then why are you making false accusation on me that i am justifying police brutality.

My post simply said reputation is built from some truth.

Also,my point was cause an effect.

If you have a bad reputation,people will treat you baldly.

Do i now need to explain to you the science of cause & effect and action & consequence?

We've already acknowledged this as the basis for what started the events that eventually landed you in trouble.

cause and effect

You then acknowledged your fault in it. 

i didn't acknowledge anything,this was just my way of being polite to Vgchartz Mod Hammer.

what? -  i didn't understand

it can work the other way too

CAUSE — a certain group committing more crime hence creating a bad reputation

EFFECT — Police having a bias against people of a certain group because of their bad reputation,hence using brutal means to protect themselves and stop crime.

❌ BANNED (2 weeks): Continued racially discriminatory posts after multiple warnings (in-thread and formal). 

I have seen the suggestion in this thread that violent crime rates are not good predictors of police violence rates. Kriegman is using it as a predictor though. So this would be quite the challange to Kriegmans assumptions. And it is an interesting point. A point I do struggle with. Because I would say it is at least somewhat of a predictor: If you do not behave in a violent manner (even as a criminal, say stealing from your employees) there is not really a reason for police to meet you with violence. You are not a risk at that point. But if you commit crimes violently (say like a robbery) it would seem clear to me that police would engage you much more ready for violent defence/retaliation. You are a risk in this scenario. So it ought to be at least sonewhat of a predictor.

Now it could be a bad predictor, precisely because police has an anti-black bias that muddies the prediction powers of police violence due to violent crime rates. I really do not know. That is just something I ponder about.

But I have a question as well: does anybody know a reliable predictor for rates of police violence in certain groups? Perhaps there is no one predictor, but a complex mix of different predictors. It really is a complicated topic. So this would speak for such a theory.

It is possible (and even likely) that there are some weak effects of violent crime rates that are statistically buried by stronger effects, but if we are seeing such burying, it largely fails to explain the trends that we see. 

As for what explains the difference, I don't think it is as easy as something on a demographic level but instead something that is spurred on in large part by the relationship between police and their communities. I think that is part of what confounds studies which look at officers on an individual level (that is, seeing how they would respond to different situations). While racial bias certainly influences decision making to some degree, it is important to consider how race impacts the relationship between the police and their communities.