contact cards) at a higher percentage than the crime rate (case reports), a civil rights case of systemic racial injustice could be made. If use of force against any demographic was disproportionate to the arrest rate, that irregularity would be a red flag. If the use-of-force rate, not sum totals, were higher in large American cities than smaller communities or nationwide averages, there’d be a smoking gun to ask bigger questions. However, there’s no evidence this is happening. Nor is there evidence the report attempts to present that information. Instead, this report and others only asks if there’s a disparity based on the city’s overall population. The DOJ report simply says it’s wrong that one-third of Chicago is black but they’re more than one-third of the city’s use of force cases. How is that fair to police? How does that help make our communities safe when in 2016 there was a 57% increase in homicides, 75–80% of which are African Americans (5% white, 19% Hispanic), and taking place mostly in the West Side and South Side of Chicago?

As it stands from evidence conveniently left out of the DOJ report: Police stops and arrests of blacks, whites, and Latinos match the percentage of suspects called into 911!

Unfortunately, a multitude of factors, including the hangover of poverty borne from American slavery and Jim Crow, lead to criminality. Regardless of the origins, it’s the behavior of citizenry rather than bias of police that lead to negative outcomes. And readers may be surprised to find how FEW times police initiate lethal force in a dangerous city like Chicago with a reputation for corrupt police practices. In a word, they’re “average.” Intriguingly, case reports have all but been scrubbed from internet media reports; the only way I found a key piece of Chicago police data that justifies the racial mix of their stops was from a web archive that preserved a now deleted WBEZ NPR-affiliate page.

These Facts Beg the Questions…

When is the Chicago Tribune, DOJ, and Chicago-mayor appointed task force groups going to do their jobs and benchmark police actions to 1.crime and 2. other cities, thus showing if the police force is really acting out more violently or unjustly?

What is the quantified evidence for systemic police abuse and civil rights violations? What criteria does the DOJ set to open an investigation, let alone determine injustice, outside a single high-profile incident? (Short answer: They don’t have any.)

From the evidence I’ve gleaned from uncontroversial sources, the Chicago Police Department (CPD) is not doling out abuse or shooting citizens greater than the national average. Approximately 1 out of 300,000 citizens is the Chicago rate of police killings Dec. 2014 thru Dec. 2016. This is the same rate as rate as nationwide, but I’ve yet to see that highly relevant fact reported in the Chicago Tribune or in other media reports — and I’ve read dozens if not well over 100.

I repeat: In the most widely publicized example of of police overreach and possible discrimination — lethal use of force by police — Chicago cops are NOT surpassing the national average per capita.

Even the anti-police site “Mapping Police Violence” shows Chicago police killing at less than the national average. Chicago, Boston, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Washington DC and New York City are to the right of the “grey bar” above.

This is remarkable due to the fact Chicago cops operate in a city with around 6 times more shootings and homicides in 2016 than the national average. (The homicide rate is near 28 per 100,000 in Chicago, nationally it’s around 5 per 100,000.) Yet, police in the Windy City have killed no more and no less than any other law enforcement department in the country in the year before and the year after the video of Laquan McDonald being shot 16 times in the street by a Chicago police officer was released. It would be hard to argue a police pull-back is simply a reaction to negative media attention, as the calendar year 2015 was nearly over, and only 9 citizens killed by police, when the video was shown on global news networks and social media. (Though, Ferguson in 2014 may have had something to do with it.) I also found this national average rate of 1 in 300,000 the same in other major cities with racially diverse populations, indicating that police violence isn’t isolated to poor inner cities. Utah’s second most common form of homicide is police shootings, for instance.

What’s obvious to me is that police are remarkably poised about NOT shooting in a systematically dangerous or racially biased way. No one knows the story of those — because they didn’t happen and end up on the evening news. What else is there to say when Chicago police shootings went down by half the last 2 years to 25 total annually, representing a little more than one-half of one percent of all shootings in the city?

Regardless, nowhere in the report could I find comparisons of Chicago to national statistics. Nor do they contextualize as I did in July 2016 and August 2016 what “20% more” instances of use of force for one group over another with controls for crime really means. (Answer: Very little difference.)

What’s obvious is the DOJ report does not give police the benefit of the doubt, nor does it try to. Over and over in the report, there’s mention of “unlawful conduct” and “unlawful use of force,” but without defining what those are or measuring how often they happen. “Excessive use of force” is ostensibly defined (page 23), but then one learns, “Courts interpreting the term ‘pattern or practice’ in similar statutes have established that statistical evidence is not required.Search “disparities,” “crime,” “prevalence” and “criminal activity” and none of those sections mention how communities of color suffer from crime in disparate ways. This is a noticeable omission, not to mention borderline unethical if attempting to make a systemic argument. Search “stats” or “statistics” and come up with “No word matches found” but search for “systemic” and discover 22 total mentions, most of them “systemic deficiencies,” often arguing there’s too much police violence directed at poor communities. But statistical prevalence is nowhere to be found, as the overall result isn’t dramatically skewed by racist actions of a few.

Thus, this report, as well as others such as the 163-page damning DOJ report on Baltimore policing and Ferguson’s, contain a significant and fundamental error: Sidelining context of verifiable criminal activity. They simply don’t include it. For instance, page 145 of the DOJ report on Chicago policing makes NO attempt to benchmark the disparities of use of force to crime — but merely mentions a larger police presence with their “unreasonable” actions (a word mentioned 68 times with no explanation of what defines “unreasonable”) — as it states the following:

As described throughout this Report, our investigation found that Chicago’s black residents collectively have a very different experience with CPD than do Chicago’s white residents. Many low-income black and Latino neighborhoods suffer the greatest harm of violent crime in Chicago. Residents in these neighborhoods, not surprisingly, have more frequent police interactions.With these interactions come the harms of unreasonable force that arise from CPD’s systemic deficiencies outlined here and throughout this Report. The result is that Chicago’s black and Latino communities experience more incidents of unreasonable force. These are the very communities who most need and call on the police to fight violent crime, and where police and community trust and cooperation is most important.
Blacks, Latinos, and whites make up approximately equal thirds of the population in Chicago, but the raw statistics show that CPD uses force almost ten times more often against blacks than against whites. For example, of all use-of-force incidents for which race was recorded between January 2011 and April 18, 2016, black individuals were subject to approximately 76% (19,374) of the uses of force, as compared to whites, who represented only 8% (2,007) of the force incidents. In some categories of force, blacks were even more overrepresented: black individuals were the subject of 80% of all CPD firearm uses and 81% of all Taser contact-stun uses during that time period. CPD’s data on force incidents involving youth also showed stark disparities: 83% (3,335) of the incidents involved black children and 14% (552) involved Latino children. [NOTE: 14% is half the percentage of Latinos’ overall population in Chicago, thus not overrepresented, and no context for gang activity is mentioned. And rate of criminality and reasons for interaction are omitted.]
These data strongly support what we repeatedly and consistently heard from both law enforcement and community sources: Chicago’s black and Latino communities live not only with higher crime, but also with more instances of police abuse. Starting from a young age, black and Latino people, especially those living in Chicago’s most challenged neighborhoods, have a vastly different experience with police than do white people. These negative, often tragic, interactions form the basis of minority communities’ distrust of police.

This was the most widely referenced section of the report in the media. It’s so problematic, I don’t know where to start. Maybe with a Part 1 and a Part 2, then go from there.

Problems with DOJ Report: Part 1 (sources below)

The issue isn’t whether police say or email racist things. The argument of “pattern or practice” of unconstitutional behavior rides on if law enforcement is acting on those racists impulses. I believe because the U.S. Department of Justice gathered evidence and anecdotes of discriminatory beliefs and behavior, they spun their report to highlight discriminatory results. They missed one basic thing: Contextualizing for crime rates. They couldn’t prove, because it wasn’t reality, that police used force at rates twice as high against minorities. Thus, like increases in national homicide rates, Lynch omitted to mention how bad crime is in certain communities, but instead focused on how bad the police are.

It’s mind-boggling when you think about it. The DOJ report simply states the following, “Blacks, Latinos, and whites make up approximately equal thirds of the population in Chicago, but the raw statistics show that CPD uses force almost ten times [10x] more often against blacks than against whites.”

This part of the report is arguably the most widely reported statistic from the DOJ report in January 2017. They present it as definitive proof of shady, violent police behavior, yet they omit the demographics of crime in the city. NPR, USA Today, The Washington Post, Vox, and The Chicago Tribune all reported that use of force occurred “almost” 10 times more often for black residents than white ones, and all did not contextualize for behavior that would lead to an interaction with law enforcement. Nowhere do they mention in the DOJ report that the “almost ten times more” (10x) use-of-force figure is borderline to case reports issued by victims or 911 calls of suspects (8x), or contact cards by police (8x). Nor do they point out that robbery arrests are 24x higher for blacks than whites according to 2009 CPD arrest data. Other arrest figures: 12x higher for criminal sexual assault; 27x higher for murder; and 10x higher for aggravated battery. The media also ignored these readily available contextual realities.

(Also, for context, residents in gentrified cities like Chicago with concentrated areas of poverty have much higher disparity rates by race than nationwide; for example, blacks nationally are 8x more likely to commit murder than whites.)

Are Chicago police “over-policing” when there’s 12 times more arrests of African Americans for criminal sexual assault than of whites? Or when the clearance rate of black murders is lower than whites and still there’s 27 times more arrests for murder than for whites? (Source: Chicago Police Department 2009 Annual Report)

The U.S. Department of Justice under Loretta Lynch simply does not state how there are vastly large racial disparities in hyper-segregated cities like Chicago when it comes to crime. My analysis of the arrest data in the 2009 CPD annual report concludes (calculated difference in parentheses):

  • 72% of total arrests are black, 9% are white (8x)
  • 75% of murder arrests are black, 3% are white (27x)
  • 68% of sexual assault arrests are black, 6% are white (12x)
  • 85% of robbery arrest are black, 4% are white (24x)
  • 68% of aggravated assault arrest are black, 7% are white (10x)
  • 78% of narcotic arrests are black, 6% are white (13x)

Instead, the DOJ report simply massages statistics to make this blisteringpoint (page 15):

“Our investigation found also that CPD has tolerated racially discriminatory conduct that not only undermines police legitimacy, but also contributes to the pattern of unreasonable force. … We have serious concerns about the prevalence of racially discriminatory conduct by some CPD officers and the degree to which that conduct is tolerated and in some respects caused by deficiencies in CPD’s systems of training, supervision and accountability. In light of these concerns, combined with the fact that the impact of CPD’s pattern or practice of unreasonable force fall heaviest on predominantly black and Latino neighborhoods, restoring police-community trust will require remedies addressing both discriminatory conduct and the disproportionality of illegal and unconstitutional patterns of force on minority communities..

In addition, this is about the only utterance of the high crime rate in minority areas in the DOJ report:

“Chicago’s black and Latino communities live not only with higher crime, but also with more instances of police abuse.”

That’s it. That’s all they mention about crime. I frankly have one word for that: Stupid.

Does this mean Lynch’s U.S. Justice Department want police to spread across the city evenly, in all neighborhoods? Should they make arrests and stops demographically in “equal thirds”? The Department of Justice under Holder and Lynch strongly implies the CPD should. Is that really what the black and brown communities want? One shouldn’t assume so. In New York City in 2016, a Quinnipiac University poll found that 50% of black residents approve of “Broken Windows” policing, and citywide 57% of New Yorkers were OK with “having police issue summonses or make arrests for so-called quality of life offenses.” A 2015 Gallup poll says more blacks (38%) want a greater police presence in their local communities than do whites (18%). 10% of blacks want a smaller police presence, while 8% of whites say the same. That means 9 out of 10 blacks want the same or more police in their communities. No doubt, they want a more respectful one, too, and anecdotally, I myself have heard horrendous stories about the CPD. But statistics also bear out that police are using less lethal force today than in decades, and peer-reviewed studies prove a more diverse force doesn’t mean less incidents of violence against minorities. People talk all the time about how police interactions would vastly improve if there weren’t so many white cops patrolling minority neighborhoods. However, it’s true that 80% of the people black officers kill are black compared to 25% by all police officers.

Of course, these rate differences are almost entirely driven by behavior, such as the fact black men are 8 times more likely than white men to commit murder or robbery. The Sentencing Project isn’t going to tell you that. By their logic, this chart also tells us that men are “discriminated” against far more than women.

I believe the Obama DOJ, ACLU and other liberal perspectives that all stops should be proportional to the population demographics of a city is not only naive and ignorant of the facts, it is also disingenuous. A glaring question lingers: Why doesn’t the logic of racial disparity in stops extend to gender disparity? The dead giveaway that they know the shaky foundation of their argument rests on sand is that no one says 50% of stops should be female. Should they? Because stops, arrests, and use of force encounters certainly are “sexist” as women are on the receiving end of law enforcement contacts a fraction of the time men are. Of course, this reasoning is the height of ridiculousness. It is the exact same reasoning that is all over DOJ, ACLU and other civil rights reports as it pertains to race.

From what will now be known as: The Zak Efron Comparative Point. (Thanks, Guardian.) P.S. Fraternities and single-gender “final clubs” may, in fact, have no higher sexual assault rates than dormitories, according to an analysis done at Harvard.

Let me contextualize this situation another way for those liberal skeptics who say police are still over-targeting African Americans. What if it was reported as fact, as The Guardian did in 2014 in an article shared 60,000 times, that members of college fraternities were 300% (3x) more likely to commit rape. Now what if, in one hypothetical, it was reported college fraternity members were no more or less likely to be charged or arrested for rape than any other male on campus? Would this not be characterized as an example of unequal justice? We’d surely see protests in front of fraternities and administration buildings nationwide. (Even without knowing if this is true or not, the 300% higher claim alone is widely used as a rallying cry to ban fraternities.) What if, in a second hypothetical, “frat bros” were charged at a rate 3x higher than the rest of the male student population, but the U.S. Department of Justice issued an investigative report as if they’re being treated unfairly. How appropriate would the following statement be as it insinuates police bias? “Fraternity members make up approximately an equal third of the male student body population at American campuses, but the raw statistics show that three times [3x] more often they are charged and arrested than other students and consequently three times as likely to receive use of force during these arrests.”

That would be dumb, right? It’s the rate that matters, not the sum total. But that’s not how the U.S. Department of Justice saw it these past few years. And if you missed it, that last sentence of the previous paragraph was written exactly like the arguably most damning sentence in the DOJ report on the Chicago Police Department. “Blacks, Latinos, and whites make up approximately equal thirds of the population in Chicago, but the raw statistics show that CPD uses force almost ten times [10x] more often against blacks than against whites.”

Is Having 3% of Arrests Leading to Use of Force Unconstitutional?

I surmise the U.S. Justice Department agenda is simply to lower incarceration rates and “fix” the policing problem that people — particularly communities of color — have been complaining about for decades as an ongoing civil rights battle. Anything that gets in the way is to be deleted. While stats aren’t perfect, it makes little sense to include police-provided incidents of use of force and leave out citizen-provided incidents like being robbed or raped.

The bottom line is simple: If you’re going to imply the Chicago Police Department is racist by pointing out the shocking fact that “almost 10 times more” blacks than whites are on the receiving end of police use of force but don’t mention that blacks are “8 times more” on the giving end of initiating crime based on victim reports, 911 calls, and tip-offs to police (video cameras, etc.) — i.e. not the police themselves — then how can you say your DOJ report is anywhere close to treating fairly those charged with upholding the law? If you fail to point out that the arrests that could likely lead to violent outcomes (criminal sexual assault, aggravated battery, robbery, murder) are 10 to 27 times greater for one demographic over another, how can say that particular government report is “honest”? How is the U.S. Department of Justice under Obama able to justify rolling out to the media these large bulk numbers and rate disparities of violent police incidents without any context, such as not indicating whether it happens more or less than the national average or other cities?

This is an important question: Are the Chicago police really acting worse — aggressively using force — than police in other American cities, particularly when you add the violent crime they face into the mix?

I often think after reading a particular stat, “OK, the report says there’s 19,374 incidents of use of force against black Chicagoans — that sounds like a lot, but is that a lot? Well, it’s tons more than the 2,007 use-of-force incidents for whites, right?” Admittedly, later when writing on Medium I’ll think some more and start breaking down the numbers. “Wait, that’s over the course of more than 5 years? Damn, I almost didn’t catch that. Now that my brain’s working, I have an obvious question: How many annual arrests of black Chicagoans are there total? Oh, I can check that, too. According to an old CPD annual report, there were 130,082 black arrests in 2009 in Chicago, 72% of the total, as well as 16,141 white arrests. Is there a statistician in the U.S. Justice Department, or anyone who can handle simple math and division and provide context?”

Give myself an hour to break down the stats here April 5, 2017 as I edit this Medium Post (sorry, I’m not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice, nor am I trained statisticians) …

Again, here are the rates of use of force that are roughly accurate based on available data:

  • 3.6 per 100 arrests (whites nationally)
  • 4.6 per 100 arrests (blacks nationally)
  • 3.3 per 100 arrests (whites in Chicago)
  • 4.0 per 100 arrests (blacks in Chicago)
The key figure on the report is on page 9 “Table 4. Use of Force Rates per 1,000 Arrests, by Citizen Race.” I wrote in July of 2016 how The New York times follows the Center for Policing Equity’s lead in spin-doctoring the data to show a large difference between blacks and whites per stop, when any reasonable person can see there’s nothing of the sort. As I wrote, “According to the Center for Policing Equity’s own data, 21 out 22 times [encounters with police] do “go well” with no “use of force” for blacks, and 27 out of 28 times it’s the same results for whites … But again for Black Americans, 31% of total instances of “use of force” vs. 28% of total times arrested indicates to me that overall there’s negligible bias. I wonder how these two data sets are unrelated. I suspect they are not.” Additionally, The Center for Policing Equity is unquestionably social justice oriented. Any question on their bias can also check their director’s Twitter feed.

How was this done? I divided the average annual instances of use of force over a 5-year period (3,693 for blacks, 383 for whites) with the arrests for the same period (92,328 for blacks, 11,541 for whites).

August 2017 & May 2018 UPDATE (row 6 of my spreadsheet):

Earlier, I listed the rate as 2.4 (white) and 2.8 (black) per 100 stops in Chicago based on one year’s worth of arrests. I did that by dividing the average annual instances of use of force over a 5-year period (3,693 for blacks, 383 for whites) with the year 2009 where there was more than 180,000 arrests. That’s also a high-water mark for number of arrests. My spreadsheet is updated now. I was able to tabulate a more accurate figure, as arrest totals lowered dramatically from 2009 to 2016, according to arrest data provided by the Chicago Sun Times in July 2017. I didn’t have those before. With those new arrest totals for each year that overlap the use-of-force data period, 2011–2016, I estimate use of force happened between 3.3 times per 100 arrests (whites in Chicago) and 4.0 per 100 arrests (blacks in Chicago). Arrest data after 2010 has not been publicly available on the CPD website, as Chicago Police Department annual reports stopped in 2010 and are set to return in 2017, according to the Chicago Tribune. Even with this update, the range of 3.3–4.0% is still much less than the 3.6–4.6% range in the national average, and the difference between blacks and whites is smaller in Chicago (18%) than nationally (24%), too.

If people still have a problem with that disparity, one can note two important arguments to prove why that small disparity isn’t racism:

All this data I either calculated or summarized myself using easily available data and using math a 7th grader could do.

Now Back to my April 2017 Analysis…

I used 2009 as it’s one of the last years CPD made publicly available on their website Chicago’s arrest data broken down by demographics; I hope to update the data when I’m able to work with with complete 2011–2016 information, such as the exact black and white arrest total for each year. The last year of that period, 2016, arrests dropped precipitously to around 80,000. I estimate that if I took the time to average all arrests during the same 2011–2016 period, it still wouldn’t be out-of-line to say that based on the available data, that about 1 in 30 Chicagoans of any race receive force per arrest.

The #1 question for me: Why didn’t the U.S. Department of Justice show the RATE of black and white Chicagoans arrested with use of force? They simply show two sharply contrasting numbers — 19,374 for blacks and 2,007 for whites. Perhaps they did know the rates were similar, but it didn’t drive home the point that there’s “systemic deficiencies” in Chicago — just like how stats on police arrests and third-party case reports were omitted, as well as contextualizing with the rest of the United States. They needed the statistical narrative to match the anecdotal narrative. That’s just a theory — or conspiracy — but it would also be an obvious argument of Obama-era liberal bias because even progressive police monitoring groups focus on the rate, like the Center for Policing Equity. This allows apples to apples comparisons as opposed to apples and oranges comparisons, which is this DOJ report.

Simply, the DOJ report says on page 22, “We found reasonable cause to believe that CPD has engaged in a pattern or practice of unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment and that the deficiencies in CPD’s training, supervision, accountability, and other systems have contributed to that pattern or practice.” I have no doubt there are some deficiencies, but if their very own data police shows police use force in under 3% of arrests — white, black or Latino — and the national average is 3.6–4.6%, then wouldn’t the entire country’s police force be acting in an “unconstitutional” manner? And how do they define “unreasonable”? (They don’t.)

61% of police misconduct complaints are black, yet blacks are more than 70% of Chicagoans on the receiving end of law enforcement use of force. How does that make sense? (And yes, it also doesn’t make sense that whites are vastly more likely to have their complaints sustained.)

The DOJ report also doesn’t provide whole numbers of Chicago Police department complaints or percentage breakdowns by race, but in 2015 a new database made available after a FOIA request showed how there’s a disparity in sustained complaints, as well as total issued. I won’t get into the reasons on the sustained gap — and nearly half the complaints are issued by women, which is interesting given their low levels of criminality — but I wish simply point out that there’s more than TWICE the rate of interactions with police (stops, arrests) as there are complaints when it comes to blacks and whites. Of these four bullet points below indicating police/citizen interaction, the latter two have nothing to do with police discretion or activity, as they are initiated by citizens themselves. And the last bullet is based on the Citizens Police Data Project of allegations of police misconduct.

Repeatedly, the only thing that matters to the ACLU and Obama U.S. Department of Justice officials are stops and how they compare to the overall population demographics. They omit crime statistics from 911 calls, crime reports, or arrests. This visualization above from the March 2015 ACLU report on Chicago policeillustrates that point. Stories on WBEZ dance around that point, while also stating clearly that stop demographics almost exactly match crime report demographics.

Any of this comparative data would be both easy to do, and essential in understanding the differences in racial outcomes involving police — or justifications for it. If these stats align, doesn’t that mean police bias is negligible or non-existent? Another huge question also lurks: If bias was a systemic phenomenon and cops were lying about stats to cover up for their overzealous policing of black and brown citizens, wouldn’t the police complaint percentage be higher than the actual interaction rate? It’s rational to conclude that. While other factors may be involved, that 61% total complaints data point, along with the fact case reports match arrests and contact cards, may be the smoking guns indicating that police data should be trusted. Regardless, the above bullets say it simply: Whites are likely complaining much more than their interaction with police.

Frankly, several parts of the DOJ report are lazily written and omit citizen behavior just like Ferguson’s DOJ report. Key arguments haven’t been properly vetted in the media, despite coming off a year with at least 270 moreChicago murders at the exact time police pulled back precipitously during the same time this report was written. Some, myself included, could call that immoral. Others call that political correctness.

SOURCES for Part 1:

Chicago Police Department 2009 Annual Report, CPD Arrests, page 43 of PDF (2010 was last year online; why were these stats and annual reports not available for 5 years? Perhaps ask Rahm Emanuel who came into office in 2011 with a new police superintendent. Wait… Google google goo… the Tribune offers some hazy answers to that question and news that the annual report is supposedly coming back in 2017.):

My arrest analysis spreadsheet of the CPD Annual Report PDF:

Case Reports, or crime incident reports, which show victims and 911 calls give a description of someone black more than 70% of the time, and at the SAME percentage as contact cards issued by police. HERE IS THE “HOLY GRAIL” SOURCE on Case Reports (this CPD data isn’t anywhere else and is scrubbed from the web):

Additional CPD Evidence on Case Reports: (2013: “CPD’s Collins also said that for the first six months of this year, the racial demographics of the contact cards strongly resembles the ratio of suspect demographics of those in crime incident reports.”):

Contact Cards:
(As of 2018, this has been deleted):
Same data here:

Poll that Blacks want more police, not less:

A 2016 Center for Policing Equity Report showing 4.6 per 100 arrests involve use of force for blacks, and 3.6 per 100 arrests for whites:

Problems with DOJ Report: Part 2 (Also: Evidence of No Racial Bias Against Blacks in Lethal Force, Including 5 Studies)

Systemic racial violence by police is true if their actions are disproportional to the violence they face. The DOJ and the media ignore them consistently. The word “disparate” or “disparities” is mentioned 21 times in the 161-page DOJ report on the Chicago Police Department, and not a single time is it related to the prodigious disparities in crime by race in Chicago, which is easily found in past CPD annual reports. Many of these disparities in Chicago are at least three times (3x) higher than the national levels, including for robbery, sexual assault, and murder.

Nothing here is inaccurate, and sources are at the end. Just the facts. I presented these rates earlier, but here they are again:

1 in 300,000 = Chicago Rate of Police Killings. This is the Same as Nationwide, But I’ve Yet to See Reported in the Chicago Tribune or Elsewhere

Police in Chicago the last two years have shot and killed roughly 1 person per 300,000 residents. (10 per year over the most recent two-year period with slightly 2.7 million residents = 1 in 272,000; 8 reported killings by the Tribune in 2015 = 1 in 337,500.)

Police nationally the last two years have shot and killed about 1 person per 300,000 residents. (Precisely, 318 million U.S. population ÷ 991 shooting deaths by police in 2015 according to The Washington Post = 1 in 320,888. 318 million ÷ 1146 deaths by police — including off-duty killings and accidents — in 2015 according to The Guardian = 1 in 277,000. Overall, police killings dipped slightly in 2016.)

San Francisco shooting deaths, also about 1 in 300,000 residents, with anew outside-the-SFPD black police chief hired due to shooting controversies. If one says many of these killings are black, one can also say blacks in SF are 9.6 times more likely than whites to be charged with resisting arrest. (Averaging 2.5 deaths per year in a city more than three times smaller than Chicago = 1 in 334,800.)

Chicago police also face 4 to 6 times greater levels of homicidal violence than the national average of 4–5 killings per 100,000. (In 2016: 750+ homicides and 4000+ shooting victims, a murder rate of about 28 per 100,000 and an increase of 57%.)

Indisputably, Chicago police, as inner city police in general, are shot at and engage in violence in a much different way than the average police officer nationwide. I recall hearing on the Chicago Public Radio affiliate — though I’ve had difficulty corroborating the information — that Chicago police in 2016 were shot at (not hit) more times than they shot a citizen directly, which is around 25 times. (The period in which the DOJ report covers police-involved shootings found 223 between January 1, 2011 and March 21, 2016, so around 40 per year.) But for every one mention on an NPR affiliate about people shooting cops in the United States (more than 4 out of 10 shooters are black) there’s seemingly countless other mentions of blacks being shot by white cops (less than 3 out of 10 are black).

Re-read the above, and check the sources below. Think about that with an open mind. San Francisco and several other large American cities have the EXACT same rate of shootings by police as the national average.Basically, shootings and deaths by police are spread equally throughout the country geographically and demographically — and in accordance to crime. But all we hear in the news is single-case examples of racism in Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Staten Island (New York City), and Ferguson (basically, St. Louis).

Black Americans nationally are:

Catch that? Cops kill blacks 25% of the time. But going the other way it’s 43%. If bewildered that lethal force is slightly less than use of force, the answer is found in research as well.

2018 Update: My Own Data

What’s remarkable to me, is that although I know many of the analysis take high-level statistical work, it’s fairly easy to take a strong estimate of “fairness” in the system. As I repeatedly say, just divide X (use of force incidents, deaths) by Y (arrests, stops). So here is my data:

Violent Crime Arrests, Drug Arrests + Police Killings Rate = Stats that Matter
Demographic breakdown of violent arrests& Drug a Source, https:// ucr. fbi. gov/ crime-in-the-u. s/ 2015/…

And here are my conclusions:

  • Blacks are killed about 1 in 10,000 arrests
  • Whites and Hispanics combined are killed in about 1 in 9,000 arrests
  • 7.9% of all arrests for whites are in 4 major violent crime categories (Murder, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Violent Crime)
  • 12.6% of all arrests for blacks are in those 4 violent crime categories.
  • 50 less whites would be killed if shot at the same rate as blacks (consistent with my data on the “Killings per arrest” tab and my first bullet point above)

Bring on the Studies & Evidence-based Research

Here are three studies published last year that prove that police shooting outcomes today aren’t racially biased against African Americans, but in fact, are biased against white Americans:

  • Research at Washington State University focused on how police reaction times in shootings may be disadvantageous to white people even if the officer have implicit bias against black people (“The Reverse Racism Effect”), and was reported about by The Washington Post. Excerpt: “Policy Implications: This article reports the results of our most recent experiment, which tested 80 police patrol officers by applying this leading edge method. We found that, despite clear evidence of implicit bias against Black suspects, officers were slower to shoot armed Black suspects than armed White suspects, and they were less likely to shoot unarmed Black suspects than unarmed White suspects. These findings challenge the assumption that implicit racial bias affects police behavior in deadly encounters with Black suspects.”
  • A working paper by a renowned Harvard economist Roland Fryer analyzed more than 1300 police shootings and found police are around less likely to shoot blacks than whites under similar circumstances. Exactly 23.8% less likely using Houston data, which the recipient of the MacArthur “Genius Grant” Fellowship and his team thoroughly categorized. Excerpt: “Using data from Houston, Texas — where we have both officer-involved shootings and a randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified — we find, in the raw data, that blacks are 23.8 percent less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5 percent less likely.” 
  • A November 2016 hard data-driven study by the College of William and Mary Department of Economics and the Crime Prevention Research Center — largely ignored by the media — concluded there is no racial bias in police shootings. They also concluded body cameras don’t reduce killings. “When either the violent crime rate or the demographics of a city are accounted for, we find that white police officers are not significantly more likely to kill a black suspect … Our estimates examining the killings of white and Hispanic suspects found no differences with respect to the races of police officers. If the police are engaged in discrimination, such discriminatory behavior should also be more difficult when body or other cameras are recording their actions. We find no evidence that body cameras affect either the number of police killings or the racial composition of those killings.”
Go to page 19 of the PDF for the Center for Policing Equity’s conclusions on use of force disparities. Blacks receive slightly more use of force in all but one category: Lethal force. They even offer a caveat on those differences in their conclusions section on page 26: “That significant attention should be paid to additional situational factors in attempting to quantify and explain racial disparities in use of force. For instance, might racial disparities in the tendency to resist, flee, or disrespect officers be implicated in the observed differences? Might cultural mismatches and/or officers’ perceptions of cooperation be influenced by residents’ race? There is some suggestive evidence that there are racial disparities in resistance based on research by Smith and colleagues for the National Institute of Justice. They find that the rate of officer injury is lower when arresting a White suspect than a suspect of another racial group (Smith et al., 2009).” The following is the excerpt and data from the Michael R. Smith, J.D., Ph.D analysis from July 2010 (A Multi-Method Evaluation of Police Use of Force Outcomes: Final Report to the National Institute of Justice): “The results from model 1 also indicate that the odds of officer injury are slightly lower if the suspect was white compared to another racial group (OR=0.87; 95% CI= 0.80–0.95).”

Here are two more analyses (making five total) that show lethal force is disproportionately directed at white Americans more than black Americans.

The Center for Policing Equity at John Jay College of Criminal Justice:

“The mean use of force rate for Black citizens was higher than that for White citizens in all categories, save the use of lethal force, when controlling for arrests for all offenses.”

Surprise, the Center for Policing Equity does NOT emphasize how lethal use of force is lower. Most of their groundbreaking document “The Science of Justice: Race, Arrests, and Police Use of Force” focuses on disparities that are disadvantageous to blacks along the use-of-force continuum. The research was reported on by The Washington Post, PBS and The New York Times, among others — sometimes misleadingly. There is one passing mention on page 20 of the research when they say “save the use of lethal force” but they don’t expand on the topic and except for conservative Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald, media outlets didn’t report it or look into it. In fact, The New York Times reported,“The researchers said they did not gather enough data specifically related to police shootings to draw conclusions on whether there were racial disparities when it came to the fatal confrontations between officers and civilians so in the news.” Thus, how can the report mention, “save for use of lethal force,” and include a bar chart that is clearly higher for whites than blacks. Coincidentally, the statistic that blacks are 24% MORE likely to receive force than whites (the difference from 36 out of 1000 arrests involving force for whites, and 46 out of 1000 arrests for blacks) is the inverse of Roland Fryer’s conclusions that blacks are 24% LESS likely to receive lethal force than whites. This variable will surely change slightly based on the data set, but the chart on page 19 clearly shows in the column “lethal” a disparity favoring blacks — matching Fryer’s conclusions — based on “12 agencies serving populations ranging from under 100,000 to over 1 million, with a median size of roughly 600,000 residents.” Page 17’s Table 5 even indicates greater use of force for whites than blacks during violent arrests. Again, the Center for Policing Equity chose purposely not to highlight this fact that would counter the narrative of racially biased police killing black people disproportionately and without regard for their well-being. However, the evidence is there in black and white (and on Figure 2, shades of grey).

The Social Cognition Laboratory, led by Joseph Cesari of Michigan State University:

“Taken in total, the above analyses, while in no way conclusive, are consistent with the idea that Black citizens are not more likely to be killed by police gunfire once the frequency of criminal or suspected criminal activity is taken into account … In sum, then, once we take into account the frequency with which Blacks and Whites interact with police in a criminal context (in terms of arrests), there is no bias against Black citizens in being killed by police. In contrast, Whites are consistently more likely to be shot and killed.It seems unlikely that these numbers are skewed to any meaningful degree by racism on the part of officers’ arrest decisions.


Additionally, here’s a sixth study published in the journal Injury Prevention that Time reported about in July 2016 that likely was swept aside and forgotten amidst Roland Fryer and Center for Policing Equity’s more high-profile media releases. It clearly shows no racial disparity in outcomes of injury or death by police per capita:

The study, published in the journal Injury Prevention, provides a nuanced view of the intersection of race and law enforcement in America. In the analysis, researchers from the U.S. and Australia used several national databases and hospital records, spanning a range of years from 2011–2015, to count the number of injuries and deaths inflicted by law enforcement officers during stops, searches and arrests. Approximately one in every 291 police stops or arrests ends in injury or death, the researchers found.
Racial minorities — especially blacks and Native Americans between ages 15–29 — were more likely to be stopped and searched or arrested by the police than whites.
The ratios of death or injury across races, once a person is stopped, are the same, which initially surprised lead study author Ted Miller, principal research scientist at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation in Maryland. “Maybe the decision to pull you over was racially biased; maybe the decision to arrest you once you were pulled over was racially biased,” Miller says. “But who a police officer kills or injures is probably more of a function of who resists arrest or who pulls out a knife or gun,” he says. The chance that a firearm injury or a hospital-admitted injury would be fatal was also the same across races.

SOURCE with key abstract excerpt below:

Objective To count and characterise injuries resulting from legal intervention by US law enforcement personnel and injury ratios per 10 000 arrests or police stops, thus expanding discussion of excessive force by police beyond fatalities.
Design Ecological.
Population Those injured during US legal police intervention as recorded in 2012 Vital Statistics mortality census, 2012 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project nationwide inpatient and emergency department samples, and two 2015 newspaper censuses of deaths.
Exposure 2012 and 2014 arrests from Federal Bureau of Investigation data adjusted for non-reporting jurisdictions; street stops and traffic stops that involved vehicle or occupant searches, without arrest, from the 2011 Police Public Contact Survey (PPCS), with the percentage breakdown by race computed from pooled 2005, 2008 and 2011 PPCS surveys due to small case counts.
Results US police killed or injured an estimated 55 400 people in 2012 (95% CI 47 050 to 63 740 for cases coded as police involved). Blacks, Native Americans and Hispanics had higher stop/arrest rates per 10 000 population than white non-Hispanics and Asians. On average, an estimated 1 in 291 stops/arrests resulted in hospital-treated injury or death of a suspect or bystander. Ratios of admitted and fatal injury due to legal police intervention per 10 000 stops/arrests did not differ significantly between racial/ethnic groups. Ratios rose with age, and were higher for men than women.
Conclusions Healthcare administrative data sets can inform public debate about injuries resulting from legal police intervention. Excess per capita death rates among blacks and youth at police hands are reflections of excess exposure. International Classification of Diseases legal intervention coding needs revision.

Another 2017 study called “A Bird’s Eye View of Civilians Killed by Police in 2015” that actually dealt with The Washington Post data indicates there could be some implicit bias in the handful of unarmed shootings nationwide, or when the offender is not attacking. But they make larger point that these incidents are rare, and unarmed individuals are 10% of total killed. This is the seventh study I’ve included here.

One of the co-authors, Justin Nix, co-wrote an opinion piece in The Hill in January 2018 using data from his study, and pointed out how rare police shootings are:

The Post’s data cannot tell us whether police officers are biased when deciding to use deadly force. To do so, we need an appropriate measure of each racial group’s “exposure” to police, so that we could compare the number of citizens fatally shot against the number of citizens who could have been fatally shot.
Thanks to The Post, the numerator (number of citizens fatally shot) in the equation no longer is unknown. But how do we come up with an appropriate denominator (number of citizens who could have been fatally shot)? To be certain, U.S. population estimates are not the answer because they assume everyone has an equal chance of being stopped or contacted by police officers. Studies consistently have demonstrated this is not the case: black citizens are more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested than white citizens.
… Thus, the fact that black males account for 22 percent of fatal shootings, but just 6 percent of the U.S. population, tells us nothing about whether officers exhibit racial bias in their decision to use deadly force. After all, to be shot by a police officer, one must first be approached, contacted or stopped by a police officer (and bear in mind, forming suspicion and making the decision to stop or approach a citizen is entirely separate from the perceived need to shoot).
… If we assumed, conservatively, that there were 40 million police-citizen interactions in 2017, then we would conclude using The Post’s data that police fatally shot a citizen in approximately 0.002 percent of those interactions. Furthermore, the majority of those fatal shootings involved a citizen who was armed with a deadly weapon and/or posing an imminent threat to the safety of officers or others. We raise these points not to dismiss concern about excessive use of force or possible racial disparities, but rather, to put The Post’s tally in the appropriate context.

Clearly Justin Nix — as a simple purview of his Twitter feed supports — is among the more nuanced of researchers on this subject. From the 2017 studyusing 2015 Washington Post fatal shootings data, there are a few key takeaways:

  • More centralized data is needed, such as from the FBI.
  • Less than 10% of people killed by police in 2015 were unarmed.
  • There are some racial disparities between blacks and whites in unarmed killings. Though, again, I’m unsure if they controlled for every interaction like the fact, as he wrote later, “black citizens are more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested than white citizens.”
  • It’s difficult to discern what the following means, when it’s not clear if any controls are added (and unarmed blacks are clearly 3–4 times more likely to be killed than whites in raw data, or 3.49 times more likely according to the infamous Cody Ross): “Blacks were more than twice as likely as Whites to have been unarmed when they were shot and killed by police. These findings suggest evidence of implicit bias in real-world scenarios.”

He also indicates the data isn’t as accurate as it needs to be. I remain confused by this argument, because The Guardian and Washington Post data remains robust enough for several outlets to argue we have a problem with police violence along racial lines. (Even see how The Guardian focuses first on rate by race — with Native Americans sadly and predictably in the top spot — and not sum totals.)

The Post’s data indicate that 990 civilians were shot and killed by police officers in the line of duty last year. According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, the police make contact with more than 40 million people each year. Out of these contacts, police force (or threatened force) is used in less than 2% of these interactions (Eith and Durose, 2011).Moreover, most use-of-force incidents do not result in a death even when police officers fire their guns (Alpert, 1989; Klinger, 2012b; Klinger et al., 2015). Thus, civilian deaths caused by police officers are extremely rare based on the overall number of police–civilian encounters. Additionally, as shown in the current analysis, most civilians killed by police were armed with a deadly weapon or were actively attacking officers. Less than 10% (N =93) of civilians shot and killed by police in 2015 were unarmed.
Mainstream media and advocacy groups, most notably Black Lives Matter and Campaign Zero, have alleged that police disproportionately use force and deadly force against minorities. The Post data showed that police killed almost twice as many Whites as Blacks; nevertheless, this is expected as Whites far outnumber Blacks in the U.S. population. In an effort to standardize these numbers, The Guardian divides the number of White and Black civilians killed by their respective population count. Presenting the number in this manner suggests that Blacks were killed at more than twice the rate of Whites in 2015 (7.2 per million to 2.9 per million, respectively). Similarly, The Washington Post recently stated, “When adjusted by population, [unarmed Black men] were seven times as likely as unarmed White men to die from police gunfire” (Lowery, 2016). We caution against using population as a benchmark because it does not account for each groups’ representation in a variety of more relevant measures, including police–civilian interactions and crime. The use of self-report data in criminological research has resulted in the finding that Black citizens offend at higher rates (Blumstein, Cohen, Roth, and Visher, 1986; Loeber et al., 2015)and are overrepresented in citizen complaints/calls for service (Engel, Smith, and Cullen, 2012), police stops (Novak, 2004), and arrests (Brame, Bushway, Paternoster, and Turner,2014; Kochel, Wilson, and Mastrofski, 2011). These and related benchmarks can be used to clarify the representation of minority deaths at the hands of police.
(Cont.) … Although we were limited to the 990 police shootings that resulted in death, we were able to analyze the data for evidence of implicit bias. Our findings showed that citizens in the other racial/ethnic group were significantly more likely than Whites to have not been attacking the officer(s) or other civilians and that Blacks were more than twice as likely as Whites to have been unarmed when they were shot and killed by police. These findings suggest evidence of implicit bias in real-world scenarios. In line with previous police shooting simulation studies (see Correll et al., 2002; Cox et al., 2014; Payne, 2001), it seems that officers may have been more likely to experience threat perception failures in fatal shootings that involved minority civilians. That is, officers subconsciously perceived minority civilians to have been a greater threat than they were (Fachner and Carter, 2015).
This study is not without limitations. Most importantly, we only had data for the 990 police shooting incidents that resulted in death. It would be ideal to have national data onuse-of-force incidents that did not result in death as well, as prior studies have suggested that civilian death only occurs in 15% to 25% of all police shootings (see, e.g., Klingeret al., 2015). With these data, we could more accurately assess whether deadly force is disproportionately used against Blacks, and we could more accurately determine whether implicit bias occurs in real-world police–civilian interactions. Additionally, we were only able to analyze data for a 1-year period. Future research would benefit from longitudinal datato assess police shooting trends over longer periods. This is especially important considering that 2015 was a period of great turmoil in American policing and might prove to be an outlier over a more extended time frame. Note, however, that Williams et al. (2016) recently suggested that annual totals of fatal police shootings have remained stable over the last 5 years. In any event, given the national debate currently surrounding police shootings, it was imperative to analyze the first year of The Post’s data objectively to shed light on any apparent racial disparities. Finally, although we were able to control for the influence of several relevant variables, we could not account for everything as evidenced by the modest amount of variance explained by our regression models. For example, suspect death can be influenced by factors such as departmental policy on rendering lifesaving aid or the proximity of level-one trauma centers (Giacopassi, Sparger, and Stein, 1992; Hanke andGundlach, 1995; MacKenzie et al., 2006). Yet without national data on nonfatal police shootings, we cannot determine whether the observed race effects would be washed away by the inclusion of these other variables.
Our analysis has contributed to an understanding of the extent to which civilians were fatally shot and killed by police in the U.S. in 2015, as well as to an understanding of the extent to which race was associated with two measures of threat perception failure: having not been attacking the police or other citizens and having been unarmed prior to being fatally shot. Flawed data have limited the empirical study of police deadly use of force at the national level for far too long. News media outlets have provided us with more accurate data on these incidents than has the research community. Nevertheless,more is needed to provide reliable and generalizable analyses of police-involved shootings. Fortunately, it seems that we are making steps in the right direction, and this study and the data from The Washington Post serve as baseline analyses for future research on civilians killed by police.


Finally, here is one Columbia University study — which I originally discovered in the Wikipedia entry on Race and Crime in the United States (“Robberies with white victims and black offenders were more than 12 times more common than the reverse.”) — that validates the fact blacks commit robbery 8 times more often than whites. It’s called “Racial Stereotypes and Robbery” published more than a decade ago by Brendan O’Flaherty and Rajiv Sethi. This is the key source showing disparities in behavior to contextualize the disparities in police interactions (i.e. evidence against accusations of racial bias by police):

  • From the introduction of “Racial Stereotypes and Robbery” in 2004: Robbery is a very serious crime, often involving violence, and resulting each year in aggregate costs to victims of several billion dollars.(1) It is also a crime that involves significant and persistent racial disparities. African-Americans are considerably more likely to be robbery victims, arrestees, and prisoners than either whites or Hispanics.(2) No other crimes except murder and possibly drug trafficking are nearly so concentrated among African-Americans. But robberies are about forty times as common as murders, and more state prison inmates are incarcerated for robbery than for any other index crime. (3) Even more striking is the fact that while white-on-white, black-on-black, and black-on-white robberies are all very common, white-on-black robberies are extremely rare. Robberies with white victims and black offenders are more than twelve times as frequent as those with black victims and white offenders. (4) Since white criminals are plentiful, the paucity of white-on-black robberies is puzzling. This phenomenon runs counter to some common beliefs about racism: if whites dislike blacks, or if law enforcement undervalues black safety, or if courts are reluctant to accept black testimony against whites, then white criminals should eagerly rob blacks. The abundance of black-on-white robbery is also somewhat surprising. Although the overwhelming majority of black robbery victims would be white if robbers were sorted to victims completely randomly, most other crime seems to be concentrated within groups.(5)
    1 — The direct cost to a victim of a robbery with injury is on average $19,000; the cost of a robbery without injury is about $2,000 (Miller, Cohen and Wiersma, 1996). These estimates include property damage, medical expenses, lost productivity, and intangible reduction in the quality of life. Updating to 2002, a year in which around half-a-million robberies occurred, implies costs to robbery victims of about $5.4 billion. These estimates do not include the costs of precautions, fear, or heightened racial friction and segregation that robbery might cause
    2 — 
    Relative to whites in 2002, African-Americans were 2.16 times as likely to be robbery victims in 2002, and 8.55 times as likely to be arrested for robbery. Relative to non-Hispanic whites, African-Americans were 16.1 times as likely to be incarcerated in a state prison for robbery. Relative to Hispanics, African Americans are 1.68 times as likely to be victims and 3.51 times as likely to be prisoners. In New York State in 1999, African-Americans were 2.85 times as likely to be arrested for robbery as Hispanics (Sources: National Criminal Victimization Survey 2002, Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, table 4.10; Harrison and Beck, 2004, table 15; New York State Division of Criminal Justice Statistics 2004, the Statistical Abstract, table 13, and American FactFinder.) The population base for arrests and prisoners is population over 18 (census); for victimization, population over 12 (NCVS). 
    3 — Around 151,000 individuals were incarcerated for robbery in 2002, of whom 91,000 were African-American (Harrison and Beck, 2004, table 15).
    16.6% of African-Americans in prison have been convicted of robbery, more than any other index crime.
    4 — Detailed evidence on these disparities is provided in Section 2 below. 
     5 — While 72% of the victims of black robbers were white, only 16% of the victims of black murderers were white, 26% of the victims of black rapists, and 53% of the victims of black assailants (Fox and Zawitz, 2004; NCVS 2002, table 42).

Liberal Academic Bias

Despite these pockets of analytical transparency and quantitative pragmatism in the social sciences regarding how crime arrests actually match the commission of crime, much of this discipline tries to run and hide from these realities. Criminologists John Paul Wright (Professor at the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Cincinnati) and Matt DeLisi (Coordinator of Criminal Justice Studies, Professor in the Department of Sociology, and Faculty Affiliate of the Center for the Study of Violence at Iowa State University) posted their own critique of their fellow sociologists in the City Journal saying, “When it comes to disciplinary biases, however, none is so strong or as corrupting as liberal views on race. Disproportionate black involvement in violent crime represents the elephant in the room amid the current controversy over policing in the United States.” They then point out how young African-American males commit homicide at rates 15 to 35 times higher than their share of the population. Also referenced is the black-white gap in armed-robbery offending that ranges between 10:1 and 15:1, which is reflected in the “Racial Stereotypes and Robbery” paper I previously mentioned. They also says something I’ve long suspected:

Criminologists talk about the race-crime connection behind closed doors, and often in highly guarded language; the topic is a lightning rod for accusations of racial hostility that can be professionally damaging. They avoid discussing even explicitly racist examples of black-on-white crime such as flash-mob assaults, “polar bear hunting,” and the “knockout game.” What criminologists won’t say in public is that black offending differences have existed since data have been collected and that these differences are behind the racial disparities in arrest, prosecution, and incarceration.

From a personal standpoint, after reading hundreds and articles and scanning research papers, statistics like those above are almost entirely unsaid in the media by the handpicked academics that show up to represent the field of crime. When professional reputations are at stake, who wants to go against the grain?

Wright and DeLisa do. They then go onto say the following which completely aligns with my own critique of the DOJ, whose ideas mirror those from academia:

In the aftermath of the Department of Justice reports on Ferguson and Baltimore, it may sound odd to hear that the system does a good job of processing individuals with comparable criminal backgrounds similarly, regardless of race. But 50 years of research on the topic have failed to find the smoking gun linking justice-system disparities to racism. Claims to the contrary often manipulate data or ignore them altogether. In the case of the DOJ reports, and in the eyes of many criminologists, racism has to be the cause of these disparities because recognizing the truth about the huge racial imbalance in crime is politically intolerable.

Indeed, the DOJ report looks like it was written by modern day criminologists who publicly ignore the higher crime rates in minority communities. Here are some sociologists that do NOT contextualize crime rates when talking about rates of violence by police:

  • Todd Beer, PhD, a faculty member in the department of Sociology and Anthropology at Lake Forest, in his website, “SOCIOLOGYtoolbox.” Many comments on his website ask repeatedly where the criminal context, with this one saying simply: “Flawed. You need to show the crime rate in each category.”
  • Odis Johnson, PhD, Associate Chair and Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Education and Associate Professor of Education and Sociology at Washington University in St. Louis, when presenting data on the his Fatal Interactions with Police Study regarding odds that Hispanics and blacks are shot both armed and unarmed more than whites. He says, “The odds that black Americans will be killed by police when unarmed are nearly 7 to 1 — more than double the odds found in research to date — and due primarily to the unarmed status of black women.” There’s only 1–3 unarmed black women killed every year, according to The Washington Post and The Guardian data, so how does he tabulate vast numbers of unarmed black women being killed to make this claim?

But there are criminologists who do mention how contextualizing for crime eliminates disparities, like David Klinger, PhD, a Professor of Criminology & Criminal Justice at University of Missouri–St. Louis. Klinger is a former police officer who’s actually shot and killed a man while in uniform. He now does work on how often police shoot citizens and under which circumstances. (He’s referenced heavily above in the Justin Nix paper.) He clearly put the-sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson in his place with his police-are-racist broken record pronouncements by countering with facts and reason when he told him on CNN with host Anderson Cooper, “There’s absolutely no empirical evidence from the the field that indicates that police are quicker on the trigger when it’s a black suspect versus a white suspect.” Klinger said on a PBS News Hour interview in June 2017:

“And I would argue that the race issue is one that gets overplayed. And what I mean by that is this. If we look at shootings that could have been prevented, and it goes back the training and tactics, we can pretty much eliminate, in my opinion, the race piece.
So, for example, here in Saint Louis, myself and Rick Rosenfeld and two other colleagues were able to look at the spatial patterns of officer-involved shootings in the city of Saint Louis. And at first, it clearly looks as if race plays a role, but once you control for the levels of crime across neighborhoods, that drops out.
And so that’s one example of why I’m not going to get on to the issue of race being the key. I really think it has to deal with the tactical performance of police officers across the board dealing with whites, blacks, Hispanics, males, females, where they don’t use sound tactics that then lead to the shootings that we scratch our heads over.”

The Contact Card pre 2016: Pretty simple. And blacks are constitute around 72% of them.

Back to Chicago: What About Use of Force?

In Chicago, the Contact Cards (police stops) absolutely MATCH the Case Reports (people reporting suspects). Thus, like national statistics, one can argue police aren’t participating in a “pattern or practice” of discrimination. Nearly two years ago I found this information on a online story after a hard hitting ACLU report, but it disappeared. Was it “scrubbed” by NPR, I speculated? The end of the story directly rebutted the civil rights argument of racial bias by Chicago police by contextualizing stops to actual crime. I call it the “Holy Grail” source because I couldn’t find this data anywhere else no matter how hard I searched. (You would think CPD or the Fraternal Order of Police would spread this information far and wide rather than in one instance, instead of generic pronouncements like, “Well, police work in high-crime areas, yada, yada.”) But luckily I saved a copy of the URL and graphic in my ACLU and CPD analysis documents I draft when wrestling with crime and police data in Chicago. Finally, I re-checked the Wayback Machine to discover this coveted URL has indeed been archived:

“In an email, a CPD spokesman Martin Maloney pointed out that the demographic breakdown of contact cards issued closely mirrors the data in the department’s case reports. (Those are descriptions of suspects identified by a third party, which is documented within incident reports.)”
Scrubbed from Web, but The Wayback Machine archive has it here. I always find it funny they misspelled “Latino” as if they whipped this table up in a rush. Source: Chicago Police Department

(My ACLU and CPD Analysis, March 2015 - present, here as a Google Doc. I also analyze the above “missing” chart in my Medium post providing context to CPD actions after Paul O’Neil’s dramatic shooting death in August 2016. In it, I mention that WBEZ reporter Katie O’Brien said she has “doubts” that the ACLU ran controls for stops, which you can listen to here.)

What About Other Big Cities? What About White People Being 50% of Citizens Killed by Police?

Indeed, cities like Chicago and San Francisco with major mental health and violence problems get a “reputation” as having a crisis in policing but when you do the math, they kill citizens at the same as the nation’s average. New York City’s fatal killings involving police have dropped by a factor of 12 since 1971, with only 8 killed in 2013. That would be three times (3x) less than the national average, at 1 in 1,050,000 citizens.

Hypothesis: Maybe big city police aren’t shooting and killing people as often as many folks think?

Remember: Very few recent discussions around police shootings mention the high number of guns and gun violence in the United States. For example, rates of firearm related deaths in the U.S. are 40 times higher than Great Britain.

A 2015 traffic stop police shooting of an unarmed father resulted in the death of 6-year-old Jeremy Mardis.

And one more thing: White People. Out of 500 shootings of white people annually, there’s many shootings (and arguably excessive beatings) of white bodies on camera few Americans don’t know about. Indignation and national outrage often comes from a critical mass of consciousness, spurred on by media attention all-but-lacking context, even when doing important work like tracking police killings. (Google search “police killing unarmed black men” or “police killings” and see for yourself.) I took the time to compile several killings or attacks on video against white individuals here. I can name 5 unarmed white teens (or younger) killed in recent years: Zachary Hammond, Jeremy Mardis (age 6), Dillon Taylor, Dylan Noble, and Gilbert Collar. Do people know their names?

Shooting of unarmed Zachary Hammond after a marijuana drug sting.

To keep it focused, I’ll highlight two examples of police violence. Example 1: NPR tries to wrestle with the conundrum of an unarmed teenage citizen shooting of Zachary Hammond that is as clear as any in existence of police wrongdoing, and asks, “A White Teen Was Killed By A Cop And No One Took To The Streets. Is That A Problem?” Example 2: “Black cops tackles white guy!” gets 900 views on YouTube. But what’s interesting is the excerpt of a white drunk man not obeying commands getting a full stiff-arm neck tackle comes directly from the TV show COPS (500,000 views). The move was likely legal, although it looks brutal and excessive. But reverse the optics, and there’s little doubt it would be a social media viral sensation with accusations of racism.

I am clear: Many more police need to be convicted or held accountable, but how can one say it’s racial injustice when far less than 1% of ALL police-involved shootings lead to a conviction and 50% of the dead are white? Where’s their justice?

I often say: If black lives don’t matter, why is it Americans know only the names of black individuals killed these past four years? Who knows the name of any of the of the 750 out of 1000 people killed by cops annually who aren’t black, as well as two-thirds of the 5–10% unarmed deaths by law enforcement?

Where is: Perspective?

In San Francisco.
In New York City.
2015 stats, 9 killed by Chicago police (CPD):
Chart from the 2016 Chicago Police Accountability Task Force: 74% of people shot by police in Chicago are black.

Further Sources for Part 2 at the Bottom of this Post

Academic Research Points to No Racial Bias in Overall Black Arrests Based on Commission of Crime & Black Cops Shoot 3x More Often than White Cops

That even includes drug arrests in the mix, which are racially disproportionate. They’re also less than 15% of arrests.

“Black crime”: Conservatives have their arguments, and liberals have theirs.

Ah, but police are arresting blacks more overall because of the racist War on Drugs, right? Actually, no. While there are disparities in drug arrests, and even sentencing, it may not be true when factoring all crime behavior. Drug inmates only make up 20.5% of the total in federal and state prisons. Nearly half are there for violent crimes — 54% of state prisoners are serving time for violence, according to the DOJ. Drug arrests make up less than 14% of total arrests. In fact, that 14% is the exact proportion of overall arrests for both blacks and whites — a statistical coincidence — while blacks are arrested for violence vastly more than whites. Even an op-ed in the New York Times admits that it’s not the War on Drugs driving incarceration rates, but the aggressive punishment of violence as argued in the book Locked In by John F. Pfaff, Professor of Law at Fordham Law School.

Still, anti-incarceration advocacy groups like to put “violence” in quotations when tabulating who’s in prison, and overplay the “nonviolent” residents by including local jails where short-term stays for drug offenses are more prevalent. I often say a variation of the following, but one should consider this framing seriously in regards to the intellectual dishonesty that’s out there, widely heralded, and swallowed up by the masses:

I read all 18,000 words of Ta-Nehisi Coates’ damning anti-incarceration article in The Atlantic titled, “The Black Family in the Age of Mass Incarceration.” Interestingly, he took 17,000 words to get to this very important peer-reviewed researched fact that undermined many of his key points: “One 2004 study found that the proportion of “unambiguously low-level drug offenders” could be less than 6% in state prisons and less than 2% in federal ones.”

Thankfully, there are critics of color willing to speak up against Coates and his ilk, such as Cedric Johnson (University of Illinois at Chicago), John McWhorter (Columbia University) and Glenn Loury (Brown University). They also recognize clearly that crime is a pressing problem that severely affects African American communities, and activist groups such as Black Lives Matter may cause more harm than good. This is one reason why McWhorter and Loury will Tweet and have discussions on YouTube about established figureheads like Ta-Nehisi Coates and Cornell West when they intellectually battle. Heck, McWhorter even debates about his own book on with Coates, himself — though, they start out friendly enough, with Coates making small talk about his son acting up in school “like his dad.”

Also, one discovers when digging deeper: Black communities may not be as over-policed as the common narrative is framed. Several studies below embolden that opinion.

If Bill Clinton’s “tough on crime” approach devastated families, how come non-marital births leveled off since the mid-1990s? Another question: How come single-parent households exploded immediately after welfare expanded in the late 1960s? Funny, it seems only conservatives ask these questions. (Source: The Economist)

Incarceration Disparity Myths

Also, much is often said about how mass incarceration, especially after the 1994 Crime Bill (supported by Bill Clinton, the Democrats, and two-thirds of the Black Caucus), destroyed lives, devastated the black community, and is racist. However, that’s simply not true.

First off, no one making these arguments ever talks about the “destroyed lives” of victims of crime. That has to be factored in.

Even though Bill Clinton took pains to renounce the sentencing laws in the bill in 2015, he regularly took heat on the campaign trail as he tried to help his wife, Hillary Clinton, win the 2016 presidential election. Black Lives Matter publicly embarrassed Bernie Sanders months earlier in Seattle, so it was only a matter of time before they regularly went after the Clintons. At one point, former President Clinton received massive blow-back from a heckler in Philadelphia, where he in turn — much to the consternation, certainly, of his wive’s campaign that was trying fruitlessly to inspire the “black vote” — doubled-down on his legislative achievement. “You are defending the people who killed the lives you say matter,” Clinton told the protesters who had interrupted his speech. “Tell the truth.” That “truth” of Bill Clinton's got called out by Rollingstone as problematic: “For once we got to see a white person who’s done real harm to our community say what he truly believes.” They were far from the only mainstream media outlet to do so.

Both Sanders and Clinton completely capitulated to the activists’ points of view, with Clinton literally giving a platform to 8 black mothers at the Democratic Convention, symbolically representing the 25% of people killed in police custody. The other 75% were not symbolically represented, nor were law enforcement. Hillary Clinton added fuel to that fire during the primaries against Sanders saying it’s “reality” that police view black lives as “cheap.” Donald Trump praised cops, and law enforcement popularity surged in October 2016 with a Pew Poll showing 74% of Americans having a “great deal of respect for police.” Around the same time, Black Lives Matter had majority of Americans (57%) holding a negative view of them. Basically, police were more popular than Black Lives Matter by the end of 2016. Perhaps that’s partially why Clinton lost the election to Trump.

Prominent talk radio conservative Larry Elder has pointed out in an article “5 Myths of the Criminal Justice System” The following (all of which I fact-checked as true):

  • “The facts do not show a ‘racist criminal justice system.’ The problem of the high rates of black imprisonment will not be solved by falsely screaming racism.”
  • “Blacks are arrested at higher rates compared to whites — but wrongly so. Not true. … Studies find that arrest rates by race are comparable to the race of suspect identification by victims.”
  • “Blacks are convicted at higher rates and given longer sentences than whites for the same crime. Not true. Differences in conviction and sentencing rates by race are due to differences in the gravity of the criminal offenses, prior records or other legal variables. A 1994 Justice Department survey of felony cases in the country’s 75 largest urban areas actually found lower felony prosecution rates for blacks than whites and that blacks were less likely to be found guilty at trial.” [Link to study.]

The Atlantic analyzed this issue in an piece, “The Real, Complex Connection Between Single-Parent Families and Crime.” They wrote that 25% of crime was reduced from the 1994 Crime Bill, and said the following:

Some academics and advocates, including Cohen here, counter that mass incarceration is actually creating more single-parent families. That argument rests on the questionable assumption that men who are in prison would become reliable presences in their children’s lives if freed. Worse, it implies that children — or their mothers — would be better off with a violent father in the house than on their own. There are valid concerns about our harsh drug policies, but the truth is the percentage of prisoners behind bars for drugs is relatively modest. According to the BJS, about 20 percent of the current state prison population has been convicted of drug offenses while 50 percent are doing time for violent crimes. (Federal percentages, though not the number of actual prisoners, are higher.) Violent offenders accounted for 60 percent of the rise in the state prison population between 2000 and 2008, a time when the percentage of drug offenders declined.

Three studies show it is actually white offenders that are more likely to be in contact with police based on the commission of a crime. One of them is consistently referenced in Wikipedia’s analysis of race and crime.

Here’s what three studies say about arrests not being institutionally racist, as police are acting fairly in their arrests consistent with the crime they face:

“Results indicate that race does have an indirect effect on police contact, but it is White individuals who are more likely to be questioned and arrested. In addition, other factors including low parental socioeconomic status (which is associated with ethnicity), previous police contact, and gender are more likely, than even involvement in crime, to determine if a person will be questioned or arrested.

SOURCE (“Revisiting ‘Measuring the Problem’: Separate Examination of Police Contact in Serious and Nonserious Offenders,” Criminal Justice Review, 2016):

“Although blacks are arrested disproportionately for most types of violent crimes, disagreement persists as to the extent to which official arrest data are indicative of differential offending behavior or selection bias on the part of law enforcement personnel. Using data from the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), we assess the effect of an offenders race on the probability of arrest for 335,619 incidents of forcible rape, robbery, and assault in 17 states during 1999. The baseline model for these comparisons is the equiprobability hypothesis that relative to violation frequency as reported by crime victims, the likelihood of arrest for white and black offenders is roughly equal.”

“Multivariate logistic regression results show that the odds of arrest for white offenders is approximately 22% higher for robbery, 13% higher for aggravated assault, and 9% higher for simple assault than they are for black offenders. These findings suggest that the disproportionately high arrest rate for black citizens is most likely attributable to differential involvement in reported crime rather than to racially biased law enforcement practices.”

SOURCE (“Race and the Probability of Arrest,” Social Forces, Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2003):

“Interestingly, none of the characteristics of the suspect was important. In other words, officers were equally likely to stop individuals whether they were male or female, African-American or white, low or high socioeconomic status … A recent area of research, that of racial profiling, has begun to examine whether or not police officers use race to discriminate against minorities. Research on racial profiling is attempting to capture officers’ pre-conceived notions and practices of discrimination by race. To date, the research that has been conducted cannot confirm or refute whether officers discriminate against members of racial minority groups. This shortcoming can be attributed to methodological weaknesses, including the lack of a proper denominator to determine if traffic stops or searches of minorities are significantly different from stops and searches of white citizens.”
SOURCE (“Police Officers’ Decision Making and Discretion: Forming Suspicion and Making a Stop,” NCJRS, U.S. Department of Justice, 2004):

Here’s one peer-reviewed study pushing back on the narrative that more “black cops” will mean less shootings:

And it’s a complete fallacy that it’s white cops with implicit bias killing black people. Black cops — who admittedly may also have implicit bias — shoot their weapons 3.3 times more often than their white counterparts, according to University of Pennsylvania criminologist Greg Ridgeway. Around 4 in 5 people black cops shoot are black themselves, as opposed to less than 1 in 4 for white cops. Ridgeway wrote: “Recent research suggests diversity does not make officers safer and this research does not suggest diversity will reduce the risk of police shootings.”
SOURCE (“Officer Risk Factors Associated with Police Shootings: A Matched Case–Control Study,” Journal Statistics and Public Policy, 2016):

Also, here’s one more study conservatives Larry Elder and Heather Mac Donald reference involving a U.S. Justice Department survey in the 75 largest urban areas that indicates a key finding: “No Racism”!

Heather MacDonald wrote in 2008: “A 1987 analysis of Georgia felony convictions, for example, found that blacks frequently received disproportionately lenient punishment. A 1990 study of 11,000 California cases found that slight racial disparities in sentence length resulted from blacks’ prior records and other legally relevant variables. A 1994 Justice Department survey of felony cases from the country’s 75 largest urban areas discovered that blacks actually had a lower chance of prosecution following a felony than whites did and that they were less likely to be found guilty at trial.”

Larry Elder wrote in 2012: “Differences in conviction and sentencing rates by race are due to differences in the gravity of the criminal offenses, prior records or other legal variables. A 1994 Justice Department survey of felony cases in the country’s 75 largest urban areas actually found lower felony prosecution rates for blacks than whites and that blacks were less likely to be found guilty at trial.”

The likely source of the above claims is literally titled “No Racism in the Justice System”:

Annotation: The criminal justice system has clearly been biased against blacks in the past, but recent evidence on such bias is far less conclusive.
Abstract: The Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted a 1-year survey in which samples of adult felony defendants were tracked as their individual cases proceeded across major criminal justice stages. The survey was based on a sample of 10,226 defendants representing 42,538 defendants in the Nation’s 75 largest counties. Survey findings revealed blacks were convicted of more serious offenses than whites, had longer criminal records, and were convicted in places that generally meted out more prison sentences. These differences explained why 51 percent of convicted blacks but only 38 percent of convicted whites were sent to prison. The survey provided no evidence that, in places where blacks had most of their contacts with the criminal justice system, the system treated them more harshly than whites.”

SOURCE (“No Racism in the Justice System,” The Public Interest, 1994):

Incarceration Digression: Let’s Assume A Small Disparity

Many other sources show there are racial disparities in sentencing. But the “white privilege” gains are small, despite all the brouhaha about the Brock Turners of the world. The Bureau of Justice in October 2015 reported: “In the 8-year period between 2005 and 2012, black men received roughly 5% to 10% longer prison sentences than white men for similar crimes, after accounting for the facts surrounding the case.” A University of Michigan Law School study in 2014 showing 10% longer sentences for blacks compared to whites at the federal level is the main citation in Wikipedia.

However, so-called news organizations like The Root, like to publish wholly inaccurate facts: “A 2014 study (pdf) by the American Civil Liberties Union found that, at the federal level, African Americans and Latinos receive sentences that are 20 times longer than whites.” Click the PDF link and it actually says 20% longer, and that’s with ACLU spinning the data. For the statistically literate, 20 times longer vs. 20% longer are a bit different, well, by almost a factor of 20. But with the way many Tweeted and wrote about Turner — it was one of the biggest incarceration stories I’ve witnessed on social media — it sure felt like he received a sentence 20 times smaller than a person of color.

Yes, one could argue Stanford swimmer Brock Turner got an outrageously low felony sentence of six months for rape (he served three). Sajid A. Khan, a deputy public defender in Santa Clara County and experienced in these cases, argued that Turner “didn’t get off easy.”

Single case examples of sentences that don’t seem fair are just that: Single cases. Statistically, someone else who’s black is getting a seven-month or eight-month sentence. Because that’s the aggregate average — 10-20% longer — based on the stats promoted by liberal advocates. Then again, as noted above, there are studies that say, “The survey provided no evidence that, in places where blacks had most of their contacts with the criminal justice system, the system treated them more harshly than whites.”

2016 Arrests in Chicago are Less than Nationwide Average (In Journalism, this is Called Burying the Lead)

Not sure what is The Sun Times source for their arrest totals, but they report arrests are down 28% (not 25%, like their URL implies, or 33% as CBS’ 60 Minutes reports).

Here’s what I concluded statistically, but have never read anywhere: Chicago’s reputation for over-arresting is vastly overrated. At least that’s true in the past few years. Activists still call Chicago “the most-policed city in the country.”

Chicago had in 2009 a little less than twice the rate of arrests as the rest of the nation, with 1.5% of the country’s total arrests and .86% of the country’s population (dividing 2009 CPD arrest data with 2012 FBI arrest data, or simply 181,669 ÷ 1,219,6959). Today, arrests are dropping precipitously in Chicago and their share is possibly LESS than the national average (take 2015 CPD arrest data and calculate a 28% to 33% arrest drop in 2016 and apply against 2015 FBI arrest data). Chicago’s share of the U.S. population is .86% but I calculate total arrests by the municipal police were .76% last year. Unless federal, state and county arrests are greater than 10–15%, roughly, of the city’s arrests and part of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting, then this could be a unique development in criminal justice. This is occurring even though murder is 4-6 times higher than the national rate, robbery is 3 times higher, and Chicago’s violent crime (rape, murder, assault) is increasing 4 times faster than the national average.

All data crunching here (feel free to comment):

But don’t say this has anything to do with the the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Well, that’s what the ACLU usually says — without rebuttal. It happened recently in a relatively balanced DNA Info article in January 2017 that reported a policy change to keep officer’s personal information away from the ACLU:

Ed Yohnka, a spokesman for the ACLU of Illinois, said the civil liberties watchdog did not oppose the change and wasn’t interested in the actions of specific officers.
“We want to fix the systemic issues,” Yohnka said. “This wasn’t worth fighting.”
Yohnka contends there is no connection between the rising murder rate and the drop in the number of investigatory stops by police. He said 250,000 stops conducted by police in 2014 found no criminal activity.
“All those stops did was drive a wedge between the police and the community,” Yohnka said.
Despite the 80 percent drop in the number of police stops, Chicago police took 25 percent more guns off the street in 2016 than the previous year, Yohnka said.

I’ve yet to see it reported exactly how police stopped 80% less people, made less felony gun arrests, yet took 25% more guns off the streets.

Another anomaly: That 2017 Sun Times article indicating a 28% drop in arrests also contained arrest totals that are roughly 50% off from official totals found in the CPD arrest data I found elsewhere (see Sun Times graphic above). It did not include links to source data. Alas, it did include activists repeating mantras without fact-based counterarguments:

“Chicago is the most-policed city in the country. Maybe it’s time to do something different.”

To all the groups above, some I’ve even contributed financially to in the past such as the ACLU, all I can do is repeat my findings:

Today, arrests are dropping precipitously in Chicago and their share is actually LESS than the national average

The ACLU Gets Defensive, Crime Spikes (Chicago, Baltimore & St. Louis) & Past Medium Posts

More charts like this at FiveThirtyEight.

Dismantling the Typical Stop-and-Frisk Arguments

It’s true, the American Civil Liberties Union were instrumental in changing how Chicago was policed after dropping an incendiary 2015 report that said, “Chicagoans were stopped more than 4 times as often as New Yorkers at the height of New York City’s stop-and-frisk practice.” True, the numbers don’t appear fair on the surface. Some could call this a “citizen toll” for dealing with high levels of violent crime in the U.S. compared to other developed nations. The homicide rate in Chicago was also 4 times as high as New York City’s, which is rarely mentioned. Though, that doesn’t mean police have to stop people at that same rate. What’s important is: How are police treating people per stop (use-force-rates and disparities) and what are the repercussions of a style of policing ends?

Starting January 1, 2016, all that changed when a new ACLU-negotiated reform on investigative stops started in Chicago. I hate to put it so bluntly, but take your pick: 6 times more of all citizens stopped, which disproportionately falls on the shoulders of blacks, yet matches their share of the crime rate. OR nearly 300 more homicides and 1,300 more people shot, which also disproportionately affects blacks and actually happened in 2016.

From the 2012 NYPD Firearms Discharge Annual Report. When people wonder how police shoot one demographic more than another, one must look at who’s shooting them. They also have to ask honestly why they’re frisking in general, and these results in New York City in 2012 might indicate why: 5,689 gun arrests and only 60 police officers shot their weapons in 45 discharge incidents. Also note: 79% of the people who shoot cops are black; 69% of the people cops shoot are black — a large difference. Nationally 43% of the people who shoot cops are black; 25% of the people cops shoot are black — a huge difference. Thus, again, we can conclude police are shooting at African Americans far less than African Americans are shooting at police. You’ll also likely never hear that reported in media, or analyzed in an academic study or criminal justice report.

Far Less Stops, No Change in Demographics — How Is Stop-and-Frisk Racial Profiling Again, ACLU?

Besides the massive shooting increases, you can have an 80% drop in stops (6 times less), and another shocking thing happens (or doesn’t happen): The demographic percentages won’t change at all. As a Chicagoan who’s heard for years about “over-policing” in minority neighborhoods, I found this incredibly surprising. If “racial profiling” was truly occurring, the demographics would logically shift dramatically after dramatic reductions in stops. This is because the widespread civil rights theory supposes stops for black and brown citizens are more arbitrary, but not as much for white citizens. The reasoning being non-Hispanic whites are more likely to live in lower-crime, more economically advantaged neighborhoods in cities and are less likely to be stopped and frisked in general — the police simply aren’t there and aren’t looking for them. A common refrain might be: “They get the white folks when they have to; they get the brown and black folks whenever they want to.” Remarkably, when vast reductions of stops occur in both Chicago and New York City, the percentages don’t change! With the ACLU and a retired federal judge monitoring them, Chicago cops still stop 8 times more blacks than whites in 2016, the same as previous years, which I’ll explore in more detail in the next section. Just like in New York City (NYC) when stop-and-frisk ended and demographic percentages were calculated by the ACLU from 2003 to 2017, there’s no change, essentially, in the percentage of white, Latino or black stops. How does this make sense?

In NYC in data captured by the ACLU, whites were 12% of stops in 2003 at the beginning of stop-and-frisk and they were 10% in 2016 when it was all but over. Remarkably, there were 55 times more stops of all races in 2011 than 2016! (A class action lawsuit ended the practice in 2013, and a slowdown occurred before then.) But what’s most important, and rarely reported, is that crime suspects nearly match the demographics of police stops in NYC. Let’s look at police stop data (not all of these involve “frisks”) and victim report data to see:

  • In 2011 in NYC, 9% of stops by NYPD were white. 685,724 stops total. 88% of stops were “innocent” or led to no known crimes. (SOURCE: ACLU stop-and-frisk data)
  • In 2016, 10% of stops by NYPD were white. 12,404 stops total. 76% of stops were “innocent” or led to no known crimes. (SOURCE: ACLU stop-and-frisk data)
  • 2011 in NYC, 16.2% of crime suspects were white according to all victims who could identify a race/ethnicity. 30.3% of overall victims were white. (SOURCE: NYPD’s annual report: Crime and Enforcement Activity in New York City, 2011)
  • 2016 in NYC, 16.3% of crime suspects were white according to all victims who could identify a race/ethnicity. 23% of overall victims were white. (SOURCE: NYPD’s annual report: Crime and Enforcement Activity in New York City, 2016)

A question remains: How can you “unfairly target minorities” when the racial breakdown both remains the same no matter the year and matches crime suspects?

Also, wouldn’t the above trends indicate that dramatic and statistically significant 24% decrease of white crime victimization also increase the minority share of the victimization demographic pie? (i.e. 30.3% white before, but 23% white with exact same demographic percentage of suspects.) Looks like minorities are feeling the effects. Sure, you also get a statistically significant 13.6% drop of “innocent” stops. But that would mean in bulk numbers cops caught 82,000 “non-innocent” (“bad guy”) people in stops in 2011 and only 3,000 “non-innocent” people in stops in 2016, all because of changes the ACLU wants and political leaders agree to.

Frankly, it’s hard what to make of these numbers, and harder still to see how the ACLU is bragging about them. It’s also shocking that crime hasn’t skyrocketed in NYC. Many left-leaning think tanks like the Brennan Center for Justice repeatedly mention the fact that crime hasn’t increased after stop-and-frisk ends as a police policy — and they love to only talk about that correlation regarding one city, New York City, whose murder rate is already lower than the national average. (Crickets or defiance when it comes to crime increases in Baltimore, St. Louis, Milwaukee, or Chicago.)

But the zero change in demographics before and after stop-and-frisk is a mystery. This is a serious quandary and point I’ve yet to see analyzed, and I’ve only discovered on my own well into my investigation of so-called “racist” stop-and-frisk practices.

Consider this Logic Exercise as Evidence of No Racism in Stop-and-Frisk in NYC:

Ok, I’ll copy the following from ACLU stop-and-frisk data.

  • In 2011, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 685,724 times.
    605,328 were totally innocent (88 percent).
    350,743 were black (53 percent).
    223,740 were Latino (34 percent).
    61,805 were white (9 percent).
    341,581 were aged 14–24 (51 percent)

Next, let’s assume as that vasts amounts of this high number are for discretionary, arbitrary stops due to “racial profiling” in a city that’s 33% white, 26% black, 26% Hispanic/Latino, and 13% Asian. Thus, you would assume 350,743 blacks stopped and 223,740 Latinos stopped have a larger portion than whites who are “innocent.” What happens when those stops drop 55 times (5500%) and are reduced across the board? As you can see below, the percentages and numbers are nearly the exact same 5 years later (except for the “innocent” category):

  • In 2016, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 12,404 times. 
    9,394 were totally innocent (76 percent).
    6,498 were black (52 percent).
    3,626 were Latino (29 percent).
    1,270 were white (10 percent).
    [percentage aged 14–24 not provided]

One should expect the white percentage should increase — maybe going up to 20%, or maybe to 33% and match their percentage of city residents, as that appears to be what the ACLU desires. Why? Because their stops are less arbitrary when “racial profiling” is taking place. This didn’t happen. There was practically no change.

Therefore, the air is let out of the “racism” balloon that social justice advocates have been trotting out for years. You get a great many less arrests, for sure. You get dramatically less stops — less people of all backgrounds are stopped. But key for the “stop-and-frisk is not racist” argument is straightforward:

  • The massive drop in stops fell at nearly the exact same rate for all demographics — 49 times less for whites and 53 times less for blacks.
  • The stops mostly match crime suspect data as reported by crime victims (in 2016, 47.6% of suspects are black, and 52% of stops are black).

Also according to the ACLU stop-and-frisk data received from the NYPD, 88% of persons stopped were “innocent” in 2016, and 76% were “innocent” in 2014. The ACLU would argue this shows police are slightly more “effective” in their stops. You also get 79,000 less “non-innocent” people off the streets in this “stop-and-frisk” pool over a five-year period (arrest numbers are much higher in general), as there were 82,000 “non-innocent” people caught by cops in stops in 2011 and only 3,000 “non-innocents” in 2016. For those who like numbers that’s 27 times more criminals on the streets — from low-level drug offenders to people with felonies carrying weapons or otherwise doing harm to New York’s five boroughs. That’s the trade-off from having 55 times less people stopped. However, in cities other than a contemporary New York City that is radically different in terms of crime than in the 1970s and 1980s, with a murder rate lower than the national average, you may get much more deadly results.

But people will keep saying: The data doesn’t explain everything, and the data isn’t always correct. Then why does the ACLU and others insist on using it to make their arguments?

St. Louis is consistently one of the top 5 murder capitals in the United States. It got worse after Michael Brown was killed and the police officer involved was acquitted.

Crime Spikes After De-Policing: Chicago, Baltimore and St. Louis

It’s unfair to accuse police of being dramatically unfair to citizens based on their race, when the statistics don’t bear that out, such as use of force per stop or how the demographics of case reports match stop reports. Even in New York City during the infamous stop-and-frisk era one has to apply heavy doses of statistical and rhetorical spin to argue vastly different treatment of citizens per stop. For example, I took the “next step” in data analysis and discovered that suspects in New York City are “pushed to the ground” 1.3% of stops for blacks and 1.1% of stops for whites. Indeed, the ACLU and others repeat ad nauseum “But … New York City” as a superstitious garlic-to-a-vampire rebuttal to a crime spike because one didn’t happen in the Big Apple after stop-and-frisk policies ended in 2013, which former mayor Rudy Giuliani predicted incorrectly. Yet the ACLU and media ignores cities like Chicago, Baltimore, and St. Louis which all had massive violent crime spikes the year after international headlines of a single black suspect’s death resulted in citizen unrest and police pulling back. So there’s three cities indicating one phenomenon in a Black Lives Matter world, and one other city years earlier indicating something different.

The murder spike happened in Baltimore directly after Freddie Gray’s death at the hands of police.

But let’s pay attention to the the political argument and ignore the fact that Baltimore had their all-time highest murder rate —72% increase in shootings leading to 55 homicides per 100,000 residents — the year of Freddie Gray’s death. Few progressives were willing to acknowledge the connection between social upheaval after Baltimore’s May protests, leading to increases in criminal activity and shifting expectations for police to abstain from proactive practices. Fewer still noticed the reason why even Gray’s captors were not prosecuted, as respected African American Judge Barry Williams stated prosecutors failed to make a legal case: “Williams has agreed with defense arguments that a crowd that formed around the arrest scene gave officers reasonable cause to use their discretion not to adhere to the department’s police general orders on using seat belts.” Blame for Gray’s death can go all around, it appears, including at the feet of people that don’t allow police to do their proper job of restraining suspects. 133 additional people died (out of 344 total) at the hands of citizens in Baltimore, too, which police had little or nothing to do with in 2015. An average of 6 people were killed per year in Baltimore by police from 2010–2014.

The ACLU finesses statistics and makes ridiculous hyperbolic statements like “250,000 people were stopped but never charged,” to which one could respond, “Duh, that’s like saying tens of millions of Americans are pulled over and never ticketed.” They also are defensively doubling down by saying, “We reject any suggestion of a so-called ‘ACLU effect’ to explain the recent spike in gun violence on Chicago’s streets. There is no discernible link between the rate of invasive street stops and searches by police and the level of violence.”

Do they know that? Or is their ideological and financial investment forcing them to say that?

Yet, the corollaries are all-too-obvious: FiveThirtyEight reported Chicago data early last year which they said “suggests a decline in law enforcement activity that may be contributing to the rise in gun crime.” This started the first week after the new ACLU rules went into effect, and a month after the Laquan McDonald video hit global news outlets.

Politicians, academics, and media, following the ACLU lead, chose to stubbornly deny a connection. They instead say it “could take years to understand the recent crime spikes.” Anonymous cops, a war-on-cops author and crime expert, the FBI Director, and even an arguably “racistpresidential candidate who “knows a Chicago cop” thought otherwise. Perhaps they’re ideologically invested, too. Or, like me, they’re noticing up to 2000 more dead people in consecutive years — 70% of those homicides are racial minorities — is an emergency that can’t wait.

Milwaukee: Let’s Throw in a Fourth City to Counter the “But What About NYC’s Lack of Crime Spike?” Narrative

No wonder police chiefs lose their cool, like the Milwaukee police chief Edward Flynn did in 2014 when he famously told reporters after a tense meeting with Black Lives Matter activists: “If some of the people here gave a good goddamn about the victimization of people in this community by crime, I’d take some of their invective more seriously.” He then added, “Now, they know all about the last three people that have been killed by the Milwaukee police department over the course of the last several years. There’s not one of them that can name one of the last three homicide victims we’ve had in this city.”

The next year, that police chief would deal with a 69% increase in homicides in 2015, 160 total, the highest number of homicides since 1993. Flynn told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that came from an “emboldened” criminal element after Ferguson. Flynn suggested officers didn’t back down, but there was more reckless behavior on the streets, such as people interfering with arrests. Flynn said the following, reflecting his officers’ viewpoints on the street: “The difference they’ve seen post-Ferguson disturbances is an emboldening of the same group of people that already are shooting each other.”

These anecdotes of “emboldened” crime — while being downplayed in activist circles — were repeated by police officials and crime experts in St. Louis, Baltimore, and Chicago, too. One thing is true: The officials have the numbers (dead bodies) and timing (spikes coming after high profile incidents) on their side.

Medium Posts — Not Widely Read, but Heavily Researched

This brings me to the several Medium Pieces in 2016–2017, updated regularly for accuracy. Read more for evidence-based facts around so-called racism in the criminal justice system, and how the media and academia has all-but-ignored “The ACLU Effect,” possibly because they’re all playing follow-the-leader — and no one wants to follow the other leader when it’s Trump or our conservative lock-’em-up history. Especially when the prevailing cultural and political tide is all about criminal justice reform and exposing the racism of mass incarceration.

Some, like Sean Kennedy wrote for Real Clear Policy, honestly counter the narrative and overt blind spots of criminal justice reform advocates, pointing out simple facts like the violent crime rate increasing 5 times over from the 1960s to the 1990s. Somehow, the ACLU thinks they can lower the jail population by 50%. And the Brennan Center for Justice imagines 39% could be dropped immediately in a December 2016 report. A dramatic 17% reduction in California’s state prison population has reportedly led to little or no crime spike, according to some academic advocates for criminal clemency, though conservative legislatures certainly push back on that point.

Personally, I think there’s a more nuanced and practical path towards smart reform. For example, lessening certain sentences and finding creative ways to lower the recidivism rate after people serve their sentence.

Feel free to get in touch if you think they can be reprinted, edited, co-opted, or republished elsewhere. Email David Shuey at:

My graph using Roland Fryer’s data (new data in right column) based on the New York Times’ damning chart (left column). My theory: The New York Times and other media simply are scared of being accused of racism in today’s race-sensitive environment, a.k.a. “political correctness.”

How Roland Fryer’s Controversial Harvard Study on Racial Bias by Police Actually Shows Negligible Bias (or Brutality)

EXCERPT (with graphic to the left): According to Fryer’s data during Giuliani-Bloomberg’s New York City, suspects are “pushed to the ground” once out of every 73 stops if black (1.3% of the time) or 1 in 87 times if white (1.1%). And the Center for Policing Equity’s definition of “use of force” by police says it happens 3.6% of the time for white people and 4.6% of the time for black people per arrest.

That’s the “next step.” That’s reality. It’s tangible and something an average reader can visualize. Why isn’t that done by media or academia?


FiveThirtyEight & Libertarian — and the Media in General — Can’t Face the Obvious: The “Ferguson Effect” is Likely Happening & Trump May Have a Point About Crime

With 31.5% homicide jump, thousands more people died in the last two years of Obama’s presidency than in the first six years. But let’s not call it a “crime wave” or “unprecedented”?

“The 13th” and its Glaring Omission: Actual Crime that Mirrors Demographics

While Ava DuVarney’s movie asks important questions on incarceration, it ignores reasons why we lock people up a majority of people in the first place (hint: It’s not drugs)

Former Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy doesn’t hold back on CBS’ “60 Minutes” on New Years Day 2017. When told there’s 80% fewer stops and 33% fewer arrests, while murders and shootings climbed to nearly 60% — all within a single year — McCarthy said, “When you have activity falling off the way it is and crime skyrocketing, that’s a huge problem.” He also implied he was a scapegoat for Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, which was the widespread assumption after being fired in December 2015 amidst police reforms taking shape in the wake of the video release of the Laquan McDonald shooting.

No Bias In Chicago Policing Despite Mayoral and U.S. Government Reports & the “ACLU Effect”

Which would you rather have in your city? 
A. Nearly 1400 more people shot with 300 more people killed
B. Tens of thousands more citizens stopped by police, some unnecessarily.

I’ll get to that in a minute, but keep that in the back of your mind. Because that’s exactly what happened in 2016.

Nationally in 2016, as many as 2,400 police were on the receiving end of firearm assaults, as 4.2% of 57,180 assaults on law enforcement officers involved guns. This is according to an FBI report released October 16, 2017 (“FBI Releases 2016 Statistics for Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted in the Line of Duty”):

“ According to statistics collected by the FBI, 118 law enforcement officers were killed in line-of-duty incidents in 2016. Of these, 66 law enforcement officers died as a result of felonious acts, and 52 officers died in accidents. In addition, 57,180 officers were victims of line-of-duty assaults.”
“In 2016, of the 57,180 officers assaulted while performing their duties, 28.9 percent were injured. The largest percentage of victim officers (32.2 percent) were assaulted while responding to disturbance calls. Assailants used personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.) in 78.0 percent of the incidents, firearms in 4.2 percent of incidents, and knives or other cutting instruments in 1.9 percent of the incidents. Other types of dangerous weapons were used in 16.0 percent of assaults.”

Chicago police last year were on the receiving end of twice as much civilian gunfire than in 2015, according to a January 2017 Chicago Public Radio report. But police shot the same number of people in back-to-back years. For example, after two police were shot in 2017 in the Back of the Yards neighborhood, The Sun Times reported that 12 officers were shot at and nine were struck in the first four months of 2016.

It’s important to keep those threats towards police in mind when pointing out that Chicago police shot around 25 citizens in both 2015 and 2016, killing two more in 2016 (11 killed, 16 wounded), yet they interacted with vastly fewer people. This paradox (police stopped less people, while being shot at more) may be a part of what many have called the “ACLU Effect.” Synonymous with the “Ferguson Effect,” this is essentially police pulling back — not making proactive stops; answering 911 calls only; avoiding using force, even if justified — not only for fear of losing one’s job, but also because of new ACLU-enforced policies like filling out a cumbersome form for every citizen stop. This change in police behavior likely leads to more crime.

The ACLU forcefully denies its existence. I think they’re blind to the facts around them, and continue to say Chicago police acted unconstitutionally in recent years, which I wouldn’t deny occasionally happens. It’s likely rare. Especially after I proved that the available data shows police in Chicago arrest both white and black citizens using force at nearly the same rates — 3.3% and 4.0% of the time, respectively — and LESS than the national average. This indicates there is no systemic problem. Also, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, the probability of being shot fatally in Chicago by police the past 28 months is the exact same odds as the nationwide average, about 1 in 300,000.

One could argue police should be commended for NOT using lethal and non-lethal force in the city of Chicago if you look at the data and compare it nationally.

Also, one can’t argue with any ounce of coherence that Chicago police are rounding up far too many black males when 7 out of 10 stops are black, 7 out of 10 arrests are black, and — most importantly — 7 out of 10 suspects (as determined by crime reports) are also black. And yes, 7 out of 10 instances of use of force are directed at black Chicagoans. If 5 out of 10 suspects were black, then you would have a racism problem in policing.

It’s also a logical argument that police know instinctively what the actual data tells us — the data I report here and not found anywhere in DOJ or ACLU reports — which is members of the CPD weren’t using too much force and acting upon implicit racial bias. Instead, they were being bludgeoned by the media, politicians, and community leaders for treating residents poorly and unfairly. Therefore, morale goes down the tubes and police pull back. They’re literally being told to disengage and not “harass” citizens — even when citizens are asking them to do something about crime.

For cops, the message is clear: You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

SHOWN ABOVE: The new Investigative Stop Report (ISR) used by CPD after January 1, 2016. Stops went down 90% after police started using them. Remember that Contact Card shown in the section “Problems with DOJ Report: Part 2”? It was fairly small. This is only 1 side of 2 pages! Second City Cop, a blog for police to air their grievances gave their less-than-pleased perspective Jan 13, 2016: “And that’s only the paper version. You’re supposed to do it electronically … This whole system is being rolled out with ZERO training aside from a video. The classroom portion of this isn’t even scheduled to begin until March … the ACLU is getting every single copy of the card … Little wonder activity has dropped off by extraordinary amounts.”
Yes, this is side 2 of the ISR.

Police Stops: Switching from Contact Cards to the ISR

2016 in Chicago started with a nearly 90% drop in police stops and 80% increase in shootings citywide in January. CBS’ “60 Minutes” reported in a high-profile story that Chicago police stopped 80% less people in 2016 than the year before — arrested 33% less people overall — but citywide homicides increased nearly 60% by year’s end. Some point to the holistic reaction of the Laquan McDonald video being released in November 2015 (a.k.a. “The Laquan Effect”), but a new ACLU-designed investigative stop form implemented January 1, 2016, that takes 40–45 minutes to fill out per person has also been widely cited, from the former U.S. Attorney representing Chicago to the former Police Superintendent, as a major factor in the slow down.

It’s also reported in the Sun Times that in December 2015 police were still stopping many suspects in the month after the McDonald video, but stops dropped precipitously with the implementation of Investigative Stop Reports (ISR) in January 2016 coinciding with an immediate jump in shootings and homicides. This created in many minds an “ACLU Effect.” Indeed, a post-New Year’s Eve immediate pull back by CPD could very well be due to mayor-approved ACLU reforms that create inertia in police more than the morale-destroying McDonald video street protests. A first report on stop-and-frisk post-reform issued by a retired federal judge in March 2017 still said there were still disparities in the rate of frisks by race. But this is key: The percentage of blacks, whites and Hispanics stopped was almost exactly the same as March 2015 report that prompted the ACLU intervention, according to the Chicago Sun Times. The Sun Times reported:

• The race of those stopped hasn’t changed. A 2015 analysis by the ACLU found that 72 percent of those stopped by police between May and August 2014 were black. According to the 2016 police data, 71 percent of those stopped were African-American, 19 percent were Hispanic, 9 percent white and 1 percent Asian.
• African-Americans and Hispanics were more likely to be frisked. Pat-downs were done during 30 percent of the stops involving Hispanics, 29 percent involving African-Americans, 26 percent involving Asians and 22 percent involving whites.
• Yet weapons were found on African-Americans and Hispanics as infrequently as on everyone else — in just 2 percent of stops. Drugs or other “contraband” were recovered in 4 percent of the stops for each group.

Ponder the ramifications of that: If the point was not to over-police one group more than another, that didn’t really result, specifically when considering rate of encounters. Whites, blacks, Hispanics — it’s still the same. And frankly, counter-intuitive.

Title this caption: A Tale of Two Sun Times Charts (That Say The Same Damn Thing). The above chart was found in a Chicago Sun Times article on 2/12/17 (“WATCHDOGS: 71 percent of Chicago cops’ street stops are of blacks”). The above blue chart also has the SAME information as the red chart below, also published in the Chicago Sun Times six weeks later on 3/25/17 (“Most police stops OK, but minorities face more patdowns — report”). Which graph seems more honest and clear to you? Could the first one be construed as deceptive to the average reader? (I admit doing a triple-take until I noticed the blue bars start at 22%.)

The ACLU calls this reduction in stops a good thing, and even wrote a January 14, 2016 press release, saying, “The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois is encouraged by reports that street stops have decreased as our agreement with the Chicago Police Department has been implemented.” The ACLU also defensively added:

“We reject the premise that there is a demonstrable relationship between Terry stops and crime reduction and any attempt to link the recent uptick in shootings with this reduction in stops. We believe that policing can be constitutional and bring safety to the neighborhoods of the City. That is a goal that each of us should share.”

You can reject the premise, but the facts remain: Stops went down 90% in January 2016 and shootings went up 80%? Again, the ACLU was immediately “encouraged” by stops decreasing, but said there’s no link to their agreement which began January 1, 2016.

“Please let this ACLU reform end, please let this ACLU reform end, Please…”

If that’s true, how come so many police complained immediately that their hands are tied, they’re confused by the ACLU form, and morale hit rock bottom? How come a year later in January 2017, the Investigative Stop Report was simplified to reverse the trend of there being fewer stops? Though, the tweaks were small, and Fraternal Order of Police President Dean Angelo said the “monstrosity of a report” should be tossed out and officers should return to their previous “contact cards.” That contact card data actually indicated there was no racial bias by police, which I address further below. The Sun Times reported Angelo saying Chicago cops are doing exactly what’s expected of them by the ACLU and city policy (mostly likely mandated by the mayor over the head of rank-and-file and police leadership):

“It limits stop, question and frisk completely because it was designed by the ACLU and accepted as policy by the department, which is the main contributing factor to the drop in our street stops,” Angelo said.
“People think that police officers are standing down. Police officers aren’t standing down. They’re following policy. They’re doing what the order requires. That’s what everybody’s missing.”
Angelo said what’s most infuriating is that he warned police brass of the dire consequences of the ACLU agreement.
“In 2015, when this order was signed, I told the department, ‘We’re gonna be at 700 murders before you know it. The violence is gonna go through the roof and some of our worst neighborhoods are gonna catch on fire.’ It’s like I had a crystal ball.”
March 2015: The Chicago Police Department prove they don’t “stop and frisk“ in a systemically racially biased manner by sharing with the media ONE key fact largely ignored: The demographic breakdown of contact cards issued closely mirrors the data in the department’s case reports. But the ACLU says they are racially biased anyways, then threaten to sue until they finally get what they want five months later. The results: 300 more people died in 2016 than in 2015.

It’s worth noting that Angelo’s criticism wasn’t enough to get him defeated in an April 2017 police union election by a bigger critic of police reforms. It’s also worth noting how defensive the ACLU is, blaming the former Police Superintendent Gary McCarthy in that same Sun Times article for “talking out of both sides of his mouth” because he signed off on the ACLU agreements in August 2015 but is now critiquing them. It’s quite possible his hand was forced by events behind the scenes with Mayor Emmanuel, who later fired McCarthy when he needed a scapegoat from what is widely seen as a cover-up during the mayor’s re-election. Thus, I’m giving McCarthy a pass when on “60 Minutes” he says the following:

“The police activity is horrific. Honestly. And there, and there’s not an excuse that could be made in my book. The noncompliance of the law is becoming legitimized. And the police are on their heels. … We’re reaching a state of lawlessness,” McCarthy said.
Eddie Johnson, CPD Superintendent April 13, 2016 — present.

A survey from Pew showed that 86% of Chicago police said their work is harder because of high-profile shootings. So what are Chicago police to think in this can’t-trust-the-cop environment? Not only is the ACLU form cumbersome (“Hey, I may have wanted to talk to you for 15 minutes about that shooting down the street … but I have to fill out a very long form for the next 45 minutes of the hour if I do”), but police morale is at an all-time low. The following generalized cop-on-the-street sentiment has been widely reported: “Why should I risk my neck if every watchdog and government report says it’s us cops who are the bad actors on the streets and ignores the real crooks.” As for real quotes, officers in Chicago are actually saying to local newspapers, “You have to be a complete idiot if you don’t think the climate doesn’t have a role in the rise in crime and murder.” In the same Tribune story, CPD Superintendent Eddie Johnson, who took over as the top policeman after the fallout from the Laquan McDonald video, says with a faint silver-lining of optimism, “I’ve never seen the level of disrespect out there on the streets … I’ve never seen that before. So it is a tough time right now. But we’ll get through it.” The Tribune vaguely referenced some of that “disrespect” and also reported that rank-and-file officers lost trust in Johnson for stripping an officer of his powers for kicking a drug-dealing arrestee in the head. A key fact was the suspect was choking his partner’s neck in a full-on street fight with a crowd surrounding the scene, which I wrote about before in a viral video that is an ink-blot test — like so much police activity — on how one views police actions. Some defend it as fully “justified” (even arguing the officers could have legally shot the dangerous suspect, citing Tennesee v Garner), and some on the evening news call it a “disgusting act.” Johnson is clearly dealing politically with two worlds, the community and his own officers who are feeling the pressure on and off the city streets, and says:

“I think they want to be the police. They just want to make sure that they don’t get in trouble for being the police. So sometimes they’re cautious about how they do things until they reconcile that ‘I’m doing the right thing for the right reason and I won’t get in trouble for it.’ But … it’s a difficult thing right now being a police officer, not just in Chicago, but across this country.”

At the grievance-heavy police blog, Second City Cop, the frustration with the ACLU is clear, and targeted directly at Karen Sheley, director of police practices for the ACLU of Illinois. A February 1, 2016 posting critical of Sheley and the ACLU included this user comment:

“The blood is on their hands. It is totally the “ACLU effect “ & Ferguson etc. I don’t know how they sleep at night knowing they are directly responsible for people dying.”
March 2018 UPDATE: A study came out on the ACLU Effect. And every article from the Chicago Tribune to the Chicago Sun Times was loaded with critics pushing back on the stringent analysis. Including the ACLU writing up their own post vilifying the study, of course. When even the conservative National Review can push back on an “ACLU Effect” when it’s as obvious as this graphic (above) showing Chicago homicides (orange line) spiking at the same time as stops dropping (blue line) then you know it’s an uphill struggle in the battleground of common sense. Read study here:

Research on “The Ferguson Effect”

The hyperfocus on policing called the “Ferguson Effect,” popularized by Manhattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald and promoted by few others — mostly conservatives — willing to stick their neck out in a decriminalization environment, importantly note an immediate shift in crime in cities like Chicago, Baltimore and St. Louis.

Many critics have pushed back against the concept that a drop in proactive policing led to rising crime, despite the fact that in 2015 major cities, and the country, had the largest single year increase in homicides since 1971. That trend continued in 2016. Much of it is driven by cities that had high-profile killings at the hands of police (Laquan McDonald, Freddie Gray, and Michael Brown), concentrations of poverty, and already high rates of criminality. Even skeptical research criminologists like Richard Rosenfeld, who said before there’s no “Ferguson Effect,” are having “second thoughts” now. “My views have been altered,” he said to The Guardian after seeing an overall 17% increase in homicide in 56 of the nation’s largest cities. Rosenfeld, who now claims “something like a Ferguson Effect was responsible for the increase.” Indeed Rosenfeld, a Founders Professor at the the University of Missouri and former President of the American Society of Criminology, wrote about the possible negative effects of “de-policing” in a June 16, 2016 paper after saying we shouldn’t be “sounding alarm bells over a “Ferguson Effect” in a 2015 policy brief.

Other criminologists like David Pyroozo of University of Boulder state that the Ferguson Effect is “long on anecdotes and short on data,” and publish papers debunking it. Yet when he and other academics write about their expertise in The Washington Post as recently as September 2017 regarding the phenomenon, there’s no mention of Chicago, Baltimore, or St. Louis — unless you look in the comments, where citizens state the obvious. Is that willful denial?

Fortunately, there are sociologists like Neil Gross who worked with a PhD candidate Marcus Mann and reviewed Google searches and an uptick interest in Black Lives Matter to write in an April 2017 published paper this alarming conclusion: “Analyzing data on 43 large U.S. cities, we find that violent crime was higher and rose more in cities where concern about police violence was greatest.”

The critics of Mac Donald should look at the continuing problem of increasing violence with fresh eyes. Additionally, civic leaders, academics and media should not be afraid of the chilling effects from the left-wing narrative saying the “Ferguson Effect” is a “racist theory,” as Daily Kos slung as a polemic in 2015.

The better argument is to say it’s “racist’ to allow poor blacks to die by being married to an ideology that repeatedly makes criminal justice and police to be the enemy. When it was all said and done, the murder rate jumped 20% from 2014 to 2016, with nearly 3000 more people killed, half of them black. Where’s the outcry there? Clearly, some kind of “Ferguson Effect” with violent crime increasing in cities marred by protest occurred. There’s very little argument on either side of the political spectrum that citizens are reluctant to work with police, and police pulled back during this period. “This is ominous,” said Mark Kleiman, a criminologist at New York University’s Marron Institute of Urban Management to The New York Times. “What you worry about is that the trend is broken, and the numbers are going to go back up. A 20 percent increase in homicides over the past two years is not trivial. We’ve got what looks like a serious problem here.”

The Results from ACLU Agreement One Year Later: No Difference in Racial Breakdown of Stops

Whatever the reasons for city-specific rises in crime, it’s beyond dispute that Chicago police have pulled back at an unprecedented rate. Despite the ACLU being pleased by that fact — just like they’d be pleased if police stopped wearing protective gear, even though the “militarization” of police has not led to more instances of lethal use of force and has saved both police and civilian lives — the leading litigator in civil rights cases nationally implied in early March 2017 that there’s continued policing problems when 71% of stops remain black despite the nearly six-fold drop in stops. Karen Sheley from the ACLU told the Chicago Tribune, “We see this as a work in progress.” The progress she’s looking for was implied in the Tribune headline: “New report shows Chicago police street stops down, minorities still stopped more.” It was also in the article itself, as the Tribune continues its focus — aping the ACLU and DOJ reports— on how interactions by police don’t match city demographics, “The report found that nearly 71 percent of stops were of African-Americans, though they make up only about a third of Chicago’s residents.” This is the exact same percentage breakdown as before the reforms, where racial disparities in stops and shootings was the focal point. However, all evidence shows stops (and police shootings) match almost exactly the demographics of perpetrators of Chicago’s crime as described by third parties, which is just over 70% black. Whites are just under 10% of stops, just as they are just under 10% of suspects. Again, stops went down 80% for every racial group at the same level, just like shootings went up nearly 60% for every demographic at the exact same level from 2015 to 2016.

But who’s killed? It’s 95% black and Hispanic. There is also “a third” of the population that is 5% of people being killed, and less than 5% doing the killing. That happens to be non-Hispanic whites.pre

When does ideology get in the way of what makes rational sense?

The Chicago Tribune headline, March 14, 2017: “Fardon issues fiery letter on exit as U.S. attorney in Chicago” He still calls for court-mandated reforms for police.

The ACLU also blasted the former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois for daring to make the obvious connection between the ACLU agreement’s effect on policing and increased criminal violence. They say they feel “attacked.” U.S. Attorney Zachary Fardon was also involved in the DOJ report, and says key police reforms are needed and “you can’t have a top-flight police department on the cheap.” Fardon wrote how the city task force on policing and the ACLU had detrimental effects, whereas rule of law had been delegitimized and the pendulum of law enforcement swung in favor of criminal. He also stated clearly his non-political perspective in his departing 5-page open letter:

“And then on January 1, 2016, a contract began between CPD and the ACLU requiring that officers complete lengthy contact cards for every street encounter. That ACLU deal grew out of a lawsuit about stop-and-frisk, but the contract that settled the lawsuit swung the pendulum hard in the other direction by telling cops if you (officer) go talk to those kids on the corner, you’re going to have to take 40 minutes to fill out a form, and you’re going to have to give them a receipt with your badge number on it.
So by January 2016, the city was on fire. We had no police superintendent. Cops were under scrutiny. Cops had to worry about the ACLU deal. And many of them just no longer wanted to bear the risk of stopping suspects. Many became scared and demoralized. And that demoralization was compounded by the City panel’s sweeping tone and language around racism and lack of respect for the sanctity of human life.”

It’s likely for Fardon, who had nothing to lose, the principle of saving lives became more important than local politics. Thus, he bravely spoke out and said the ACLU-CPD agreement is costing lives. Thus, he was rebuked by the ACLU.

And yet, who are disproportionately the victims in Chicago? What is the goal of the ACLU and the officials from Obama’s U.S. Justice Department? Why are 911 calls and third-party case reports (crime reports) nowhere to be found to contextualize the stops in the ACLU’s damning report and the DOJ’s so-called “scathing indictment” of police (a term Fardon says the media overuses and is “not accurate”)? With Chicago shootings becoming an international story in 2016, why can’t the state of Illinois enact stronger sentences for repeat gun offenders without drawing the ire of criminal justice reform critics?

80% of the shooting perpetrators and victims are African American. In a city that is nearly one-third white, only 5% of the victims and perpetrators are white. That’s a disparity of 16 times (16x). (Sources: and 2009 CPD Arrests)

When one has to agree with Megyn Kelly about the infamous “in your face” Chicago Black Lives Matter protester, it’s a rare day. But the evidence points in that direction.

The Crime Is Real: Contact Cards Match Crime Reports

If you think the difference in arrest is because police are out harassing citizens and finding crimes, ask yourself: How do they find 12x more sexual assaults? These are called in by victims (case reports). But from The Tribune to The Atlantic, the “10 times more” moments of use of force is lobbed as some law enforcement injustice, but it merely is a result of the 8–10 times more arrests that Chicago police are making because of actual crime. If case reports of descriptions of black perpetrators were in the 50–60% range, you would have evidence of racial bias and harassment of citizens when cops are arresting and shooting black citizens in the 70–80% range (whites are in the 5–10% range). Alas, that’s the not the case because they align almost perfectly at around 71–73%.

Contact Cards (police initiated); Case Reports (citizen initiated)

Again, the data is from the CPD and was provided to the media in March 2015 based upon CPD records to defend themselves from accusations of racial bias by the ACLU. But by summer of 2015, the police department agreed with the ACLU to institute changes in how they report each stop.

The ACLU Effect is brought up by police and immediately denied by the American Civil Liberties Union. Of course. Who wants any portion of 270-plus more dead Chicago bodies resting at your well-intentioned feet? Or possibly 1500–2000 more deaths every year since 2014 if you count nationwide based on FBI and Brennan Center for Justice estimates. [Update: Link goes to my 2016–2017 Google Doc analysis on estimated murder increases; I was validated — sadly — Sept 2017 as the FBI stated there were more than 3000 additional murders in 2 years.]

Yes, You Can Trust Police Stats

I know many critics say you can’t trust police stats because, well, they’re police stats. This is lazy, and defies logic, even if police may at times not issue honest reports. There’s two reasons why:

  1. It’s police stats that the DOJ and ACLU wields when saying police departments have systemic racial bias. (And as noted earlier, they usually make arguments by showing whole numbers and use-of-force disparities without contextualizing for which demographic commits more crime.)
  2. You can’t hide dead or shot bodies. The stats on black people killed by police match or are more favorable to blacks than arrest or use-of-force stats. (For example, nationally for Black Americans 25% are killed using lethal use of force, 27% are arrested, and 31% are on receiving end of use of force by police. In Chicago, blacks are 72% of arrests, 72% of stops, and, according to the DOJ, 76% of all uses of force. The DOJ also claims that blacks are “80% of all CPD firearm uses” despite the fact the mayoral task force in 2016 using presumably the same CPD data says blacks are 74% of those shot by police.)

Regardless, the data is all in the same ball park and should on the face of it say, “There’s not racism problem with police when it comes to use of force.” But no one says that. Even if it’s the truth.

I’ve argued against this problematic “you can’t trust police” argument extensively in my “numbers” section of my Roland Fryer and use-of-force Medium posting. I’ve yet to hear a convincing argument why that 6% differential between lethal and non-lethal use of force — 25% and 31%, respectively — in national statistics indicate anything but proof police statistics are accurate. The difference is even large enough to signify how blatantly obvious it is that police today may not be pulling the trigger against black men in dangerous situations. This happened in October 2016 when a Chicago female police officer didn’t want to shoot her attacker out of fear of public scrutiny. Of course, as previously mentioned, a Washington State study that found “officers were slower to shoot armed Black suspects than armed White suspects” could have told you the same thing. Alas, it is ignored.

“But you’re wrong, man,” I hear the blogosphere cry out. “The cops are hassling all the black guys, and ‘white privilege’ keeps white people safe.” Logic destroys this common assumption when whites are 50% of people dying at the hands of police, around 25% of murderers, and close to 40% of persons arrested for violent crimes. Blacks are 25% of those killed by police, 50% of the murderers, and also close to 40% of individuals arrested for violent crimes. (This flies in the face of what liberal media pundits like CNN”s Sally Kohn spin when they try to pin “69% of violent crime” arrests on white men, when they ignore per capita differences or don’t remove 90% of the “Hispanic/Latino” portion of crime from FBI crime data “white” column total.)

I say Black Lives Matter needs to look elsewhere with their anger when 4% of black homicides are by police, but 12% of white homicides are instigated by law enforcement. More liberals need to be open to these indisputable facts, I argue, or people will continue to die.

Is this “white privilege”?

Simple math: Divide killings by law enforcement by homicides by race. Roughly, 25% of victims of police shootings are black and 50% are non-Hispanic white (aggregated by The Guardian or The Washington Post). In terms of national homicide rates, 51.6% of victims and 53% of offenders are black (found in FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting), and around 30% of victims are non-Hispanic white (calculated by the Violence Policy Center’s data showing the following homicide victimization rate in 2010: Black = 19.47 per 100,000; Hispanic was 5.73 per 100,000; non-Hispanic white = 2.52 per 100,000). Total annual homicides in the United States in 2014 are nearly 16,000, according to the CDC. So using The Guardian totals with the CDC number, the black percentage is derived by dividing 306 / 7900 = .038 (3.8%); and the white percentage comes from dividing 581 / 5000 = .116 (11.6%). P.S. I did conjure up this Black Lives Matter “myth” before Heather Mac Donald similarly did. Her data is 100% correct, and fairly straightforward, as she puts police killings as a proportion of overall white deaths (and Hispanic deaths, too) at 12% and black deaths are at 4%. It’s also worth noting, with more than 12 million arrests annually, a fatal police shooting is an extraordinarily rare event.

Conservatives and liberals don’t deny this graph based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data is true. Then how come so many believe shootings have gotten worse for blacks? Fact: Those end-points on the right side match the crime rate.

Again, Context!

Police are killing vastly fewer black people than ever, but it’s rarely mentioned in the media. There is evidence that police are shooting up to 6 times less in Chicago today than in the 1970s. There were 148 people shot by police in 1975 and only 25 in 2015. Most of them were black. According to the New York Times, New York City had 91 fatal police killings in 1971, but only 8 in 2013. That’s 11 times less!

Nationally, the trend is the same. Both liberal and conservative sources agree on the same data point. (See CDC graph.)

The liberal group Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice refers to CDC data showing the rate per million of black people killed by law enforcement is three times less than 40–50 years ago in the United States, but the rate flat-lined for all other races. Black conservative Larry Elder cites the same CDC data and asks, “So what’s driving this notion that there is now an ‘epidemic’ of white cops shooting blacks when in the last several decades the numbers of blacks killed by cops are down nearly 75 percent?” Liberal sites like The Daily Kos regularly fumble statistics by not contextualizing African American interaction rates with police, but concede Bill O’Reilly and Fox News’ use of CDC data is accurate (they also published the same CDC chart): “It is fair to point out the rate of police killing of African-Americans has significantly dropped since the 1960s.” I’ve yet to find a high-profile mainstream media story, outside Fox News, highlight how police are likely treating minority and inner city communities in the United States of America far better than in the recent past based on evidence directly from a highly respected U.S. government agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Instead, it appears media narratives are shaped by social justice and civil rights groups unquestionably. Even when they have the data, it’s ignored or spin-doctored to state something else. (I was never a fan of Bill O’Reilly, but his push for a “No Spin Zone” serves a purpose.)

For evidence of how lethal use of force was used 4–6 times more often in Chicago in the 1970s, you can do what I did: Research. Look at page 19 (or p. “349”) of this 1982 peer-reviewed source document. Then compare to modern tabulations of Chicago’s police use of lethal force.

Again, not only has historical context scrubbed from U.S. Department of Justice damnations of Chicago policing, so are current crime demographics.

Ask yourself: Have I seen facts like these shared in the news? Why not?

Fact: Around 70% of perpetrators of crime as described by victims in Chicago are black, matching the overall arrest rate (Case Reports, Arrest Rates)

Fact: Around 70% of people in contact by police are black (Contact Cards, reported by the ACLU)

Fact: Around 70% of people shot or killed by police are black (Chicago Police Accountability Task Force Report, instigated by Mayor Rahm Emanuel after the public outcry from Laquan McDonald’s death)

Fact: Around 80% of people killed in Chicago, mostly by gun violence, are black (University of Chicago’s Crime Lab)

Thus: Where’s the racial bias in today’s Chicago Police Department? How can the mayoral task force on the Chicago Police Department in early 2016 say, “CPD’s own data gives validity to the widely held belief the police have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color”? How can the U.S. Justice Department investigators in 2017 say they have, “Serious concerns about the prevalence of racially discriminatory conduct by some CPD officers”?

Where is the actual evidence of disproportionate racial bias when ALL the data points — from police stopping people to police shooting people — mirror their crime rate based on third party reports, a vast majority of which are racial minority victims?

SOURCES (for 70–75% overlap for Case Reports, Contact Cards, and Police Shootings; thus proving no racial bias by Chicago Police):

Case Reports are the key. Case Reports show that Chicago victims and 911 calls (third-party observers) describe someone black more than 70% of the time, and at the SAME percentage as contact cards issued by police. Case Reports are HIGHER by 1–2% than the Contact Cards. As I wrote above, “If the Case Reports of descriptions of black perpetrators were in the 50–60% range, you would have evidence of racial bias and harassment of citizens if cops were stopping black citizens around 70% of the time. But that’s not the case. They are the same.”

Key Source, scrubbed off the internet and archived by the Wayback Machine:

Second source with similar data:

Arrests by race from Chicago Police Department’s 2009 Annual Report (listed as page 43, page 45 in PDF), in most categories 65–80% are black (robbery, 85%!):

My own data-crunching arrest analysis of the CPD Annual Report PDF (72% of overall arrests are black):

Contact Cards, 72% of all stops are black (8 times higher than whites):

Chicago Police Accountability Task Force Report says 74% of the victims of police shootings 2008–14 are black (still undetermined how Tribune and DOJ numbers put that at 80%, but ostensibly using same data as this high profile task force):

A University of Chicago’s Crime Lab report released Jan 2017 states that of Chicago’s 764 people killed in 2016, African-Americans represent 80% of that total. (They also make up one-third of Chicago’s population.)

SOURCES (for all others):

FBI Uniform Crime Statistics: 27% of of overall arrests and 36% of violent crime arrests are black. 
SOURCE: — NOTES: Most of these are crimes with victims, who often have to come forward for the arrest. i.e. not at the discretion of police (unlike drug crimes and prostitution). The only crime by African Americans at their level of the population (12.5%) is drunk driving. Note also, that “white” includes 90% of the Hispanic/Latino proportion of crime, which is mentioned on the right side. So one can often shave roughly 15–25% off the “White” column, which is a common mistake.

Who kills police by race: 43% are black.

Approximately 25% of people shot and killed by police are black (13 percentage points lower than percentage of cops killed by black people).

31% of use of force is against blacks.

UPenn criminologist Greg Ridgeway says, “Recent research suggests diversity does not make officers safer and this research does not suggest diversity will reduce the risk of police shootings.”

Police shot 4–6 times more people in Chicago in the 1970s than present day. Look at page 19 (or original page 349).

60 Minutes — arrests down 33%.

Chicago’s murder rate up 57% (nearly 60%).

CDC — 70% drop in rate of killings of African Americans by police.

National police shootings and deaths, about 1 in 300,000 residents (blacks around 25%, whites around 50%). (318 million U.S. population / 991 deaths by police according to The Washington Post = 320,888).

Chicago shootings (police, civilian). Last 2 years, averaging 10 shooting deaths by police in a city of 2.72 million = 1 in 272,000.

San Francisco shooting deaths, also about 1 in 300,000 residents, with new police chief due to shooting controversies. (Averaging 2.5 deaths per year in a city more than three times smaller than Chicago = 1 in 334,800)

Reasons Chicago police pulled back in 2016: “The number of stops between January and late November dropped from about 560,000 in 2015 to 100,000 this year, a result of chastened police as well as a new agreement between the city and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) that changed the requirements and definition of a stop.”

Onerous new ACLU form that lead to dramatic drops in stops (and can take 45 minutes per stop).

Peer-reviewed Studies: Arrests Not Systemically Racist

“Results indicate that race does have an indirect effect on police contact, but it is White individuals who are more likely to be questioned and arrested.” 
SOURCE (2016, Criminal Justice Review):

“…findings suggest that the disproportionately high arrest rate for black citizens is most likely attributable to differential involvement in reported crime rather than to racially biased law enforcement practices.” 
SOURCE (2003, Stewart J. D’Alessio and Lisa Stolzenberg):

“To date, the research that has been conducted cannot confirm or refute whether officers discriminate against members of racial minority groups.”
SOURCE (2004, NCJRS, U.S. Department of Justice):

University of Pennsylvania criminologist Greg Ridgeway shows black cops shoot 3.3 times more often than white counterparts: “Recent research suggests diversity does not make officers safer and this research does not suggest diversity will reduce the risk of police shootings.”

Extra Info & Idea: Maybe Reform ALL Police Departments Nationwide! Why? Because the Evidence Indicates the Chicago Police Department is No More Violent than Others

A story idea I have percolating is confronting the perception that police are more violent today. Some would say police are simply shooting more people countrywide in the 2010s. Others could say there were 200–300% more police killings in the 1970s. The latter appears likely, based on the evidence. I wrote earlier that NYC’s police are killing people up to 12 times less, which I would still find shocking if not reported by The New York Times. 4–6 times less Chicago police shootings are taking place now than in the 1970s. The homicide rate in Chicago in 2016 was nearly the same as 1974.

But even if we’re at an all-time low when it comes to lethal and non-lethal use of force, which is likely, is that still too much use of force? What is the standard? Chicago is arguably the nation’s most heavily investigated and profiled police force where the U.S. Department of Justice says with no hesitation Chicago police engage in a pattern of “excessive” use of force, primarily towards people of color. Pardon the side eye, but what is their standard when police kill about 1 in 300,000 citizens, the same rate as the rest of the country despite having one of the highest homicide rates in the nation?

The mayor-appointed task force says police data, “gives validity to the widely held belief the police have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color.” Allow for more snark: Are they talking about the police data that says use of force occurs around 3.3–4% of the time in Chicago for both black and white citizens, but happens 3.6–4.6% of the time in the rest of the country? Again, I’ll note: I’m the only one who did the simple math to find that us of force is 3.3% for whites and 4.0% for blacks. It was really as simple as this: Dividing the average annual instances of use of force over a 5-year period (3,693 for blacks, 383 for whites) with the arrests for the same period (93,328 for blacks, 11,541 for whites).

Beyoncé’s video for the song “Formation” showed a sinking police car. She said the message was not anti-police. Maybe she can raise up consciousness in the ways dangerous situations arise between Americans and police.

The Big Idea (yes, with a dose of humor and sarcasm, fully fleshed out in Sept 2017): Reform all U.S. police departments, and say “our national goal is 2% use of force.” Obviously, if the Chicago Police Department is a systemically racist institution at 3%, then “lower” is what politicians and bureaucrats may be looking for. If 3.6–4.6% is the national average, then they have even more work to do than Chicago! We want perfect numbers, so make sure it’s the same to the decimal point — don’t let the fact that one demographic may be arrested more often for violent crimes get in the way. All arrests are created equal! Also to reach 2%, it’s not just about revamping police hiring and training practices. One would have to educate citizens who are actually dictating whether use of force occurs, not the police, and ask that they follow police commands and make a complaint later if “treated rough” by an officer of the law. Look at any of the high-profile videos of police use of force, and nearly all of them come from citizens not complying with police commands, fighting, and/or resisting arrest. Perhaps Katy Perry or Beyoncé can make the public service message video with the title, “Hands Up, Don’t Mouth Off.” (I’m half serious about the last one, and Sam Harris would agree. Also, if everyone doesn’t know by now that “Hands up, Don’t Shoot” was a lie, they should by now, as Politifact gave the Black Lives Matter mantra 4 pinocchios as one of the biggest lies of the year. That same 4 pinocchios went to the lie “A black man is killed every 24 hours.”)

Trust me: The guys in the picture know policing problems are a lot more complicated than what Loretta Lynch is saying.

Former U.S. Attorney Zachary Fardon says in a no-holds-barred letter that Chicago needs court-mandated reforms, but the delegitimization of police is a huge problem. He says reform can’t be done “on the cheap.”

The ACLU also pushes back defensively.

Former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch says:

“ We did find a pattern or practice of unconstitutional behavior on the part of the police involving force, including deadly force. And we also found that the root cause of that, or certainly a major cause of what has led the police department to fall into this situation has been a lack of systemic training, a lack of focusing on the correct techniques, a lack of proper equipment, low morale within the department.”

Current U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions says:

In a 2008 policy paper on consent decrees, Sessions described the agreements as “one of the most dangerous, and rarely discussed, exercises of raw power” and said that “in practice, a decree can last for many years — longer than the remedy that was needed.”

Frustratingly, Fraternal Order of Police Spokesman Dean Angelo does NOT say how the 10 times disparity for use of force as a telling marker of police racism is unfair criticism. He knows it, as it was used by Chicago police to defend itself in March 2015 amid criticisms by the ACLU. All he would have to say on NPR is, “But crime victims point out a disparity of blacks and white perpetrators by a factor of 10, and police arrest almost 10 times more blacks — so of course 10 times more instances of use of force occurs. That’s just common sense. Which is sadly missing today in the media today because I haven’t heard a single reporter or person interviewed mention it. Have you?”

Addendum: The Chicago Tribune “Conservative” No Longer, Takes Sides Strongly with the ACLU and the Department of Justice

How the Tribune gets it wrong with this story and headline: “Editorial: What’s behind Chicago’s surge in violence?” This is from ostensibly from their traditionally “conservative” editorial board. To counter, this Doc is my in-depth critique of their bias and poor reporting:

See Also How the Traditionally “Conservative” Chicago Tribune Bias Often Bends to Ear of ACLU and Black Lives Matter, While Including Rank-and-File Police Sentiment, but Often Devoid of Contextual Facts Like Those Presented in this Post.

Last Word: Why Trump Won

I’m just noticing: There are no longer comments on Chicago Tribune posts. They’ve been erased. Perhaps there’s a new system. I can see why. They were overrun with “Trolls.” And frustrated Trump-leaning commenters. But also, some had rational reasons for lobbing complaints. 90% of them were ripping the Trib on every article or editorial about policing or city violence. Some were racist. A vast majority were simply angry at the Tribune’s coverage and felt police were getting a raw deal. I consistently agreed that policing wasn’t getting a fair shake, and context was being lost to the prevailing sentiment. It was an approach used by politicians, editors, and writers alike that likely caused a huge blowback to bedrock institutions. Faith in media is a feeling in 14% for Republicans, down from 32% in 2015, according to a Sept. 2016 Gallup poll. I wouldn’t be surprised if mainstream media’s avoidance of key facts like crime rates, and the validation of activist groups like Black Lives Matter (now a Pepsi commercial) and protesters like Colin Kaepernick, contributed to Donald Trump’s narrow electoral victory. I’m not the only one.

And it pisses me off.

NOTE BY DAVID SHUEY, AUTHOR: This was originally posted April 4, 2017. However, I consider this a “working paper” and consistently edit it with updates while keeping the core argument, structure, and conclusions the same. I’m open to other opportunities to collaborate and/or publish. Questions can be directed to me at or via comments below.

Another Note: I eschew AP style on numbers, mostly (i.e. 2, 5, and 7 rather than two, five, and seven). This is to sustain focus on the data in this numbers-driven analysis.