Thread by @JohnFPfaff

I know I should just let this go, but sometimes things #onhere get under your skin in a way you need to reply to.

Someone today, who should know better, accused me of unethically being in the “violence denying” camp.

It’s a tedious point, but just need to rebuke it here.

Here I am arguing that it’s hard to compare 2020 to 2019—in OPPOSITION to those who would downplay violence—because the at-risk denominators are different in 2020:

https://twitter.com/JohnFPfaff/status/1436179585423523846

Here I am explicitly pointing out that UCR assault rose, so progressives should stop saying “just murder rose”:

https://twitter.com/JohnFPfaff/status/1445027811119480833

My entire New Republic piece was built around the claim that we cannot deny the rise in homicides, but should point out it doesn’t undermine reforms: newrepublic.com/article/162634…

But NCVS data is data. It’s data from a different source than the police, at a time when data is a bitterly contested issue. We should always, in all fields, be skeptical of data gathered by those with a political stake in the numbers.

The NCVS for 2020 may be fatally flawed by how they tried to adjust for … 2020. Not saying it is, to be clear! But maybe.

But we just can’t dismiss it bc it doesn’t align w our priors, just like we shouldn’t rush headlong to embrace it if it does.

But we can’t ignore it.

And perhaps my concerns abt the reliability of shooting data will prove to be unfounded—I might even beg against myself here.

But the police have been REALLY BAD w how they’ve used data re bail reform. Some skepticism isn’t unwarranted.

Anyway, to point out that the NCVS reported declines in all non-lethal violence isn’t to “deny violence.” To immediately assume the NCVS MUST bc wrong bc we KNOW violence rose is to be anti-empirical.

Disagree w me all you want. It’s why I’m #onhere. But don’t call me unethical.

Finally, I would add: I opened the NCVS today fully expecting to see significant increases in violence and declines in reporting. I figured it was going to tell a worse story than the UCR. So I was quite surprised by what I saw. It did not at all confirm my priors.