I’m Not Making This Up, You Know

There’s now a “movement” to eliminate the use of black targets in law enforcement training because of claims that “young black men are 3X more likely to be shot by trained shooters than their white peers” and a “study by University of Illinois researchers that concluded shooters were more likely to fire at a black target.” (H/T, guns.com)

aw20170219Correlation is not the same thing as causation, so statistically, there are two questions that should examined concerning that “3X more likely” claim—if it is true. First, young black men are a small subset of the population, but, as a group, they appear to be more likely that average to be involved in crime. How much more likely? 3X? More? If more likely, one is led to wonder why they would be shot less frequently than their share of dangerous interactions with police (or armed victims) would suggest. Second, how much more likely than average are young black men to be shot at (including being missed) by untrained shooters? It could be that one reason young black men are only 3X more likely to be shot by trained shooters is that training reduces the probability of an unjustified shooting.

Both of those factors may come into play. Or neither.

22 thoughts on “I’m Not Making This Up, You Know

      • I think it would be amusing for them to use cardboard cutouts of Barak Obama, Valerie Jarrett, and Eric Holder. I mean if critics are gonna be upset anyways, why not give them something to really get upset about?

  1. The cucks who make these studies have no clue why they use black targets. If any of them had ever been on a range in their entire lives, they would know black backgrounds with white rings provide the highest level of contrast in order to be able to hone skills and see impacts at distance.

    Don’t believe me? set your monitor to black background with white text and see how the lines just pop.

    Hopefully liberalism makes the DSM VI

    • Also, they are cheaper to print than color poster. High contrast and cheap price is the same reason most documents are printed in black and white. Do these people even bother to think?

      I don’t see how that has to do with being cuckolded though.

  2. Except that other studies show police are MORE likely to shoot white suspects than black. The final difference in numbers is due, as you suspected, to the higher rate of involvement in criminality.

    It’s always ANYTHING except the behavior of the criminals, isn’t it? Too many police, too few police, police are too aggressive, police are too passive, and now the ludicrous excuse of using targets printed in black. Don’t want to get shot? Don’t get involved in crime. Stay in school. Work, even at a crap job — because you WILL do better. Don’t make kids without a wedding *AND* a job first.

  3. Jeepers. Most of my targets are NOT black. Blue, red, yellow, etc. I find black targets are more difficult to see because the front posts on my sights are BLACK and they blend in with the target.

    Should I start using black targets and paint my front post sights some other color?

    • Many modern handguns have moved away from black sights. Smith and Wesson uses orange on revolvers, Glock and others white. So the answer is yes, paint your sites a nice contrasty color.

  4. There are parents who train their children, when interacting with the police, to show their empty hands at all times and say, “Yes, sir!,” “No, sir!,” and, to work in the words “I don’t want any trouble with you,” into the conversation as often as possible, and, those that don’t.

Leave a Reply