Dashcam images reveal where police are deployed

It depends how you read that sentence.

Race doesn't matter if "low-income neighborhoods with higher proportions of Black and Latino residents" is simply stating that all low income neighborhoods have higher proportions of Black and Latino residents. Although it's kind of relevant if all downstream bias in arrests etc, say, goes away when you control for income.

But I read it as "of all low income neighborhoods, ones with higher proportions of Black and Latino residents had more police vehicle images". In which case, the question is:

Why would similar-income neighborhoods (which you theorize should have similar crime levels regardless of race) be policed differently based on the race of the population?

Not in every case.

https://www.livescience.com/59329-drug-alcohol-addiction-wea...

> By age 22, lifetime rates of addiction to drugs or alcohol were 11 to 16 percent among women from affluent families, which is similar to the national norms; the rates were 19 to 27 percent among men from affluent families, twice the national norms, according to the study.

> But a more troubling trend emerged by age 26: Lifetime rates of addiction to drugs or alcohol were 19 to 24 percent among women from wealthier upbringings and 23 to 40 percent among men from those families. These rates were three times higher than the national average for women, and two times higher in men.

This does't match up with drug arrest rates.

I see a viscious cycle if being policed aggressively, producing further poverty, increasing crime, encouraging more aggressive policing.

The evidence I have seen is that more aggressive policing fundamentally fails at changing systemic poverty that is the root of the issue, and the funding that is funnelled into it would be better put into things like drug programmes to rehabilitate people, social programmes to help people keep in education/work, funding for safe and legal opportunities for kids, support for education and public facilities so people get opportunity to improve their situations generationally, etc...

Race is a factor becuase slavery and post-slavery racism have created a huge wealth gap, and redlining pushed black people into these areas. Yes, of course crime is more prevelant in these areas, but that doesn't mean race isn't a factor. It doesn't have to be police officers thinking "I'm going to be racist today" for it to unfairly hurt people based on race.

It's important to note that common sense itself is a bias. It's a bias towards what we already think. Don't mistake that as trying to say that for "we should avoid priors" - that's not possible. What would it take for you to soften (not move) your priors on the common sense that "police aren't co-creators in crime through the act of observation"?

Are you arguing that more police does help against crime, but does not raise the amount of crime discovered by the police?