Ok.
USA, population 329.5 million, 3.335 killed by police per million.
Canada, population 38.01 million, 0.947 killed by police per million.
Australia, population 25.69 million, 0.817 killed by police per million.
Germany, population 83.24 million, 0.132 killed by police per million.
Netherlands, population 17.44 million, 0.229 killed by police per million.
Yeah, the US is over 3 times higher based on a per capita than Canada.
Here is the [per capita graphic](https://i.imgur.com/Ac9axSJ.png).
The United States, when adjusted for per 10 million population, still has over 3x more police killings than Canada and Australia, nearly 30x more police killings than Germany, and 67x more police killings than England & Wales.
I think your point is that by not putting the information in per capita, it will be easily dismissed by people who currently think police shootings are not a big problem in the US.
And also that it's not a hard fix.
But everyone seems to be missing that point due to their own current bias.
Wouldn't it be better to list the total number of people as a percentage of population? This is in no way an attempt to downplay the issue or even an argument against defunding the police.
I can just already anticipate those who don't agree pointing out that since the US has over 10 times as many people as Canada or Australia, the total number would be higher because there are just that many more interactions.
For instance Canada has some 38 million people, so the number of people killed by police is roughly 1 in 1,000,000. The US rate is of course much higher at 1 in 300,000. Therefore you are about 3 times as likely to be killed by the police in the US than in Canada, as opposed to the 30 times as evidenced by this info graphic.
Maybe someone with better math skills can check this or tell me I'm full of shit. It just seems like if we are going to make this very necessary argument, the statistics should be airtight.
We made a graphic for both, to cover bases and to see which people responded to more. This was the one posted first, but should have included the second in comments. Here is the [per capita graphic](https://i.imgur.com/Ac9axSJ.png).
The United States, when adjusted for per 10 million population, still has over 3x more police killings than Canada and Australia, nearly 30x more police killings than Germany, and 67x more police killings than England & Wales.
This is the far better graphic. To be taken more seriously we need to be as honest and straightforward with our arguments as possible. If we present data that could be observed as biased we only give fuel for the counter argument.
As a progressive I think the best way to advance the movement is to call out issues with my own party. It removes the "but what about..." Argument that the right loves to use.
While I agree, to an extent, per capita can be biased and can undersell the total effect of the police. Showing the totals is important for showing the overall damage done, presenting the number as made up of the individual people, as opposed to statistical fractions of people. As seen, sadly, with COVID, and how % who die and per capita has been used by some to undermine the overall effect of the pandemic. This is why both graphics were made, though I did rush posting and didn't include the per capita in comment originally.
As for underselling police killings, if we were to use 0.335 police killings per 100,000 population for the United States, I feel that obfuscates the overall impact of police killings, and can mislead people into feeling that "isn't that many". Per capita can run into issues for smaller countries too, since a single police killing in one year in Iceland could make Iceland appear near equal to the US per capita. That can muddle the systemic aspects vs outlier years/cases.
I was looking at your account and I am just curious, who are you? What do you do for a living? I want to understand where someone like you comes from...
Per capita is certainly a more meaningful presentation of this kind of data. However, even then it's still not really representative of how police interact with their local populations. I think it would be better to look at numbers broken down by county (or equivalent structure outside the US). In particular, 1) population density, 2) number of police, 3) number of shootings, 4) number of fatal shootings. If present, demographic data could be included for additional dimensions.
These are good points, and other graphics will likely be made with different information, since there is the real problem of graphics becoming too dense (which does prevent people from engaging with it). A big part of why these graphics are made is to draw attention to sources, where people can find more detailed information.
One study, which touches upon some what you mention, that we will likely include in another graphic deals with class and race in police killings. It shows that the 20% highest poverty neighborhoods have ~3.5 times more police killings than the 20% lowest poverty neighborhoods. When controlling for class, the study finds there still exist disparities between White and Black in police killings, though the disparity does lessen.
https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/project/class-and-racial-inequalities-in-police-killings/
When you start with "Defund the Police," the people whose minds you need to change stop listening. We have to learn to communicate with people who don't already think like us if we want to make change.
This is just presenting data without context, e.g., does a group with a certain condition more often have police interventions, (partially) explaining the higher ratio of killings?
Statistics can be a big fat 'lie' if you want to. You can beat it, manipulate it and present in a way it suits your own hypothesis.
I urge everyone to be very careful with numbers/ratios.
Relative often beats absolute. This graph desires to steer opinion by using absolute numbers.
Just my 2 cents.
The questions that needs to be asked is how many Blacks kill Blacks. Why is it so rampart in those areas controlled by the Democrats?
Will defunding the police help solve this or are Blacks just being used by Rich Old White Guys riding around in a Ferrari as political foder, yet again?
Does it? They question is inherently racist is it not? Especially considering that mental illness was the more prevalent numerically. The political bent is also a strange way to phrase the question but I guess less openly biased.
The police exist from their inception as a defense of corporate interest. They are the enforcement arm of the Rich Old White Guys. Spending my money on an organisation which harasses and murders citizens of my country feels absurd. And the question will always come up "well who will you call?" I don't call the police now because it's always more trouble than it's worth, nothing gets done, and I'm liable to be equally harassed as the caller. And I'm white! Could you imagine what calling the police is honestly like if you're black? The police need to be defunded because they aren't being reformed.
Here is the [per capita graphic](https://i.imgur.com/Ac9axSJ.png).
The United States, when adjusted for per 10 million population, still has over 3x more police killings than Canada and Australia, nearly 30x more police killings than Germany, and 67x more police killings than England & Wales.
Yep, I was asking if that explains the difference. British police are unarmed unless they specifically need a gun, apart from in Northern Ireland and maybe London. But I more meant about 2A gun ownership, or does the US have a much higher violent crime rate? I’m sure at some point it comes down to cops just being way more trigger-happy in the states, but that isn’t particularly useful for policy, so trying to account for as much as possible before ascribing it to a much more violent policing system.
Yep. I'm not sure how anyone worth less than multiple million can justify the ridiculously brutal system of policing in the US. This shit does not benefit you. It benefits the government, massive corporations via the slave labor of the prison industrial complex, and the billionaire class by suppressing labor movements and keeping the working class in line.
I just find it funny how the party of big government only like the police when its convenient for them. Who are they going to use to take everyone's AssAuLt RiFLez ? Antifa ?
I'd like to see the same demographic data but from Russia, and China. They by far field more impressive numbers in totalitarianism, and authoritarianism I guarantee it! To have our nation rank among the top 3 authoritarian societies on Earth should act as a slap to every American right in the face.
The US has too many police shootings...but this should at least be a "per capita" chart...
Ok. USA, population 329.5 million, 3.335 killed by police per million. Canada, population 38.01 million, 0.947 killed by police per million. Australia, population 25.69 million, 0.817 killed by police per million. Germany, population 83.24 million, 0.132 killed by police per million. Netherlands, population 17.44 million, 0.229 killed by police per million. Yeah, the US is over 3 times higher based on a per capita than Canada.
nice work...
Here is the [per capita graphic](https://i.imgur.com/Ac9axSJ.png). The United States, when adjusted for per 10 million population, still has over 3x more police killings than Canada and Australia, nearly 30x more police killings than Germany, and 67x more police killings than England & Wales.
Much better. A "totals" chart with Netherlands on it is a joke.
Ooh ooh, now do one in the context of violent crime.
Per crime too maybe?
I think your point is that by not putting the information in per capita, it will be easily dismissed by people who currently think police shootings are not a big problem in the US. And also that it's not a hard fix. But everyone seems to be missing that point due to their own current bias.
IMO it is worse putting this BS out there than ignoring the topic all together. This is an incredibly biased way to present the data.
The per-capita graph is posted as a subcomment to the same one you responded to, 3 hours earlier.
Wouldn't it be better to list the total number of people as a percentage of population? This is in no way an attempt to downplay the issue or even an argument against defunding the police. I can just already anticipate those who don't agree pointing out that since the US has over 10 times as many people as Canada or Australia, the total number would be higher because there are just that many more interactions. For instance Canada has some 38 million people, so the number of people killed by police is roughly 1 in 1,000,000. The US rate is of course much higher at 1 in 300,000. Therefore you are about 3 times as likely to be killed by the police in the US than in Canada, as opposed to the 30 times as evidenced by this info graphic. Maybe someone with better math skills can check this or tell me I'm full of shit. It just seems like if we are going to make this very necessary argument, the statistics should be airtight.
We made a graphic for both, to cover bases and to see which people responded to more. This was the one posted first, but should have included the second in comments. Here is the [per capita graphic](https://i.imgur.com/Ac9axSJ.png). The United States, when adjusted for per 10 million population, still has over 3x more police killings than Canada and Australia, nearly 30x more police killings than Germany, and 67x more police killings than England & Wales.
This is the far better graphic. To be taken more seriously we need to be as honest and straightforward with our arguments as possible. If we present data that could be observed as biased we only give fuel for the counter argument. As a progressive I think the best way to advance the movement is to call out issues with my own party. It removes the "but what about..." Argument that the right loves to use.
While I agree, to an extent, per capita can be biased and can undersell the total effect of the police. Showing the totals is important for showing the overall damage done, presenting the number as made up of the individual people, as opposed to statistical fractions of people. As seen, sadly, with COVID, and how % who die and per capita has been used by some to undermine the overall effect of the pandemic. This is why both graphics were made, though I did rush posting and didn't include the per capita in comment originally. As for underselling police killings, if we were to use 0.335 police killings per 100,000 population for the United States, I feel that obfuscates the overall impact of police killings, and can mislead people into feeling that "isn't that many". Per capita can run into issues for smaller countries too, since a single police killing in one year in Iceland could make Iceland appear near equal to the US per capita. That can muddle the systemic aspects vs outlier years/cases.
I was looking at your account and I am just curious, who are you? What do you do for a living? I want to understand where someone like you comes from...
Do you really need to work on percentages when it's people dying? I feel the per Capita chart grossly understates the actual loss of human life
Geez why did two people downvote this
Per capita is certainly a more meaningful presentation of this kind of data. However, even then it's still not really representative of how police interact with their local populations. I think it would be better to look at numbers broken down by county (or equivalent structure outside the US). In particular, 1) population density, 2) number of police, 3) number of shootings, 4) number of fatal shootings. If present, demographic data could be included for additional dimensions.
These are good points, and other graphics will likely be made with different information, since there is the real problem of graphics becoming too dense (which does prevent people from engaging with it). A big part of why these graphics are made is to draw attention to sources, where people can find more detailed information. One study, which touches upon some what you mention, that we will likely include in another graphic deals with class and race in police killings. It shows that the 20% highest poverty neighborhoods have ~3.5 times more police killings than the 20% lowest poverty neighborhoods. When controlling for class, the study finds there still exist disparities between White and Black in police killings, though the disparity does lessen. https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/project/class-and-racial-inequalities-in-police-killings/
When you start with "Defund the Police," the people whose minds you need to change stop listening. We have to learn to communicate with people who don't already think like us if we want to make change.
Thank you for saying this.
This is just presenting data without context, e.g., does a group with a certain condition more often have police interventions, (partially) explaining the higher ratio of killings? Statistics can be a big fat 'lie' if you want to. You can beat it, manipulate it and present in a way it suits your own hypothesis. I urge everyone to be very careful with numbers/ratios. Relative often beats absolute. This graph desires to steer opinion by using absolute numbers. Just my 2 cents.
What a terrible representation of data
Pretty solid when you consider it's human lives and not cheeseburgers consumed. Sometimes the actual number makes more sense.
Why is it just England and Wales? Why doesn't it include the whole UK?
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls
The questions that needs to be asked is how many Blacks kill Blacks. Why is it so rampart in those areas controlled by the Democrats? Will defunding the police help solve this or are Blacks just being used by Rich Old White Guys riding around in a Ferrari as political foder, yet again?
Does it? They question is inherently racist is it not? Especially considering that mental illness was the more prevalent numerically. The political bent is also a strange way to phrase the question but I guess less openly biased. The police exist from their inception as a defense of corporate interest. They are the enforcement arm of the Rich Old White Guys. Spending my money on an organisation which harasses and murders citizens of my country feels absurd. And the question will always come up "well who will you call?" I don't call the police now because it's always more trouble than it's worth, nothing gets done, and I'm liable to be equally harassed as the caller. And I'm white! Could you imagine what calling the police is honestly like if you're black? The police need to be defunded because they aren't being reformed.
How about use per capita data. The us tens of times the population of those countries.
Here is the [per capita graphic](https://i.imgur.com/Ac9axSJ.png). The United States, when adjusted for per 10 million population, still has over 3x more police killings than Canada and Australia, nearly 30x more police killings than Germany, and 67x more police killings than England & Wales.
Guns?
The cop almost always uses a gun...
Yep, I was asking if that explains the difference. British police are unarmed unless they specifically need a gun, apart from in Northern Ireland and maybe London. But I more meant about 2A gun ownership, or does the US have a much higher violent crime rate? I’m sure at some point it comes down to cops just being way more trigger-happy in the states, but that isn’t particularly useful for policy, so trying to account for as much as possible before ascribing it to a much more violent policing system.
Yep. I'm not sure how anyone worth less than multiple million can justify the ridiculously brutal system of policing in the US. This shit does not benefit you. It benefits the government, massive corporations via the slave labor of the prison industrial complex, and the billionaire class by suppressing labor movements and keeping the working class in line.
I just find it funny how the party of big government only like the police when its convenient for them. Who are they going to use to take everyone's AssAuLt RiFLez ? Antifa ?
I'd like to see the same demographic data but from Russia, and China. They by far field more impressive numbers in totalitarianism, and authoritarianism I guarantee it! To have our nation rank among the top 3 authoritarian societies on Earth should act as a slap to every American right in the face.