this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
611 points (98.0% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

5715 readers
956 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I found this article commenting on the paper you linked

Paper finding no racial bias in shootings by police criticized

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/07/21/paper-finding-no-racial-bias-shootings-police-criticized/87301632/

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Interesting though his main criticism of the paper is a bit ah...subjective (below). Seems more like he's manipulating data for an outcome tbh.

I had a look at the author and he seems to have based his career on race relations which makes me worried about his impartiality too.

'The CPE report acknowledges three problems with measuring police force: measuring "excessive" force against all force, measuring differences in police use of force, and measuring force incidents as unchanging rather than constantly changing. Goff said Fryer neither acknowledges these concepts nor deals with them as problems.'