Recent comments in /f/dataisbeautiful

possiblynotthefbi t1_ja90vwj wrote

I feel like a better context would be how this data compares to the total number of police interactions by race. I feel like we can disregard the geography for a moment and just focus on the people involved with the police, since it doesn't really matter to the population that never interacts with them.

8

ComplexInflation6814 t1_ja8zi71 wrote

"In the absence of [Variable], the results would be the same across [Variable]."

Technically correct, but the statement is meaningless. The assumption that we can reliably design statistical controls for something as pervasive to society as racial differences is rather optimistic, to say the least

32

datacriminal t1_ja8zb9c wrote

One piece of context you're losing is that the us population is not an equal distribution across all cities and police involved shootings occur more often in larger communities. You'd need to check the population subsets for the demographics of those communities to figure out if there is significance.

12

sea_dev OP t1_ja8xpbl wrote

Schedule A is the form you use to figure out your itemized deductions, I worked through all of that and it was less than the standard deduction. The real limiting factor is that state and local taxes are capped at $10k. If I had made more charitable donations, I would have been able to have more deductions, but at the end of the day, that's still more money out of my pocket.

EDIT: Only medical expenses over 7.5% of your income is deductible and the interest I pay on my home isn't enough to eclipse the standard deduction.

2

HitchHux OP t1_ja8x2g3 wrote

Data source: The Washington Post Fatal Force Database.

Analysis and visualization: R

Comments: The aim of the plot is to show the differences in fatal police encounters across races, after adjusting for population size, and how the trend has evolved over time. The denominator is the race and year specific population. The differences in rates are explained by both differences in number of encounters, and how deadly those encounters are.

−4

tessthismess t1_ja8wq62 wrote

Yeah I'd agree. There's like 4 reasonable ways to sort this (female expectancy, male expectancy, difference, or alphabetical) and difference seems like the most obvious given the reason these were separated out. Even if it's a bit uglier.

7

JPAnalyst t1_ja8wng7 wrote

The Veil of Darkness study also shows that just by being black, someone is more likely to be pulled over by police. This suggests to me that a persons race alone, is a factor which influence how much contact one has with the law.

> The Stanford team decided to repeat the analysis using the much larger dataset that they had gathered. First, they narrowed the range of variables they had to analyze by choosing a specific time of day -- around 7 p.m. -- when the probable causes for a stop were more or less constant. Next, they took advantage of the fact that, in the months before and after daylight saving time each year, the sky gets a little darker or lighter, day by day. Because they had such a massive database, the researchers were able to find 113,000 traffic stops, from all of the locations in their database, that occurred on those days, before or after clocks sprang forward or fell back, when the sky was growing darker or lighter at around 7 p.m. local time.

>This dataset provided a statistically valid sample with two important variables -- the race of the driver being stopped, and the darkness of the sky at around 7 p.m. The analysis left no doubt that the darker it got, the less likely it became that a black driver would be stopped. The reverse was true when the sky was lighter.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/05/200507094621.htm

−1