"Taken together, we argue that the results are most consistent with, but in no way proof of, tastebased discrimination among police officers who face convex costs of excessive use of force. Yet, the data does more to provide a more compelling case that there is no discrimination in officer-involved shootings than it does to illuminate the reasons behind racial differences in non-lethal uses of force."
I'm rather confused as to what the conclusion is here. Reading through the entire introduction of the paper, my impression is that it supports that there is not a statistically significant discrimination in the numbers of shootings of black people by officers; that in a similar situation, race does not increase the likelihood of a shooting. Am I reading this right?
I'm rather confused as to what the conclusion is here. Reading through the entire introduction of the paper, my impression is that it supports that there is not a statistically significant discrimination in the numbers of shootings of black people by officers; that in a similar situation, race does not increase the likelihood of a shooting. Am I reading this right?