The methodological choice made in some academic circles to “adjust” rates of police violence based on rates of violent crime is a clear and pernicious example of scientific racism. A methodology designed to artificially and arbitrarily erase the existence of racism in policing.
Why is this choice so problematic? Violent crime doesn’t sufficiently explain police violence. Only 1-3% of police calls for service and 5% of all arrests are for violent crime. Violent crime rates don’t determine whether a city will have a high rate of killings by police. 
Don’t take my word for it. Read the actual research literature. Here’s a recent study’s findings:
Here’s another study finding the same conclusion re: crime rates and police violence. bit.ly/1IaGmul
And here’s a third study. wapo.st/1Wjz513
Police and police-aligned academics tend to apply this methodology as an intentional strategy to justify high rates of police violence in general, and especially against Black people. It’s a racist methodology designed to give cover to officers who kill Black people.
There are many versions of this. For example, displaying rates of police use of force “per violent crime” or “per violent crime arrest” by race. The effect is to reverse or erase disparities. Here’s a comparison of the before/after applying this method: policingequity.org/images/pdfs-do…
Then there’s Heather MacDonald. She traffics in scientific racism perhaps more than anyone. Here’s info she provided to Congress citing a debunked study to claim police are not shooting as many Black people as “their rates of violent crime predict.” 🤔 docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU…
Now, there’s real debate about what benchmarks to use to evaluate police use of force. There are reasons to consider a range or options: population size, stops, etc. Methods suceptible to bias to differing degrees. Displaying use of force rates by violent crime is a huge tell.
