FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by rjolley

Does anyone know why some of the police officers are against reform and/or accountability? I've seen some articles that seem to talk about why some are for it, but not much about why they aren't. Has anyone heard anything either from officers or online?

Based on a couple of conversations, they would say the characterizations that they don't want reform and/or accountability is unfair. The officers that I have talked to are worried that the reforms won't come with a reform in the public's expectations for how the police should deal with crime. According to them, the American public loves the idea of being tough on crime especially when it does not affect them.They do not like the realities of being tough on crime especially when it does affect them. This has become a bigger problem if you believe. as they do, that the public is moving closer to expecting the police to stop potential criminals before they commit the crime.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by cartman

He's retiring with the same number of wins as the Confederacy

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

The Detroit Lions have won more playoff games in the SuperBowl era than this guy has NASCAR wins.

You guys are on fire. Is it bad when you look at Hue Jackson's Browns record and pine "Maybe one day I can be that successful!"?

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by rjolley

Does anyone know why some of the police officers are against reform and/or accountability?

I can't say why they are against it, but I think there are multiple possible reasons; some good and some bad. On the bad side would obviously just not wanting to be punished for violating citizen rights, using excessive force, etc. The negative side would be that it's hard to get enough qualified police officers as it is even with them being paid fairly well not being trained as long as in some other countries, etc. Concerns on that end would be with being able to maintain a large enough force to handle the needs & expectations, or whatever oversight happens going to far to the point where police become more concerned about making the wrong judgement call and getting in trouble for that than they are about doing their jobs effectively, etc.

[Jukeman]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I can't say why they are against it, but I think there are multiple possible reasons; some good and some bad. On the bad side would obviously just not wanting to be punished for violating citizen rights, using excessive force, etc. The negative side would be that it's hard to get enough qualified police officers as it is even with them being paid fairly well not being trained as long as in some other countries, etc. Concerns on that end would be with being able to maintain a large enough force to handle the needs & expectations, or whatever oversight happens going to far to the point where police become more concerned about making the wrong judgement call and getting in trouble for that than they are about doing their jobs effectively, etc.

Imagine only needing just enough quality police over quantity.

People only care about the effects but never the cause. People say defunding police is radical but atleast in my city (and I’m sure it’s the same for other major cities) they have been defunding schools for over 10 years...The funds allocated for police vs everything else in the city is gross.

[Brian Swartz]

I think that's one of those issues where there's going to be a wide variety between various locations and departments. The nearest large city to me (Grand Rapids MI) spends less on the police than it does on the sewer system, and a little more than it spends on water. Fire dept. budget is over half the police expenditure, etc. I don't think that's horribly out of line, and given that overall crime rates are slightly better than the national average but violent crime is far worse, you could make an argument that police funding should be higher.

For a lot of cities I'm sure the opposite is the case. I think this is one reason why national reform is really difficult, because there are as many unique sets of circumstances and appropriate responses as there are police departments.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Based on a couple of conversations, they would say the characterizations that they don't want reform and/or accountability is unfair. The officers that I have talked to are worried that the reforms won't come with a reform in the public's expectations for how the police should deal with crime. According to them, the American public loves the idea of being tough on crime especially when it does not affect them.They do not like the realities of being tough on crime especially when it does affect them. This has become a bigger problem if you believe. as they do, that the public is moving closer to expecting the police to stop potential criminals before they commit the crime.

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

I can't say why they are against it, but I think there are multiple possible reasons; some good and some bad. On the bad side would obviously just not wanting to be punished for violating citizen rights, using excessive force, etc. The negative side would be that it's hard to get enough qualified police officers as it is even with them being paid fairly well not being trained as long as in some other countries, etc. Concerns on that end would be with being able to maintain a large enough force to handle the needs & expectations, or whatever oversight happens going to far to the point where police become more concerned about making the wrong judgement call and getting in trouble for that than they are about doing their jobs effectively, etc.

Both of you make good points. Officers are asked to do more than they should be. And that's where reform comes in. Take those responsibilities off their plate and bring in people who can properly handle them. Fund programs to try and address those issues. And better screening, pay, and training to all officers to help staff a competent police force.

NobodyHere: No one likes more paperwork. I know I don't. However, accountability from your clients/customers when a mistake is made is a common thing across all professions. In one where someone's life is in their hands, it is more important.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Wow, Mitt Romney was marching in the Black Lives Matter protest today!!

https://twitter.com/mboorstein/statu...108554753?s=21

Mitt Romney's company looted more than every looter over the past few weeks.

[Qwikshot]

I really liked the new Chappelle stand-up (if one could call it that) was absolutely bracing.

https://www.vulture.com/2020/06/dave...floyd-set.html

[GrantDawg]

An unarmed black man was shot by police last night in Atlanta in Wendy's parking lot. A fully expect Atlanta to be on fire tonight.

Update: Trigger Warning — Atlanta Police killed a man on University & Pryor Rd at Wendy's. Apparently, it was a traffic stop & he was DUI. He was shot 3 times in the back. SMH! #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/EUHgXUzBd1

— Mia the Multimedia Maven (@miaharden_) June 13, 2020

TRIGGER WARNING: police murder

Atlanta police just shot a Black man in a Wendy’s drive-thru. What is shown in the video is the aftermath. pic.twitter.com/wsTZXQVvjo

— بيسان (@hbs14n) June 13, 2020

[Lathum]

Molson would probably know better, but the above video seems to me a lot less cut and dry than the other ones. I suspect the cops won't even be charged, and even if they are they get off.

It is clear he resisted and they tried using other methods to subdue him. The man clearly grabbed one of the cops tasers and starts running. This is where someone like Molson would maybe know, but I would assume at that point he becomes a danger to the public and the cops have a right to act upon it.

I am not condoning them shooting him, just pointing out I think it may be seen as justified by the powers that be.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Molson would probably know better, but the above video seems to me a lot less cut and dry than the other ones. I suspect the cops won't even be charged, and even if they are they get off.

It is clear he resisted and they tried using other methods to subdue him. The man clearly grabbed one of the cops tasers and starts running. This is where someone like Molson would maybe know, but I would assume at that point he becomes a danger to the public and the cops have a right to act upon it.

I am not condoning them shooting him, just pointing out I think it may be seen as justified by the powers that be.

While I agree, it does not look like the protester community is going to agree. We will see, but the officers not getting charged is likely to be a tipping-point.

[JPhillips]

I don't know how the law will see this, but I think firing multiple shots in a neighborhood, when we know even trained shooters mostly miss, is incredibly reckless.

[Lathum]

So the town I live in is hard core republican and pretty racist. 94% white, 2.5% black. In the 1930s the KKK set up their Jersey Shore HQ here. It is obviously gone but the effect linger. Black people from surrounding areas purposely don't drive through here because they will be harassed. My cousin is a cop a few towns over and has confirmed this. It is a dirty little secret. People who live here like to talk about what a great community it is, etc...and it is if you are white and have a little money.

Local preacher, white guy, held a BLM rally here last night. He gave a speech and told a story thet he and his 6 year old daughter made a sign supporting BLM and put it in their yard. First night it was taken and thrown in the woods. They put it back up. Next night it was taken again and someone threw a severed deer head on their lawn and smeared blood on their bedroom window.

Fucking crazy. I hope the police catch the person or people.

[tarcone]

What is the definition of excessive force? The video said the cops were talking to him for 20 minutes. Why? What was going on that it led to him being shot?

Were the cops escalating and baiting? Were they just performing a DUI check? What led to the struggle? Were they wearing body cams?

So many questions on this one. But, again, another unarmed black mann is killed by white police. At this time, wouldnt you think they knew who he was and could just pick him up at a later time?

[ISiddiqui]

The guy in Atlanta should be in jail for DUI and resisting arrest. He should not be dead. Deadly force should only be an option to respond to imminent deadly force. Not when a guy is running away from you! I mean the cops had cars. They could have called for backup and chased him in their cars (the ones not running). Why in the world would you start firing because the drunk guy was in better shape than you?!

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

If accurate, seems to be a justifiable shoot ... resisting arrest, escaping and turning around and pointing the taser (or possibly something else).

Question is was there fault in how it got to the point where the cops were wrestling with the guy on the ground vs some other method of submission (e.g. tonfa/baton).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/13/us/at...dys/index.html

The incident began with a call to police at 10:33 p.m. Friday about a man sleeping in a parked vehicle in the restaurant's drive-thru lane, causing other customers to drive around it, the GBI said in a statement.

Police gave Brooks a field sobriety test, which he failed, the GBI said. He resisted arrest and struggled with officers, the GBI said.

GBI Director Vic Reynolds said Saturday that his department obtained surveillance video of the incident from Wendy's and reviewed video witnesses posted on social media.

Surveillance video shows Brooks struggling with one of the officers, then running away with what appears to be the officer's Taser, Reynolds said.
According to the video, Brooks ran the length of about five to seven parking spaces before turning around and pointing the Taser at the officer, Reynolds said.

"At that point, the Atlanta officer reaches down and retrieves his weapon from his holster, discharges it, strikes Mr. Brooks there on the parking lot and he goes down," Reynolds said.

Brooks was taken to a hospital, where he died, the statement said. One officer was treated for an injury and released, the GBI said.

[ISiddiqui]

How does pointing or even shooting a taser make shooting a gun ok? If you are only supposed to use deadly force to deal with imminent deadly force, you should never shoot a gun when the guy has a taser.

In other news, Atlanta's police chief has resigned.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

How does pointing or even shooting a taser make shooting a gun ok? If you are only supposed to use deadly force to deal with imminent deadly force, you should never shoot a gun when the guy has a taser.

In other news, Atlanta's police chief has resigned.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Just playing devils advocate, but if the cop gets tazed whats to stop the suspect from taking his gun while the cop is incapacitated and shooting him or someone else?

[ISiddiqui]

There is another cop right there (his partner). And by that logic you can shoot any one who uses any force. A punch? If it lands right the cop could get knocked out and take his gun - does that justify deadly force?

There is a reason the police chief resigned and Mayor Lance-Bottoms wants the officer fired.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

There is another cop right there (his partner). And by that logic you can shoot any one who uses any force. A punch? If it lands right the cop could get knocked out and take his gun - does that justify deadly force?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

The other cop is seemingly far away and may not get to his partner in time.

A punch would be close enough to be able to defend yourself or even run away. A taser can be shot from a distance and there isn't an effective way to stop it. There are tons of examples of cops shooting people who had weapons that weren't guns and they were considered justifiable killings.

Again, I am coming from a place of will the DA or whomever makes the decisions to press charges view this as justifiable. I am not myself justifying it.

We all know the current climate surrounding us, but the reality is some shootings are justifiable, I suspect this one will be seen as such.

[ISiddiqui]

I'm not saying that the DA won't justify it, I'm saying it's not morally justified and why use of force protocols need to be changed.

But who knows, the Atlanta Police Chief resigned today and the mayor wants the cop fired.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I'm not saying that the DA won't justify it, I'm saying it's not morally justified and why use of force protocols need to be changed.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I totally agree. They should have just let the guy run away.

[ISiddiqui]

On CNN they were interviewing a former LAPD officer and she said usually in those cases you'd set up a perimeter and send some cops to his house (I mean they have his car and all his info is in there). Or jump in their police car and cut him off.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Jas_lov]

The police chief resigning is a good first step. The officers involved need to be fired immediately and charged with murder. There needs to be a nationwide retraining of police not to automatically go to the worst possible outcome. No reason to shoot the guy. Let him run, call for backup, run after him, get in the car and follow him. There were many non fatal options.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Lathum

He Gone

You have been blocked

lolol

You wrote "You have been blocked" hahahahaa that got me!

[Edward64]

When police can use deadly force.

I will be surprised if the cops are charged. Good move by Police Chief. Assume she has a nice pension.

So in a situation like this, would the cops be okay to use tonfa/batons when struggling with the guy on the ground?

Police can use deadly force if they merely perceive a threat - Vox

Constitutionally, “police officers are allowed to shoot under two circumstances,” David Klinger, a University of Missouri St. Louis professor who studies use of force, said. The first circumstance is “to protect their life or the life of another innocent party” — what departments call the “defense-of-life” standard. The second circumstance is to prevent a suspect from escaping, but only if the officer has probable cause to think the suspect poses a dangerous threat to others.

The logic behind the second circumstance, Klinger said, comes from the Supreme Court’s decision in Tennessee v. Garner. That case involved a pair of police officers who shot a 15-year-old boy as he fled from a burglary. (He’d stolen $10 and a purse from a house.) The court ruled that cops couldn’t shoot every felon who tried to escape. But, as Klinger said, “they basically say that the job of a cop is to protect people from violence, and if you’ve got a violent person who’s fleeing, you can shoot them to stop their flight.”

The key to both the legal standards — defense of life and fleeing a violent felony — is that it doesn’t matter whether there is an actual threat when force is used. Instead, what matters is the officer’s “objectively reasonable” belief that there is a threat.

[Brian Swartz]

I can see a scenario where someone is known to be a violent offender and shooting being justified. Situation like this?

Nah, I'm with Issidiqui on this one for sure and it's not close.

[GrantDawg]

This shows the shot clearly. The suspect does point the gun at the cop. It is possible that he shot and missed. He then is totally facing the other direction from the officer when he is shot multiple times in the back. Flat out murder.

GBI released video that shows the moment Rayshard Brooks was shot and killed by an Atlanta Police officer at a Wendys on University Ave last night. Police say Brooks had taken an officer's taser and pointed it at the officer as he ran. pic.twitter.com/1G8fn03gFV

— Matt Johnson (@MattWSB) June 13, 2020

[Brian Swartz]

Another issue that I'm not sure has been brought up is the public perception of crime vis a vis the reality of it. Polls have consistently found that people think crime is getting worse (nationwide, not in their local area) even when it isn't. A lot of that is probably due to sensationalist media - driven in turn by viewer appetites in infotainment consumption.

I don't know how to properly educate more of the public - other than dealing long-term with the education system, a whole other can of worms - to have more of a realistic outlook on where we actually are in terms of crime being dramatically down across the board compared to what it was a generation ago. I also think police reform is problematic without that, because concerns about crime are a large driver of desires for more aggressive policing methods & tactics.

[GrantDawg]

Wendy's where the shooting occurred is on fire. It is rumoured that the employees called the police on the victim.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Wendy's where the shooting occurred is on fire. It is rumoured that the employees called the police on the victim.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

The dude was asleep in his car in the drive thru. What exactly should they have done?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Another issue that I'm not sure has been brought up is the public perception of crime vis a vis the reality of it. Polls have consistently found that people think crime is getting worse (nationwide, not in their local area) even when it isn't. A lot of that is probably due to sensationalist media - driven in turn by viewer appetites in infotainment consumption.

I don't know how to properly educate more of the public - other than dealing long-term with the education system, a whole other can of worms - to have more of a realistic outlook on where we actually are in terms of crime being dramatically down across the board compared to what it was a generation ago. I also think police reform is problematic without that, because concerns about crime are a large driver of desires for more aggressive policing methods & tactics.

I remember reading this in Freakanomics

Legalized abortion and crime effect - Wikipedia

The effect of legalized abortion on crime (also the Donohue–Levitt hypothesis) is a controversial hypothesis about the reduction in crime in the decades following the legalization of abortion. Proponents argue that the availability of abortion resulted in fewer births of children at the highest risk of committing crime. The earliest research suggesting such an effect was a 1966 study in Sweden. In 2001, Steven Levitt of the University of Chicago and John Donohue of Yale University argued, citing their research and earlier studies, that children who are unwanted or whose parents cannot support them are likelier to become criminals, and that there is an inverse correlation between the availability of abortion and subsequent crime. This idea was further popularized by its inclusion in the book Freakonomics, which Levitt co-wrote.

Critics have argued that Donohue and Levitt's methodologies are flawed and that no statistically significant relationship between abortion and later crime rates can be proven. Criticisms include the assumption in the Donohue-Levitt study that abortion rates increased substantially since 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade eliminated many restrictions in the United States; critics use census data to show that the changes in the overall abortion rate could not account for the decrease in crime claimed by the study's methodology (legal abortions had been permitted under limited circumstances in many states prior). Other critics state that the correlations between births and crime found by Donohue–Levitt do not adequately account for confounding factors such as reduced drug use, changes in demographics and population densities, or other contemporary cultural changes. However, these criticisms have been addressed by Donohue and Levitt in follow-up studies and were subsequently found to have little to no impact on the original hypothesis. Such criticisms may be politically motivated, as many of the critics themselves adhere to right-wing ideologies and thus may be opposed to legalized abortion.

[JPhillips]

It's not all (but mostly) about lead poisoning.

[Warhammer]

In the video, the suspect turns and discharges the taser at the cop, or it sure as heck looks like it. The cop is hit by something, then uses his weapon. How does this not go down as self defense? Especially since The suspect took the weapon from the cop?

This is not a cut and dry scenario. The fact that the suspect took a weapon and discharged it makes him dangerous. If he was just running away, force should not have been used, but the weapon was discharged towards the officer. Also in the story, the officer was treated for injuries. We’re these related to the taser? If so, was he not justified?

[kingfc22]

I haven’t watched the video and don’t plan on it.

But he was asleep at the wheel in a drive-thru lane and failed a sobriety test.

Was he impaired to the point where he was blacked out? If he was, he may not even have known he was fighting with a police officer.

This incident isn’t as cut and dry as the George Floyd murder.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Wendy's where the shooting occurred is on fire. It is rumoured that the employees called the police on the victim.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I'm sure BLM will catch the arsonists and bring them to justice.

[Edward64]

I'm glad some people are asking for more info/context before making a final judgement especially since we don't know what happened before the film starts.

[ISiddiqui]

The officer has been terminated and his partner placed on admin leave (the later I'm not sure the reason - it could be just during an investigation).

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Radii]

A man (possibly) drunk and asleep in a drive through should not end up dead. That it happens here to another yet another black man is another sign of the problem we face in America right now. If this was a white man he wouldn't be dead. That's just all there is to it. I think its murder, as do another of others here, and very clearly so. Others think maybe it was justified. But no matter what happened in that moment when this man's life was ended, I think that a quickly growing number of people are going to look at this and say that a drunk man asleep in a car is a situation that cannot end in death, and that if this man were white, it wouldn't have. And on top of multiple other high profile murders of black men and women by police in a terrifyingly short time frame, and in the face of literally hundreds of documented/filmed cases of police brutality against peaceful protesters, journalists and random people on the street not even participating in protests, we are quickly approaching a point where this either ends in significant change or catastrophic violence.

At this point, I think this is where we're supposed to be as a nation. Systemic racism and oppression are out in full force and in broad daylight, actively encouraged and supported by the president of the united states, to the point that even millions of white folks that aren't impacted by any of this oppression (and usually benefit from it) are outraged too because its simply impossible to ignore and it is so abhorrent.


Seriously, think back to election night 2016, if someone came back from today to election night 2016 and told you "the backdrop to the 2020 presidential election campaign season is going to be large scale protesting and rioting over issues of race and racial violence in America. In a couple cities, police stations have been abandoned, either burned down or turned into safe zones where police are unable to access them, in order to provide food and medical care to the protesters who are being tear gassed daily by the police. Instead of speaking out for unity, the president of the united states ordered the military to tear gas 100% peaceful protesters to clear a path so he can walk across the street to hold up a bible for a photo op at a church, while calling multiple times for the US Military to be mobilized, threatening deadly force against Americans in every city in the country"

How do you think you would have responded? I feel like this is exactly where we belong and exactly what we deserve, and a small part of me believes this might actually bring about some real change. I don't *want* the cops to keep killing black people, but since they can't seem to help themselves, maybe we can get enough people angry enough this time to actually make something real happen to improve things for upcoming generations.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

In the video, the suspect turns and discharges the taser at the cop, or it sure as heck looks like it. The cop is hit by something, then uses his weapon. How does this not go down as self defense? Especially since The suspect took the weapon from the cop?

This is not a cut and dry scenario. The fact that the suspect took a weapon and discharged it makes him dangerous. If he was just running away, force should not have been used, but the weapon was discharged towards the officer. Also in the story, the officer was treated for injuries. We’re these related to the taser? If so, was he not justified?

Because as officers often point out, a taser is not deadly force. Using lethal force versus non-lethal force is not justified. CNN had the former Chief of Police from Philadelphia on, and he said the same thing. They knew he was not carrying a gun, and he was not a lethal threat.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I'm sure BLM will catch the arsonists and bring them to justice.

Glad you're on top of the important part of this story

SI

[Jukeman]

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CBauBRX...=1y065x5k6yytr


Wow I was recently in a similar situation a few months ago. I was driving home and dosed off which caused me to swerved a bit. I was then pulled over by state troopers and was accused of being under the influence. Passed all of the test, but the cop still tried to get me to admit to smoking marijuana after I passed the alcohol test. Luckily his partner was there and had a look on his face like this was a bunch of BS.


But other than that this is so relatable because I often park in parking lots like these to try and take a quick nap when I used to uber/lyft.

[booradley]

"If he was white this never would have happened ..." blah blah blah. Police kill more whites than any other ethnicity. Making the blind supposition that this man was killed because he was black is unworthy of the debate at hand.

[ISiddiqui]

Now check the percentages and get back to us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[NobodyHere]

When you try to grab a cop's taser, bad things are going to happen, regardless of race.

[Jukeman]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

When you try to grab a cop's taser, bad things are going to happen, regardless of race.

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CBbECmL...d=6wcsw6qz5q7w

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by booradley

"If he was white this never would have happened ..." blah blah blah. Police kill more whites than any other ethnicity. Making the blind supposition that this man was killed because he was black is unworthy of the debate at hand.

You'd have the makings of a great point if there were remarkable examples of obvious, excessive police brutality against white people being recorded and replayed constantly over literally the entire course of your life.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

When you try to grab a cop's taser, bad things are going to happen, regardless of race.

[booradley]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Now check the percentages and get back to us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

FBI — Table 43

Well, according to the FBI, blacks are the runaway leader in two major forms of crime that would bring them into armed conflict with the police: Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter (52.2% of ALL such crimes committed) and Robbery (56.4% of ALL such crimes committed).

In cases where the perpetrator is under 18, the situation is worse - 54.3% and 74.1% respectively.

Considering that blacks constitute between 12-13% of the overall U.S. population, these numbers are extraordinarily bad.

It's what led Tulsa Police Department Maj. Travis Yates (Top Tulsa police officer: 'We're shooting African Americans about 24 percent less than we probably ought to be' | TheHill) to state: “we're shooting African-Americans about 24 percent less than we probably ought to be, based on the crimes being committed."

Don't want to write a book - you guys are smart and can get the gist.

[Jukeman]

Originally Posted by booradley

FBI — Table 43

Well, according to the FBI, blacks are the runaway leader in two major forms of crime that would bring them into armed conflict with the police: Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter (52.2% of ALL such crimes committed) and Robbery (56.4% of ALL such crimes committed).

In cases where the perpetrator is under 18, the situation is worse - 54.3% and 74.1% respectively.

Considering that blacks constitute between 12-13% of the overall U.S. population, these numbers are extraordinarily bad.

It's what led Tulsa Police Department Maj. Travis Yates (Top Tulsa police officer: 'We're shooting African Americans about 24 percent less than we probably ought to be' | TheHill) to state: “we're shooting African-Americans about 24 percent less than we probably ought to be, based on the crimes being committed."

Don't want to write a book - you guys are smart and can get the gist.

In other words, systematic racism.