Independent Reporting Shows Cops Are Still Killing People At An Alarming Rate
from the us-vs.-them-means-they-still-get-to-kill-us-with-impunity dept
Law enforcement agencies have no interest in tracking how often officers kill people. Despite all the talk about police reform, very few states require accurate reporting on deadly force deployments.
Even the DOJ doesn’t care. The federal face of law enforcement has been required to compile this data for over two decades. It has yet to provide an accurate account of US law enforcement deadly force use. Part of that isn’t the DOJ’s fault. It can’t mandate reporting due to the US Constitution, which limits how much direct intervention the federal government can engage in when dealing with state and local level issues.
The other factor in this perpetual under-reporting is due to the DOJ’s disinterest in obtaining accurate force deployment stats. Doing the job correctly would just turn local agencies with a predilection for killing against the DOJ, which means less cooperation when things the DOJ actually considers important (drug busts, forfeitures, etc.) are on the line.
This means that, for years, the private sector has been forced to do the government’s work for it. Multiple efforts have been mounted to accurately track killings by police officers, utilizing open-source data and public record requests to provide a fuller picture than the DOJ — with all of its billions in funding — has continually failed to provide.
What’s treated as “official” by government agencies is a massive misrepresentation of the actual facts. The private sector doesn’t need billions to accomplish what governments won’t. All it needs is people interested in reporting the truth.
And the uncomfortable truth is that law enforcement at all levels hasn’t been reformed, at least not noticeably. The tally for last year outpaces the years leading up to the supposed law enforcement reckoning that followed the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers. Here’s Trone Dowd, reporting for Vice News:
Mapping Police Violence’s 2022 tracking found that 1,176 people died during encounters with police last year, the highest number the organization has ever recorded. Samuel Sinyangwe, the creator of the project, said the number includes anyone who was killed by police, be it by shooting or other forms of force. According to Mapping Police Violence, police killed the equivalent of 3.2 people per day in 2022—and there were only 12 days in the whole year when a deadly police encounter was not reported.
Suppose you were an idiot. You might respond to this by saying something like, “Well, cops routinely deal with violent and dangerous people, so it’s no surprise they’ve killed [this year’s death total].”
Well, let’s talk about the “danger” and “violence” you (a rhetorical idiot) might present as a supposedly valid counterpoint. Here’s more data… again not collected, compiled, reported, collated, documented, or distributed by any actual government-powered clearinghouse.
More than a third of those killed by police encountered the authorities during a traffic stop, a mental health and welfare check, or a non-violent offense.
Cops turn routine stops into dangerous encounters by engaging in pretextual stops predicated on minor moving violations that soon escalate into full-blown, warrantless, ad hoc criminal investigations that convert “routine stops” into Ralph-Wiggum-on-the-bus without any assistance from those being pulled over.
When you create the danger, you can’t use that danger to excuse your actions. I mean, theoretically. In practicality, it happens all the time. So, if traffic stops turn deadly, it’s probably because officers are engaging in fishing expeditions, rather than getting to the alleged point of the stop.
The other cases are the unhealthy side effects of sending cops out to “help” people. That’s not their job and it’s certainly nothing they’re trained to do. Most training involves securing scenes and neutralizing threats. Mental health issues present cops with people behaving unpredictably. And their training mandates they treat unexpected behavior as a threat to their safety. Consequently, people in need of mental health assistance are often helped to death by officers whose mental health toolkit is composed of bad information and bullets.
The same thing can be said about welfare checks. Cops see welfare checks as an opportunity to happen upon other criminal activity. People in need of a welfare check seldom expect police to react with violence to a secondhand cry for help. Case in point: Ft. Worth police officer Aaron Dean, who was recently convicted of manslaughter for shooting a woman through the window of her house while performing a “welfare check” that involved him walking around in the dark outside of Atatiana Wilson’s home without announcing his presence and shooting her within one second of spotting her through her window.
It’s all broken. And all the efforts to reform police haven’t changed a thing. It’s still the way it’s always been. Cops can kill. With impunity.
According to the data, 98.1 percent of officers involved in the death of a citizen between 2013 and 2022 faced no charges. Less than 0.3 percent of officers were convicted.
There’s a lot that needs to be fixed. Unfortunately, after decades of neglect and rot, a lot of this seems irreparable. But if we could just stop cops from killing people they were asked to help, we might finally see a drastic reduction in annual “killed by cops” numbers. But if cops don’t even want to be honest about killings they assert are always justified, what hope do we have that reform efforts that ignore the root of the problem (entrenched law enforcement culture) will ever succeed?
Filed Under: deadly force, police, police killing, police violence
Comments on “Independent Reporting Shows Cops Are Still Killing People At An Alarming Rate”
Suppose you were an idiot
Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.
Ahem, her name was Atatiana Jefferson
'How many people do we need to kill to get them to respect us?!'
According to the data, 98.1 percent of officers involved in the death of a citizen between 2013 and 2022 faced no charges. Less than 0.3 percent of officers were convicted.
And they wonder where the ‘Defund the police’ and distrust of the legal system to protect the public from homicidal cops comes from…
Re:
Weren’t there ones arguing that if cops couldn’t murder anyone they wanted with zero consequences, then nobody would ever want to join the force?
Re: Re:
Come to think of it, davec hasn’t been spotted lately has he?
Re: Re: Re:
Are you implying he finally got to meet his heroes?
Re: Re: Re:2
I did once point out that based on davec’s chest-thumping defense of cops on account of the stressors they have on the job, he should not be allowed to profess his defense if the cops broke down his door and shot his wife on a mistaken warrant, because he admitted to owning a firearm.
Re: Re:
At least one of them, yes, and ooof talk about an own goal.
I wonder if there could be incentives to make cops less likely to kill people (other than body cameras that seem to magically turn off when shit hits the fan). Maybe attach part of their wages plus some bonus money to their performance? eg: they’d only get full bonuses with no deaths and start losing part of their wages after a determined number of casualties. Of course you’d need other precautions along with something like this to make at least less desirable to kill during duty such as replacing the ones in charge of violent PDs but maybe it’s an idea?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
I remember a few years ago when sites like techdirt here were of the belief that police wearing body cameras would reduce the incidence of shootings. Instead, the incidence has been maintained, and the occurrence of no body camera footage being available in the high profile cases has nearly evaporated. It turns out that in the vast majority of shooting incidents, the body camera footage validates the police decisions, and confirms that they are almost always righteous kills.
Re: Re:
Prove it.
Re: Re: Re:
Police activity is a good start. Look it up. Prove otherwise. Because the numbers are much clearer than the crap pile presented here. See below.
Re: Re: Re:
Btw, I don’t like the term righteous her. Justified, not righteous.
Re: Same as always, dont take responsibility
Cops need to be classified as professionals.
What does this entail?
2-3 years college program.
Full background and mental evaluation during first year.
Personal profession insurance.
Licenses that need to be renewed.
Renewal based on physical mental fitness and maintaining the basic body of knowledge.
With all that, respect would come naturally and the number of bubuhs with a gun would significantly diminish.
It happens during the mundane
I am white
I am reasonably wealthy
I have been assaulted to the point of injury during a welfare check while asleep.
Don’t tell me it doesnt occur.
Re:
It does, but not nearly as often to people like you as it does to the marginalized.
and what is even more alarming is that no one of authority in the vasrious police forces, the Unions or Government are attempting to do anything to stop it! what does that tell you?
Re:
At best? They value their own careers over the lives of those police murder and don’t want to risk being labeled as ‘anti-police’ and so look the other way as the body-count ticks up.
At worst? They support the murders and have no desire in doing anything to stop or even reduce them.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
“More than a third of those killed by police encountered the authorities during a traffic stop, a mental health and welfare check, or a non-violent offense.”
What happens when police stop a car that has occupants that have committed a crime? The occupants get violent.
You make it sound like the police randomly stop vehicles and walk up and shoot people.
Re:
Ah, so it’s the fault of the occupants that they get shot?
Well, sometimes they sort of do.
Re:
What happens when police stop a car that has occupants that have committed a crime? The occupants get violent.
Oh absolutely, I’m sure an overwhelming majority of criminals who would have faced a fine and/or some jail time would just jump on the chance to add ‘assaulting an officer'(something judges and prosecutors are notoriously indifferent about) to their charges, assuming they even survive to get to court after giving a cop an excuse to gun them down on the spot, and that’s why so many of them were killed in those interactions.
Re:
Stopping a car of criminal suspects is not a traffic stop.
Re:
Why would actual offenders do this? Why give themselves away as actual criminals? Why would actual criminals not keep their heads down and hope that they’re calm enough to pass the cops’ test of suspicion?
This isn’t the movies, fam. Not every interaction between cops and criminals turns into a shootout or chase sequence. I get that cops need this to be a dominant narrative to make it sound like their lives are constantly under threat, but that simply doesn’t pass muster based on reality.
Not initially, but they do have a very concerning track record of stopping vehicles, treating any reaction or behavior on the part of the driver or passengers as suspicious, and using that as justification to unload a full mag.
And there is an alarming number of things the cops count as a sign of suspicious activity.
Hidding the numbers
Author conveniently lumps in the single digit percentage of welfare/mental checks in with the overwhelming traffic and “nonviolent”.
Body cam and dash footage is available for the vast majority of cases these days.
You fail to mention that the vast majority of such violent traffic stops involve actual criminals who commit further crimes during the traffic stop. Such a driving away at high speed, pulling a gun or knifnin the cops, running away from the scene. Etc,
Don’t break the law.
The vast majority, that is, 99%,, of people who are not criminals and are of sound mind, don’t get killed during police encounters.
Pretend and fudge and politicise the numbers all you want. But the author here is ignorant of what they are reporting on, or intentionally disingenuous.
Re:
False. The issue is whether or not the person was believed to have committed a nonviolent offense before the police encountered the individual, not whether or not the encounter itself was nonviolent. Basically, was the underlying offense violent? If not, it was a case of a nonviolent offense.
The statistic was never implied to be solely about cases where the target was nonviolent during the interaction. That you misread it doesn’t make it misleading, certainly not deliberately so.
[citation needed]