Sadly, the trend of fatal police shootings in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 1,173 civilians having been shot, 248 of whom were Black, as of December 2024. In 2023, there were 1,164 fatal police shootings. Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 6.1 fatal shootings per million of the population per year between 2015 and 2024. Police brutality in the U.S. In recent years, particularly since the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, police brutality has become a hot button issue in the United States. The number of homicides committed by police in the United States is often compared to those in countries such as England, where the number is significantly lower. Black Lives Matter The Black Lives Matter Movement, formed in 2013, has been a vocal part of the movement against police brutality in the U.S. by organizing “die-ins”, marches, and demonstrations in response to the killings of black men and women by police. While Black Lives Matter has become a controversial movement within the U.S., it has brought more attention to the number and frequency of police shootings of civilians.

The rate of fatal police shootings in the United States shows large differences based on ethnicity. Among Black Americans, the rate of fatal police shootings between 2015 and December 2024 stood at 6.1 per million of the population per year, while for white Americans, the rate stood at 2.4 fatal police shootings per million of the population per year. Police brutality in the United States Police brutality is a major issue in the United States, but recently saw a spike in online awareness and protests following the murder of George Floyd, an African American who was killed by a Minneapolis police officer. Just a few months before, Breonna Taylor was fatally shot in her apartment when Louisville police officers forced entry into her apartment. Despite the repeated fatal police shootings across the country, police accountability has not been adequate according to many Americans. A majority of Black Americans thought that police officers were not held accountable for their misconduct, while less than half of White Americans thought the same. Political opinions Not only are there differences in opinion between ethnicities on police brutality, but there are also major differences between political parties. A majority of Democrats in the United States thought that police officers were not held accountable for their misconduct, while a majority of Republicans that they were held accountable. Despite opposing views on police accountability, both Democrats and Republicans agree that police should be required to be trained in nonviolent alternatives to deadly force.

A geographically-resolved, multi-level Bayesian model is used to analyze the data presented in the U.S. Police-Shooting Database (USPSD) in order to investigate the extent of racial bias in the shooting of American civilians by police officers in recent years. In contrast to previous work that relied on the FBI’s Supplemental Homicide Reports that were constructed from self-reported cases of police-involved homicide, this data set is less likely to be biased by police reporting practices. County-specific relative risk outcomes of being shot by police are estimated as a function of the interaction of: 1) whether suspects/civilians were armed or unarmed, and 2) the race/ethnicity of the suspects/civilians. The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49 times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime rates.

Field descriptions:

Note regarding income calculations:

All income fields are in inflation-adjusted 2013 dollars.

comp_income is simply tract-level median household income as a share of county-level median household income.

county_bucket provides where the tract's median household income falls in the distribution (by quintile) of all tracts in the county. (1 indicates a tract falls in the poorest 20% of tracts within the county.) Distribution is not weighted by population.

nat_bucket is the same but for all U.S. counties.

Number, percentage and rate (per 100,000 population) of homicide victims, by racialized identity group (total, by racialized identity group; racialized identity group; South Asian; Chinese; Black; Filipino; Arab; Latin American; Southeast Asian; West Asian; Korean; Japanese; other racialized identity group; multiple racialized identity; racialized identity, but racialized identity group is unknown; rest of the population; unknown racialized identity group), gender (all genders; male; female; gender unknown) and region (Canada; Atlantic region; Quebec; Ontario; Prairies region; British Columbia; territories), 2019 to 2024.

Officer Involved Shooting (OIS) Database and Statistical Analysis. Data is updated after there is an officer involved shooting.PIU#Incident # - the number associated with either the incident or used as reference to store the items in our evidence rooms Date of Occurrence Month - month the incident occurred (Note the year is labeled on the tab of the spreadsheet)Date of Occurrence Day - day of the month the incident occurred (Note the year is labeled on the tab of the spreadsheet)Time of Occurrence - time the incident occurredAddress of incident - the location the incident occurredDivision - the LMPD division in which the incident actually occurredBeat - the LMPD beat in which the incident actually occurredInvestigation Type - the type of investigation (shooting or death)Case Status - status of the case (open or closed)Suspect Name - the name of the suspect involved in the incidentSuspect Race - the race of the suspect involved in the incident (W-White, B-Black)Suspect Sex - the gender of the suspect involved in the incidentSuspect Age - the age of the suspect involved in the incidentSuspect Ethnicity - the ethnicity of the suspect involved in the incident (H-Hispanic, N-Not Hispanic)Suspect Weapon - the type of weapon the suspect used in the incidentOfficer Name - the name of the officer involved in the incidentOfficer Race - the race of the officer involved in the incident (W-White, B-Black, A-Asian)Officer Sex - the gender of the officer involved in the incidentOfficer Age - the age of the officer involved in the incidentOfficer Ethnicity - the ethnicity of the suspect involved in the incident (H-Hispanic, N-Not Hispanic)Officer Years of Service - the number of years the officer has been serving at the time of the incidentLethal Y/N - whether or not the incident involved a death (Y-Yes, N-No, continued-pending)Narrative - a description of what was determined from the investigationContact:Carol Boylecarol.boyle@louisvilleky.gov

This data set contains New York City Police Department provided domestic violence incident data for calendar years 2020, 2021 and 2022. In addition, ENDGBV obtained through Open Data the number of shooting incidents for calendar years 2020, 2021 and 2022. The data includes counts of the number of domestic violence incidents, shooting incidents and the number of expected domestic violence incidents and shooting incidents by: race (American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, and White) and sex (male, female) for New York City, each borough (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens and Staten Island). It also provides the count and rate of domestic violence and shooting incidents by police precinct. The expected number of domestic violence incidents and shooting incidents were calculated by taking the total number of actual domestic violence and shooting incidents for a given geography (New York City, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens and Staten Island) and proportioning them by demographic breakdown of the geographic area.

Following racially charged events, individuals often diverge in perceptions of what happened and how justice should be served. Examining data gathered shortly after the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri alongside reactions to a novel officer-involved shooting, we unpack the processes by which racial divisions emerge. Even in a controlled information environment, White Americans preferred information that supported claims of a justified shooting. Conversely, Black Americans preferred information that implied the officer behaved inappropriately. These differences stemmed from two distinct processes: we find some evidence for a form of race-based motivated reasoning and strong evidence for belief updating based on racially distinct priors. Differences in summary judgments were larger when individuals identified strongly with their racial group or when expectations about the typical behaviors of Black Americans and police diverged. The findings elucidate processes whereby individuals in different social groups come to accept differing narratives about contentious events.

In 1980, the National Institute of Justice awarded a grant to the Cornell University College of Human Ecology for the establishment of the Center for the Study of Race, Crime, and Social Policy in Oakland, California. This center mounted a long-term research project that sought to explain the wide variation in crime statistics by race and ethnicity. Using information from eight ethnic communities in Oakland, California, representing working- and middle-class Black, White, Chinese, and Hispanic groups, as well as additional data from Oakland's justice systems and local organizations, the center conducted empirical research to describe the criminalization process and to explore the relationship between race and crime. The differences in observed patterns and levels of crime were analyzed in terms of: (1) the abilities of local ethnic communities to contribute to, resist, neutralize, or otherwise affect the criminalization of its members, (2) the impacts of criminal justice policies on ethnic communities and their members, and (3) the cumulative impacts of criminal justice agency decisions on the processing of individuals in the system. Administrative records data were gathered from two sources, the Alameda County Criminal Oriented Records Production System (CORPUS) (Part 1) and the Oakland District Attorney Legal Information System (DALITE) (Part 2). In addition to collecting administrative data, the researchers also surveyed residents (Part 3), police officers (Part 4), and public defenders and district attorneys (Part 5). The eight study areas included a middle- and low-income pair of census tracts for each of the four racial/ethnic groups: white, Black, Hispanic, and Asian. Part 1, Criminal Oriented Records Production System (CORPUS) Data, contains information on offenders' most serious felony and misdemeanor arrests, dispositions, offense codes, bail arrangements, fines, jail terms, and pleas for both current and prior arrests in Alameda County. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, and marital status. Variables in Part 2, District Attorney Legal Information System (DALITE) Data, include current and prior charges, days from offense to charge, disposition, and arrest, plea agreement conditions, final results from both municipal court and superior court, sentence outcomes, date and outcome of arraignment, disposition, and sentence, number and type of enhancements, numbers of convictions, mistrials, acquittals, insanity pleas, and dismissals, and factors that determined the prison term. For Part 3, Oakland Community Crime Survey Data, researchers interviewed 1,930 Oakland residents from eight communities. Information was gathered from community residents on the quality of schools, shopping, and transportation in their neighborhoods, the neighborhood's racial composition, neighborhood problems, such as noise, abandoned buildings, and drugs, level of crime in the neighborhood, chances of being victimized, how respondents would describe certain types of criminals in terms of age, race, education, and work history, community involvement, crime prevention measures, the performance of the police, judges, and attorneys, victimization experiences, and fear of certain types of crimes. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, and family status. For Part 4, Oakland Police Department Survey Data, Oakland County police officers were asked about why they joined the police force, how they perceived their role, aspects of a good and a bad police officer, why they believed crime was down, and how they would describe certain beats in terms of drug availability, crime rates, socioeconomic status, number of juveniles, potential for violence, residential versus commercial, and degree of danger. Officers were also asked about problems particular neighborhoods were experiencing, strategies for reducing crime, difficulties in doing police work well, and work conditions. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, marital status, level of education, and years on the force. In Part 5, Public Defender/District Attorney Survey Data, public defenders and district attorneys were queried regarding which offenses were increasing most rapidly in Oakland, and they were asked to rank certain offenses in terms of seriousness. Respondents were also asked about the public's influence on criminal justice agencies and on the performance of certain criminal justice agencies. Respondents were presented with a list of crimes and asked how typical these offenses were and what factors influenced their decisions about such cases (e.g., intent, motive, evidence, behavior, prior history, injury or loss, substance abuse, emotional trauma). Other variables measured how often and under what circumstances the public defender and client and the public defender and the district attorney agreed on the case, defendant characteristics in terms of who should not be put on the stand, the effects of Proposition 8, public defender and district attorney plea guidelines, attorney discretion, and advantageous and disadvantageous characteristics of a defendant. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, marital status, religion, years of experience, and area of responsibility.

ABSTRACT This article aims to understand the dissemination and consolidation of an ideological sign of resistance, starting with the analysis of a verbal-visual utterance, a photo reportage published in the Portuguese newspaper Expresso. That reportage, through a series of photographs and a brief text, shows a demonstration in Lisbon, in June 2020, against the murder of George Floyd, by police officers, in the USA. The Dialogical Discourse Analysis, grounded in the work of Mikhail Bakhtin and the Circle, is the theoretical and methodological basis for this article, which mobilizes the notions of ideological sign and dialogic relations. Starting with one of the photos referred to in the title of the reportage, the analysis raised meanings produced in the various axiological dialogues among spatially and temporally distinct statements, using words, images, and gestures shared during the protest demonstrations. The dialogic chains of statements show how a discourse of resistance to racism and other social inequalities is constituted, and expressed in an ideological sign.