Originally Posted by Gibonius
Step back from these two cases for a second. There's a running theme in these arguments that people "should just comply with the police and you won't get your ass kicked." Why do we accept that premise, rather than question why the police have such broad authority to use force? They don't need that authority to do their jobs, there's no evidence that it actually makes anyone safer, and it occasionally gets escalated to much more serious violence and even death.
You know, looking at this report a little I am seeing other things. For one thing, the author's definition of "force" appears to include frisks (I can't say for sure as the document isn't searchable, but in the text I am reading the author hides the ball about what "force" means. That's BS. Then, you keep saying that only 6% of stops lead to arrests, but it says that another 6% led to a summons (i.e., a ticket like the editorial you posted says should be issued in more misdemeanor cases).
It also says that the rate of arrest/summons resulting from the stops is approximately equal for black, white, and hispanic.
Then it says that the rate
of recovering guns
from blacks who are stopped is about two and a half times what it is for whites. The overall rate of recovery (including contraband and lesser weapons) is only a little higher for whites (about 0.5%).
The report also repeatedly compares the results of frisks
to the total number of stops,
instead of the number of frisks, which is inexplicable unless it's intended to produce numbers the author wants.