# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Does Drug Use Affect Your High School Grades?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

# data[].attributes.body
usa.gov will have helpful stats that will help you on teens and drug use
Also, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) might have stats on this too.
Also see if schools have programs to prevent drug use and how effective they are
As a bigger picture, look into the "war on drugs" and see if this has been effective overall
Finally, look at the impact that drugs can have on the teenage brain and how preventing that could improve teen's lives

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that if the government helps to improve the drugs and alcohol in high schools the percentages of deaths will go down. While the government has many important things to improve I believe this topic is very big. The kids in schools today are using all different types of drugs which messes with their brains. Our generation will soon be the elders and their minds will be fried due to these drug conflicts. Another thing that is very worrisome topic is the amount of teens overdosing and getting into car accidents due to being intoxicated.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Highly publicized incidents of violence by police against African Americans are often linked to issues of racial profiling and police brutality. While preconceived biases may have played a role in many of these cases, such as the killings of Eric Garner and Philando Castile, each instance of officer-involved violence against a black citizen does not necessarily reflect racial biases. Attributing the same bias to all officers based on a few cases paints an unfair image of all police. Clearly, biases do exist within individual officers in this country; however, identifying the police as one block of people with the same mindset, biases, and behaviors is dangerous if one hopes to understand the racial aspect of police brutality.

All too often, a brutal police officer is presumed to be white and male, even though not all cases of police violence or brutality necessarily involve white policemen. Why does this bias exist, and does the data confirm or debunk this commonly held notion?

To effectively address these two questions, it is necessary to take an objective view of the issue, prioritizing empirical evidence over sweeping statements about police brutality. Specifically, by breaking down available data to investigate the tendencies of police by race and gender, we may be able to develop a more factual and actionable analysis of the role of racism in police brutality than currently exists.
Perception vs. Reality
One key area of analysis is citizens' sentiments regarding the origin of police brutality. In large American cities and metropolitan areas, women represent about 16.5 percent of all full-time police officers, while African Americans and Hispanics constitute 25.2 percent and 17.3 percent of full-time officers, respectively. Yet citizen complaints against officers in metropolitan police departments rarely mirror those . Based on data from the nonprofit Police Foundation's Public Safety Open Data Portal, in Cincinnati, only 8.6 percent of citizen complaints from 2010 to 2015 were against policewomen. Similarly, in Indianapolis, only 10.5 percent of complaints from 2012 to 2016 were against female officers. For these large, diverse cities, the statistical disparities are further reflected in the racial breakdown of officers who had complaints lodged against them. In Cincinnati, only 25 percent of officers who faced complaints were non-white, and in Indianapolis, that figure was approximately 20 percent. In both cities, over 70 percent of all complaints were lodged against white male police officers.

External information and politicization aside, these figures appear to validate the stereotype of white male officers being responsible for police brutality. Most often, this blame centers on deadly shootings of black males by white officers. Yet complaint data does not necessarily speak to officer culpability; some complaints may be the result of inherent bias or preconceived notions of police intent. Cincinnati municipal spanning the last 20 years indicates that for every white subject targeted by a white male police officer, 3.92 black subjects were targeted. Meanwhile, for every white subject targeted by a black male officer, four black subjects were targeted. Perhaps surprisingly, this data bespeaks a negligible difference in racial targeting between white and black male officers.

"It's very difficult to study all this," explained Justin Feldman, a doctoral candidate at the Harvard School of Public Health, in an interview with the HPR. "But there has been, for decades, research on the influence of officers' race and their likelihood of using force on a subject of their own race versus a subject of another race ... Basically, the finding is that black officers are no less likely to use force against black subjects than white officers."

Pinning down the reasons for this phenomenon is much more challenging. One potential interpretation lies in the fact that black officers are often more likely to be assigned to precincts with greater numbers of black residents. A Cincinnati Police Department officer, who wished to be identified only as Officer T, elaborated on this in an interview with the HPR. "I sometimes do undercover work, but my undercover experience in black precincts is limited. Black officers are much more likely to be undercover in black neighborhoods and environments because they don't stand out as much."

Another explanation may be that black police officers also carry implicit anti-black biases. and firsthand by black police officers attest to this possibility. Neil Franklin, an African American officer who served in the Baltimore Police Department and Maryland State Police, admitted his own previous prejudices during service in an interview with Vox. "When I'd see a young black male in a particular neighborhood, or his pants were sagging a little bit, or he walked a certain way," he said, "my first thoughts were, 'Oh, I wonder if he's selling drugs.'"

Whatever the reason for this phenomenon, efforts to eliminate any racial basis of police brutality by diversifying police departments may be misguided. "I know that in some cities, they're trying to get more black officers," said Officer T. "But that didn't work in Baltimore; 70 percent of their force is black officers. They still had the same riots, the same crime. People often think that having a different color of officer might solve the 'brutality' issue, but that isn't the case."
The Failings of a Single Story
Of course, nationwide data by itself does not tell the whole story. Other sources of information specific to the region and case, including municipal-level correlations between officer and subject race and eyewitness testimonies, are critical for assessing whether an individual shooting represents a case of police brutality. from the Indianapolis Police Department over the last two years, for example, suggests a stark difference in the targets in white and black officer-involved shootings. While black officers targeted white subjects about twice as often as black subjects, white officers targeted black subjects about twice as often as white subjects. The contrast between the Indianapolis statistics and those of Cincinnati, where black officers seem no less likely to use force against black subjects, may be tied to the unique circumstances of officers working in each police department. Thus, drawing one overarching conclusion from the data about the role of the officer's race in police-involved shootings may not be accurate. However, that message is the very essence of the data-driven method: instead of constraining ourselves to publicized anecdotes, nationwide blanket statistics, and a single conclusion about the entire police force, we should strive to objectively understand the intricacies and variations of the issue. One way to do so is by examining numerical data that specifically pertains to the region or type of case in question.

in these contexts may also help to explain the stereotype that male officers are more likely to be involved in instances of police brutality than female officers. Although women represent a visible portion of the police force, especially in large metropolitan police departments, most highly-publicized cases of police brutality have involved male officers. In Indianapolis, only two officer-involved shootings between 2014 and 2016 were connected to female officers. In Austin, over a 14-year period, that number was one. Yet, as before, other sources of data may tell different stories. In Cincinnati, for example, nearly 12.6 percent of officer-involved shootings included a female police officer, consistent with the proportion of female officers in its police force.

The lack of a single conclusive finding may be frustrating to those attempting to bolster their opinions with data, but it does reveal that the situation is more complex than most people imagine. One conclusion that we can reach is that different cities feature variations in police violence and the racial dynamics of that violence because of their differences in community-police department relations.

Officer T explained the differences he sees in his city, where the racial and gender gap in officer-involved violence is less prominent than in other regions."We're all trained the same, regardless of whether you're an Asian officer or a black officer, and in Cincinnati, we have good relations with the public ... Our city has gone out and explained why it does things and how it helps, and the citizens of our city embrace our police department because they understand why we're there."

Officer T contrasted this example of thriving community relations with what he sees as a more common national trend. "In general, citizens themselves say that they want police in their neighborhoods, like in New York in the 1980s due to cocaine-related deaths," Officer T said. "After about 10 years of people enjoying the police presence, they forget the original reason for the police presence and begin to view police in a bad light. I think residents often forget over time why police are even there."
The Power of Data
Looking back at the big questions surrounding the blame for police brutality-why it is so often attributed to white male officers and what data says about this stereotype-the consensus supported by years of that white and black police officers are equally likely to use force against black subjects suggests that the notion of individual police officers being racist against black subjects is not accurate throughout the nation. While individual officers' biases may play a large role in significantly higher rates of violence against black subjects in some places, the real source of anti-black bias in other places may be of a systemic or institutional origin. Therefore, the data may point toward a need for further research into the structure and historically rooted conventions of local legal systems and law enforcement agencies. Such efforts may shed light on sources or anti-black bias that are engrained in regional institutions.

To explain why the stereotype of white male officers being responsible for police brutality exists in the minds of the public, one must consider not only the facts and figures of the present but also their historical context and significance. "History exists," said Feldman, "and there's a very long history in the United States of either white police officers or white vigilantes committing explicitly racist acts of violence [against black people]."

Though it is infeasible to propose any single solution to this pervasive social issue, the objectivity, specificity, and transparency of data analysis make it better than hastily scanning for broad, surface-level statistics or relying solely upon emotionally charged anecdotes. Contrary to intuition, using data doesn't necessarily take away from the emotional core of the issue. Historical data about officer-involved lynchings and shootings of African Americans certainly reminds people of the cruel legacy of Jim Crow racism, and modern polling on the culpability of the police force can reveal the disparate sentiments of different groups of people. Data in both cases may have a strong impact on individuals who feel affected or threatened by these issues.

Feldman expounded on this intersection between the quantitative and emotional aspects of the police brutality issue: "Data can be emotional; I don't see the dichotomy. There is this idea among academics that social problems are technical problems and can be solved through technical solutions ... I don't think that that's how the world works, especially on this issue, when data is so politically charged and it does come to questions of politics and power and different groups of people who perceive the world in profoundly different ways."

Thorough data analysis-performed on a considerable amount of case- or region-specific data-reveals the folly of proposing ineffective one-size-fits-all panaceas, such as increasing the racial and gender diversity of all police departments. Instead, policymakers and social scientists should identify the root of the police brutality problem to suggest more pertinent solutions by analyzing data. For example, data can be used to reveal which police departments feature the most serious epidemics of police brutality in order to more effectively target critical cities. Data may also help reveal which levels of violence different demographics are most susceptible to, thereby improving contemporary understanding of the complexities of the issue. In addition, some solutions may involve improving the quality of the data available for future research. By noticing gaps, inconsistencies, or weaknesses in currently available data, scientists and policymakers-along with the public-can push police departments to release more specific or relevant information publicly. Doing so would increase transparency and improve society's grasp of the intricacies of police brutality, demonstrating data's ability to usher in mutual understanding and to make a significant social impact.
Image Source: Flickr/siwc

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police Brutality: A Statistical Perspective

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Highly publicized incidents of violence by police against African Americans are often linked to issues of racial profiling and police brutality. While preconceived biases may have played a role in many of these cases, such as the killings of Eric Garner and Philando Castile, each instance of officer-involved violence against a black citizen does not necessarily reflect racial biases.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A few days ago, former police officer Jason Stockley, who is white, was acquitted of first-degree murder; he had fatally shot Anthony Lamar Smith, who was black, in 2011. Protests started in St. Louis, where the shooting took place and Stockley was judged, immediately after the verdict was announced. Although they were initially peaceful, they soon turned violent, and dozens of protesters were arrested while several police officers were injured. Since the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, just outside St. Louis, in 2014, this has become a familiar pattern.

This article is not about whether Stockley should have been acquitted. Instead, I want to talk about the underlying narrative regarding the prevalence of police brutality against black men in the U.S., which is largely undisputed in the media.

According to this narrative, black men are constantly harassed by the police and routinely brutalized with impunity, even when they have done nothing wrong, and there is an "epidemic of police shootings of unarmed black men." Even high-profile black celebrities often claim to be afraid of the police because the same thing might happen to them. Police brutality, or at least the possibility that one might become a victim of such violence, is supposed to be part of the experience of a typical black man in the U.S. Events such as the death of Brown in Ferguson are presented as proof that black men are never safe from the police.

This narrative is false. In reality, a randomly selected black man is overwhelmingly unlikely to be victim of police violence - and though white men experience such violence even less often, the disparity is consistent with the racial gap in violent crime, suggesting that the role of racial bias is small. The media's acceptance of the false narrative poisons the relations between law enforcement and black communities throughout the country and results in violent protests that destroy property and sometimes even claim lives. Perhaps even more importantly, the narrative distracts from far more serious problems that black Americans face.

Let's start with the question of fatal violence. Last year, according to the Washington Post's tally, just 16 unarmed black men, out of a population of more than 20 million, were killed by the police. The year before, the number was 36. These figures are likely close to the number of black men struck by lightning in a given year, considering that happens to about 300 Americans annually and black men are 7 percent of the population. And they include cases where the shooting was justified, even if the person killed was unarmed.

Of course, police killings are not the result of a force of nature, and I'm not claiming these are morally equivalent. But the comparison illustrates that these killings are incredibly rare, and that it's completely misleading to talk about an "epidemic" of them. You don't hear people talk about an epidemic of lightning strikes and claim they are afraid to go outside because of it. Liberals often make the same comparison when they argue that it's completely irrational to fear that you might become a victim of terrorism.

One might retort that, while it may be rare for a black man to be killed by the police, black men are still constantly stopped and routinely brutalized by the police, even if they don't die from it. However, even this weaker claim is false. It just isn't true that black men are kicked, punched, etc., on a regular basis by the police.

In order to show that, I'm going to use data from the Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), which, as its name suggests, provides detailed information about contacts between the police and the public. It's conducted on a regular basis by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and is based on a nationally representative sample of more than 70,000 U.S. residents age 16 or older. Respondents are asked whether they had a contact with the police during the past 12 months; if they say they did, they answer a battery of questions about the nature of their last contact, including any use of force. Since the respondents also provide their age, race, gender, etc., we can use this survey to calculate the prevalence of police violence for various demographic groups. The numbers in this piece are from my own analysis of the data, the details and code for which I provide here, but they are consistent with a 2015 report compiled by the BJS itself to the extent the two overlap.

It's not true that black men are constantly stopped by the police for no reason.

First, despite what the narrative claims, it's not true that black men are constantly stopped by the police for no reason. Indeed, black men are less likely than white men to havecontact with the police in any given year, though this includes situations where the respondent called the cops himself: 17.5 percent versus 20.7 percent. Similarly, a black man has on average only 0.32 contacts with the police in any given year, compared with 0.35 contacts for a white man. It's true that black men are overrepresented among people who have many contacts with the police, but not by much. Only 1.5 percent of black men have more than three contacts with the police in any given year, whereas 1.2 percent of white men do.

If we look at how often the police use physical force against men of different races, we find that there is indeed a racial disparity, but that this experience is rare across the board. Only 0.6 percent of black men experience physical force by the police in any given year, while approximately 0.2 percent of white men do. To be fair, these are probably slight undercounts, because the survey does not allow us to identify people who did not experience physical force during their most recent contact but did experience such force during a previous contact in the same year.

Further, physical force as defined by the PPCS includes relatively mild forms of violence such as pushing and grabbing. Actual injuries by the police are so rare that one cannot estimate them very precisely even in a survey as big as the PPCS, but the available data suggest that only 0.08 percent of black men are injured by the police each year, approximately the same rate as for white men. A black man is about 44 times as likely to suffer a traffic-related injury, according to the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Moreover, keep in mind that these tallies of police violence include violence that is legally justified.

Now, it's true that there are significant differences in the rates at which men of different races experience police violence - 0.6 percent is triple 0.2 percent. However, although people often equate racial disparities with bias, this inference is fallacious, as can be seen through an analogy with gender: Men are vastly more likely to experience police violence than women are, but while bias may explain part of this disparity, nobody doubts that most of it has to do with the fact that men are on average far more violent than women. Similarly, if black men commit violent crimes at much higher rates than white men, that might have a lot to do with the disparity in the use of force by the police.

This is evident in the National Crime Victimization Survey, another survey of the public conducted by the BJS. Interviewers ask respondents if they have been the victim of a crime in the past 12 months; if they have, respondents provide information about the nature of the incidents, including the race and ethnicity of the offenders. This makes it possible to measure racial differences in crime rates without relying on data from the criminal-justice system, in which racial bias could lead to higher rates of arrest and conviction for black men even if they commit violence at the same rate.

Racial bias is unlikely to explain a very large part of the discrepancy.

NCVS data from 2015, the most recent year available, suggest that black men are three times as likely to commit violent crimes as white men. To the extent that cops are more likely to use force against people who commit violent crimes, which they surely are, this could easily explain the disparities we have observed in the rates at which the police use force. That's not to say that bias plays no role; I'm sure it does play one. But it's unlikely to explain a very large part of the discrepancy.

Some might say that, instead of consulting statistics like these, we should defer to black Americans' own perceptions of how the police treat them. As various polls have demonstrated, black people are much more likely than white people to think that police violence against minorities is very common. But the issue cannot be settled this way.

Since individuals have direct knowledge of what happened to them personally, you can trust them about that. But when it comes to larger social phenomena, people's beliefs are influenced by far more than just their personal experience, including the media. The far more compelling fact is that, if you draw a representative sample of the population and ask each black man in that sample whether a police officer has used physical force against him in the past year, you find that it's extremely rare.

On many issues, liberals have no problem recognizing this problem. For instance, there is a cottage industry of articles deploring the fact that, although crime has fallen spectacularly in the U.S. since the 1990s, most Americans believe it has increased. Liberals are absolutely right to point out this misperception, but if people of any color can be wrong about this, there is no reason to think black people can't be wrong about the prevalence of police violence against minorities.

READ MORE:
Police Aren't Targeting and Killing Black Men
Pro-Black, Pro-Police Reforms One Year Later
Justice Is Bigger than Narrative

- Philippe Lemoine is a Ph.D. candidate in philosophy at Cornell University. He can also be found on Twitter at @phl43 and you can read more from him on his blog.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police Violence against Black Men Is Rare

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A few days ago, former police officer Jason Stockley, who is white, was acquitted of first-degree murder; he had fatally shot Anthony Lamar Smith, who was black, in 2011. Protests started in St. Louis, where the shooting took place and Stockley was judged, immediately after the verdict was announced.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Tennessee sheriff ordered his deputies to shoot a fleeing driver rather than risk damage to his patrol cars and was later captured on video saying, "I love this s-t," according to a lawsuit filed by the suspect's widow.

White County Sheriff Oddie Shoupe and his deputies were trying to pull Michael Dial over on April 13, 2017, after he fled from Smithville cops who discovered that his license was suspended, Patch reported.

Dashcam video obtained by NewsChannel 5 shows police trying the so-called PIT maneuver, in which a pursuing car forces a fleeing vehicle to turn sideways to cause the driver to lose control and stop.

As they tried the move, a police dispatcher radioed that Shoupe authorized deadly force against the unarmed suspect.

"Per 59 [the sheriff], use deadly force if necessary. Take the subject out by any means necessary," the dispatcher said.

Despite the order, one deputy continued to try to ram Dial's car, which ran off the shoulder of Highway 111.

Reserve Deputy Adam West then fired his gun three times at Dial, and Sparta Police Officer Charlie Sims fired another four or five shots, according to Patch.

Dial was struck by at least one bullet from each officer and later died at a hospital.

Shoupe, who arrived on the scene moments later, was unwittingly recorded by another deputy's body camera.

"I told him, I said, 'Take him out.' Damn, I don't give a s-t. He said, 'We'll ram him,' I said, 'Don't ram him, shoot him.' F-k that s-t. Ain't gonna tear my cars up. But I got two cars tore up again," he is heard saying.

"If they don't think I'll give the damn order to kill that motherf-ker, they're full of s-t," he says, laughing.

"Take him out. I'm here on the damn wrong end of the county," he adds.

Later, Shoupe can be heard saying: "I love this s-t" and "God, I tell you what, I thrive on it."

Dial's widow, Robyn Dial, filed a federal lawsuit alleging the use of excessive force against her husband.

"It was not only inappropriate but also unconscionable for Defendant Shoupe to give the order to use deadly force," according to the filing, which calls the sheriff's decision proof of a "malicious and sadistic mindset."

The lawsuit also names the county, the city of Sparta and the two cops who fired their weapons.

"The comments as seen on the video are extremely disturbing. I'm not sure how anybody can thrive on the taking of a life, let alone somebody in law enforcement," Dial's attorney David Weissman told the UK's Guardian.

The sheriff's office declined to comment to the Guardian.

The lawsuit claims excessive force, deliberate indifference, failure to train and supervise. It seeks an undisclosed amount of damages.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sheriff after ordering deputies to shoot fleeing driver: 'I love this s-t'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Tennessee sheriff ordered his deputies to shoot a fleeing driver rather than risk damage to his patrol cars and was later captured on video saying, "I love this s-t," according to a lawsuit filed by the suspect's widow.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
He was insufficiently compliant, too imperfect, probably both.

There's no other reasonable explanation, because cops are good men doing impossible jobs, and good men doing impossible jobs need our support, must have our support.

That man, he made the cop fear him, had to, made the cop pull out his baton or pepper spray or stun gun or Glock. Why are we wasting time mourning wasted blood flowing from the body of a wasted life?

He's been arrested before, certainly. Maybe stole some cigarillos from the helpless owner of a corner store. And you know he smoked a little weed, if not that night on that dark street corner, last week or the week before. And we know what weed does to their systems.

Who told him to wear that hoodie? His pants sagging like a prisoner's? He had on a red sweater. The Crips? That blue cap. He should have known that would have triggered the cop's training on gangs and gang violence. And those tattoos, a thug's signature decoration, if ever there was one.

Who gave him that nice car? You know drug dealers drive cars like that, and drug dealers are a threat to us all, and cops, good men doing impossible jobs, are supposed to take the likes of them off the street. They need to be praised for doing so, not questioned about how they go about doing so.

Who told him to reach down so quickly when the cop told him to retrieve his ID slowly from his back pocket? Who told him to smoke that cigarette in his own car?

Why did he keep shouting, asking why he was being stopped and detained, long after that cop told him to shut his fat mouth? Any time my daddy told me to shut my fat mouth, I shut it, immediately, or he shut it for me. Maybe that's why he didn't know to do the same because, you know, they usually don't have daddies.

Why didn't he smile more, appreciate the cop's protection? That smile would have put that cop at ease. That smile could have saved his life, if only he was willing to paint it on his face for a few seconds. But, no, he wanted to be hard and disrespectful instead. I mean, really, he had no reason to fear that cop and should have known that the cop, like every cop, whether in Baton Rouge or Minnesota, had good reason to fear him.

You know, without cops, we'd all be in trouble. Why couldn't he see that?

Didn't his parents give him "The Talk," about how to reach a state of perfection in the presence of a man with a badge? Shame on his parents if he didn't. Shame on him if he didn't take good enough notes to be effective when staring down the barrel of a cop's gun if his parents did.

Maybe none of that applies to him. But he's still one of them, and they commit a disproportionate of crime. That's why he's suspect on the spot. That's not the cop's fault; that's their fault.

Blame them for his death, not the cop who pulled the trigger, if not out of anger or fear or self-preservation, but common sense. They are dangerous. Maybe he wasn't dangerous. But a cop has to get home safely to the wife he's trying to love and the kids he's trying to raise. You can't expect him to assume that that man in that instance was one of the few good ones in the bunch.

The cop? Clearly a good man. How do we know? Because he's a cop, an officer of the law, and where there's no law, chaos reigns. The badge, the uniform, the smile, they all tell us he's good. Because only good men willingly run toward the problem everyone else is fleeing.

The cop needs our support. You can see on the video how distraught he was for being forced to shoot that man. We must pray for him, console him, put ourselves in his shoes. The horror of having to live in the aftermath of taking an unarmed man's life.

The cop desperately needs our prayers. Can you imagine the pressure he's under, the guilt he's feeling, because he's the focus of angry protesters for the sin of simply doing his job?

And if that cop made a mistake, or if several cops keep making similar ones, well, we don't have the right to judge him, or them, too harshly, or use their missteps to judge the entire profession.

Because cops are good men doing impossible jobs, nothing is more important than shielding them from unfair criticism. Because treating them as though they are guilty until proven innocent would be wrong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
police brutality: why we always find excuses for cops who kill - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why we always find excuses for cops who kill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
He was insufficiently compliant, too imperfect, probably both. There's no other reasonable explanation, because cops are good men doing impossible jobs, and good men doing impossible jobs need our support, must have our support. That man, he made the cop fear him, had to, made the cop pull out his baton or pepper spray or stun gun or Glock.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's hard for me to write this, but we must be honest about our status in the fight against police brutality in America. We are losing. I have two primary metrics for that conclusion. First, 2017 is on pace to be the deadliest year ever measured for the number of people killed by police in our country. We can never claim to be winning the battle against police brutality if American police are killing more and more people. Period. Secondly, even the most egregious officers, in the most heinous cases of police violence, with the most overwhelming evidence, are still beating the charges against them.

I can get granular about it. I monitor nearly 50 different metrics regarding police brutality and injustice in America. All of them matter - from the introduction of new policies in local police departments, to the election of district attorneys who are willing to aggressively prosecute police. The battle to reduce police violence in America is a complicated one. But at the end of the day, if more people are being killed by police this year than any other year and the most rotten apples among America's police still aren't being held accountable, then we are losing.

(Facebook)

I am losing. This isn't me pointing the fingers at activists or organizations. I am right in the middle of this fight. I've marched. I've protested. I've organized. I've taught. I've petitioned. I've donated. I've lobbied. I've voted. I've campaigned. I've presented. I've written. I've tweeted. I've Facebooked. I've strategized. I've televised. I've radioed. For three straight years, I've thrown everything I've known to throw at the problem of police brutality in America, and by all measures, the problem is now worse than it was before I did any of those things.

We are losing. We are being outspent, out-organized, and out-maneuvered by an unjust system that is so deeply entrenched and so well fortified with the principles of white supremacy, racism and classism that in spite of all of our collective efforts, injustice marches on. It isn't skipping a beat.

PART 1: 2 Supreme Court rulings must change to end police brutality

Pregnant black women are being shot and killed by police in front of their children. Young black boys are being shot and killed by police. Charges are being filed here and there, but convictions simply aren't happening. Families and communities are repeatedly being told to stay calm and trust the system, but only a damn fool would trust this system. It is fundamentally and categorically unfair.

(AP)

I can't speak for the thousands and thousands of cases of police brutality in America, but the officer who repeatedly shot Walter Scott in the back should've been convicted. The officer who shot and killed Philando Castile should've been convicted. The officer who shot and killed Rekia Boyd should've been convicted. The officer who shot and killed Terence Crutcher should've been convicted. I could add at least 100 more names to that list just off the top of my head. Every single one of these officers was set free. Why would their fellow officers across the country think it would be any different for them? The odds of an officer being convicted for murder in a police shooting is approaching lottery ticket levels. It's that bad.

I did not say all of this to lament or wallow in self-pity - never that. I said all of that to say that we need a change of direction. I wouldn't even go so far as to say that anything we've done is wrong. We should protest. We should petition and march and vote. We should do all of those things, but they just aren't enough to make a systemic shift in the problem. Maybe if we weren't doing all of those things the problem would've spiraled even farther out of control - we'll never know - but what I do know if that families who deserve justice don't have it and the threat of police brutality is more problematic than ever.

On Thursday, I'm going to begin a new five-part series on the immediate pivots and changes I believe we must make moving forward. Last year, I wrote a series on the 25 policy shifts that would drastically reduce police violence in America. Those shifts are still as necessary as ever, but this short new series is less about policy and more about strategy. All I know is that I refuse to do the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
Send a Letter to the Editor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
KING: We're losing the battle against police brutality in America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's hard for me to write this, but we must be honest about our status in the fight against police brutality in America. We are losing. I have two primary metrics for that conclusion. First, 2017 is on pace to be the deadliest year ever measured for the number of people killed by police in our country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Because the government refuses to pass serious gun-control legislation, there is a good solution for forcing it to do so. The international community should boycott all travel to the United States until serious gun-control action is taken that will convince the world it is reasonably safe to travel here.

I have friends in Europe who refuse to travel to the United States due to gun violence. We need all international travelers to do the same. It is the only answer.
Jim Coyle, Falls Church
I woke up Monday morning to the news of mass killings in Las Vegas. With a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach, I tried to go about my business, with varied success.

I remember feeling this way on April 19, 1995; April 20, 1999 ; and Sept. 11, 2001. I worked then for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. One thing I learned during those years is that we can all have what Alexander calls a "terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day." This is why I refuse to own a gun.

As a former weapons-trained law enforcement officer, I have a healthy appreciation for guns. You can feel mighty powerful holding an M-16 assault weapon - especially after you just shot a round perfectly onto the target during annual training. But what happens if you take a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day and infuse it with a weapon and ammo stored in your home? Lots of terrible, horrible, no good, very bad things.

We can debate the Second Amendment together another time. Suffice it to say I've stood face to face with men like Stephen Paddock, and nothing is going to convince me that anyone needs to own dozens of guns.
Stacy Korbelak, Odenton
Legislators, have some empathy and put yourselves in the position of the survivors and the families of the dead. If you can't conjure any empathy over gun violence, then get out of public office, because so many of us who do vote are sick and tired of your procrastination, refusing to take definitive action to make our surroundings and social venues safe. Show loyalty to the safety and interests of the American people instead of bowing to the National Rifle Association.

Be creative in coming up with solutions. Instead of working on tax reform, which may hurt many of us, introduce legislation that places inordinately high taxes on ammunition and bans certain types of it.
Carole Jennings, Silver Spring
After reading the Oct. 3 editorial " The worst kind of American exceptionalism," I urge all Americans to study the reasonable and effective rules controlling gun ownership that Australia enacted under a right-wing prime minister, John Howard. There are extensive police checks, a written test and a waiting period before licenses are issued for a specific weapon. It works well.

As an American who spends a lot of time down under, I am heartbroken to see that it can be done and that thousands of American lives could be saved.
Nicholas Hammond, Washington
After Sunday's shooting in Las Vegas, I want to ask our lawmakers, when will my rights be considered? When will they address my rights to feel safe, to allow my children to go to large gatherings or even go to school, to pray in church, to ride Metro without fearing that some evil person who has purchased guns legally will start firing his or her weapons at me or my loved ones?

The people of this country are tired of hearing that the National Rifle Association is invincible. I'm tired of hearing "prayers for the people who were injured." Take action. Protect your constituents with stricter gun-control measures.
Martha Yates, Arlington
I am a gun rights advocate and firmly support the Second Amendment. I own handguns. I learned to shoot at an early age from my father, who was in law enforcement. I am an infantry combat veteran of the Korean War. I am absolutely opposed to civilians owning any form of assault weapons and multi-round magazines. The only reason for these weapons is to kill people, and they belong in law enforcement and the military.

My proposal: Let shooting ranges have these weapons and rent them to people to shoot on the premises.
Carroll Rueben, Montclair

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | The United States needs gun control

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Because the government refuses to pass serious gun-control legislation, there is a good solution for forcing it to do so. The international community should boycott all travel to the United States until serious gun-control action is taken that will convince the world it is reasonably safe to travel here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NRA-ILA | Washington: Additional Gun-Control Bill Fails Deadline, Others Still Moving

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yesterday was the deadline for all bills with a fiscal note to pass out of the Senate Ways & Means Committee and House Appropriations Committee. Substitute Senate Bill 5444, which would create a back-door registry and 10 day waiting period on commonly owned semi-automatic firearms, failed to receive a committee vote by the fiscal cutoff deadline and is likely defeated for the year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Mr. Ruger, a Brooklyn-born gun designer, took an inventor's interest in guns after his father gave him a rifle at age 12. A 1981 profile in The New York Times reported that he read everything he could about guns at the New York Public Library and "studied gun metallurgy, gun mechanisms, gun designs" and "came to regard the gun as a uniquely engineered tool."

He also liked to recount how he once revealed to guests at a Manhattan cocktail party what he did for a living.

"When you mention you're in the gun business, people look shocked," he said. "They infer that you have an utter disregard for human life, which is preposterous."

He said at the time, "There's so much hostility, so many people stimulated to violence. But to be talking about gun legislation as a cure for this is ridiculous."

His position appeared to evolve. A series of mass shootings captured headlines in the following years. Among them, an unemployed security guard named James Oliver Huberty used an Uzi semiautomatic rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and a 9-millimeter semiautomatic pistol during a 1984 rampage at a McDonald's in California that left 21 dead and 19 wounded. In 1991, an unemployment merchant seaman, George J. Hennard, shot 22 people dead at a cafeteria in Killeen, Tex., and injured another 20.

With momentum building for gun control, Mr. Ruger's move was partly tactical. He and his allies wanted "to take a responsible position to head off any further restrictions that might even have banned all semiautomatic firearms," Robert L. Wilson wrote in the book "Ruger and His Guns."

From the gun industry's point of view, Mr. Ruger's stance is a cautionary tale. If he aimed to forestall a ban on assault weapons, in the end, both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines were banned through a 1994 measure signed by President Bill Clinton. The ban expired in 2004.

"You give people who are truly anti-gun an inch, and they'll take a mile," Stephen L. Sanetti, a former Ruger executive, told The Hartford Courant in 2013. Mr. Sanetti, who now runs the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a lobby group, declined to comment through a spokesman.

In an email, Kevin B. Reid Sr., the vice president and general counsel of Sturm, Ruger, said, "As I am sure you can appreciate, Mr. Ruger died many years ago and folks who were around and worked with him directly are long gone."

"Indeed, none of the Ruger family has been involved in the day-to-day operation of the business for more than a decade," he added. (In 2006, the family made a large sale of its holdings back to the company.) "As such, there really isn't anyone who can speak to his comments or views."

Gunmakers are not proposing gun control anymore. After the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre led to the deaths of 20 first graders and six adults, Senator Pat Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican, was a co-sponsor of legislation that would have required universal background checks.

"I'm a big believer in the Second Amendment, I'm a gun owner and take my son shooting," he said in an interview. But at the same time, he said, "I think it's completely reasonable to make it more difficult for those who do not have a legitimate right to a firearm to obtain them."

The legislation, which was also sponsored by Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, failed.

"You know, the N.R.A. used to be very big supporters of mine, institutionally; they are not so much anymore," Mr. Toomey said. "I will say honestly, a vast majority of Pennsylvanians agree with my approach on background checks, so on balance, I don't think it hurt me politically."

The N.R.A., which did not return calls for comment, has lately been pushing to compel states that do not allow concealed carry permits to honor permits issued by other states. It is also trying to deregulate silencers.

John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group backed by Michael R. Bloomberg, said his group spent more money lobbying states than the federal government. Restrictions on bump stocks, the device that makes semiautomatic weapons more like machine guns, faltered in Washington after they were used in the Las Vegas massacre. But bans have been enacted in Massachusetts and New Jersey.

"The way to move Congress is to show where the people stand on this issue, and you do that most effectively through state ballots and state legislation," Mr. Feinblatt said, likening the approach to the way gay rights advocates methodically advanced marriage rights through state legislatures.

Many other western democracies have far tighter gun control laws. The rate of homicides with guns in the United States is 16 times higher than it is in Germany, 6.6 times higher than it is in Canada and more than 30 times higher than in Australia or Britain, according to data collected by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

Twenty-six people died in the Sutherland Springs shooting, including the pastor's 14-year-old daughter and a pregnant woman, while another 20 were injured by a gun bearing the Ruger name. If he were alive today, America's most outspoken gun maker would likely have had something to say.

Correction: February 11, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
sutherland springs  tex  shooting (2017)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Mr. Ruger, a Brooklyn-born gun designer, took an inventor's interest in guns after his father gave him a rifle at age 12. A 1981 profile in The New York Times reported that he read everything he could about guns at the New York Public Library and "studied gun metallurgy, gun mechanisms, gun designs" and "came to regard the gun as a uniquely engineered tool."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NRA-ILA | Washington: Gun Control Bills Fail to Meet Deadline

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Friday, February 2nd marked the deadline for bills to be voted out of committee in the house in which they originated. As previously reported, several anti-gun bills received committee votes prior to this deadline; however, many of the bills NRA-ILA has been actively opposing in Olympia failed to receive a vote before the cut-off and are likely defeated for the year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Statistics on U.S. states' levels and European countries' national levels of alcohol use, binge drinking, marijuana use, cocaine use, and illicit prescription drug use, as well as reported levels of availability of alcohol and marijuana, were obtained from surveys and studies by state and national agencies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Since 1975 the MTF survey has measured drug and alcohol use and related attitudes among adolescent students nationwide. A nationally representative sample of survey participants report their drug use behaviors across three time periods: lifetime, past year, and past month. The survey is funded by the NIDA, a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and conducted by the University of Michigan.

Results from the Survey are released each fall. To get the latest information, check the links below. Note: The findings and conclusions in these reports are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the NIH.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Monitoring the Future | National Institute on Drug Abuse

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Since 1975 the MTF survey has measured drug and alcohol use and related attitudes among adolescent students nationwide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your teenager might enter high school as a child, but they will graduate as a young adult. This four-year period is transformational - full of growth, hardships and self-discovery. It's also an experimental time - and for millions of teens, that means trying drugs and alcohol. Sadly, some teens doing drugs will suffer serious consequences as a result of substance use.

Why do teenagers use drugs? There are countless reasons. Many are reacting to peer pressure and believe turning to drugs and alcohol is how to become popular in high school. Some use drugs to self-medicate from painful feelings. Some teens even turn to study aid drugs like Adderall or Ritalin, because they believe these substances will boost their grades. High school is often the first time that kids encounter illicit substances - and the curiosity can be too much to resist.

Statistics of Drug Use in High School

Facts about teenage drug and alcohol abuse reveal that 86% of this age group know someone who smokes, drinks or does drugs during the school day.

In the U.S., teens abuse alcohol more than any illicit drug. Not surprisingly, it causes the most harm - teen alcohol abuse is responsible each year for nearly 200,000 ER visits and 4,300 deaths among kids under 21.

68% of 12th graders have tried alcohol

37.4% of 12th graders drank in the last month

23.5% of 10th graders drank in the last month

Among high schoolers, within the month they were surveyed:

35% drank some alcohol

21% binge drank (consuming an excessive amount)

22% rode in someone's car who'd been drinking

10% drove after drinking

In terms of illicit drugs, teens use marijuana the most. More high school seniors smoke pot than smoke cigarettes at this point, and as of 2015, high school seniors are about as likely to smoke weed as they are to drink.

According to experts, around 13% of people who start smoking pot as teenagers become dependent on it. Regular marijuana use can cause a drop in IQ of up to 8 points. Considering that nearly 3,300 teens try weed for the first time every day, it's an undeniable problem that's impacting high schoolers everywhere.

The stats show that marijuana use is rampant:

35.1% of 12th graders have smoked pot in the past year

21.3% of 12th graders have smoked pot in the last 30 days

16.6% of 10th graders have smoked pot in the last 30 days

6% of 12th graders say they use marijuana every day

81% of 12th graders say it would be easy to get marijuana

Only 32% of 12th graders feel that regular marijuana use is harmful

According to one study, 12th graders who smoke marijuana are 65% more likely to crash their car. Among 12th graders in the U.S., one out of eight drove after smoking marijuana at some point in the last two weeks - one in five rode with a driver who'd been smoking.

Other Drugs Used by High Schoolers

Nearly a quarter of American high schoolers use at least one type of illicit drug. According to a high school drug use survey from National Institute of Drug Abuse, the next most popular drugs in high schools - especially among 12th graders - are:

Approximately 2.5% of seniors are caught up in cocaine use. This may seem small, but it amounts to more than a million teens doing drugs that could kill them. High school deaths are reported each year for nearly every drug on that list. Don't assume that your kids aren't using, or that they're safe from these dangers. It's a mistake that far too many parents have made in the past.

Effects of Drug Use in High School

Consequences of addiction include brain abnormalities, slowed thinking and impaired learning and memory. It can also deplete the brain of certain chemicals like dopamine and serotonin, sending high schoolers into a prolonged depression and leaving them susceptible for more destructive behaviors.

Alcohol abuse in high school impacts the brain just as hard as other drugs. Memory problems and other life-long brain issues are common in high schoolers who drink excessively. And kids who start before age 15 are 6 times more likely to develop alcoholism later in life than individuals who wait until 21.

Substance abuse in high school can also cause stunted growth - in one study, high school boys addicted to weed were an average of 4.6 inches shorter when they reached age 20.

Substance Abuse in Schools

High schoolers can find drugs through a friend, through word-of-mouth and on the Internet. Most kids needn't look any further than their school - nearly 44% of high school students know a classmate who sells drugs. When asked which drugs are sold:

91% said marijuana

24% said prescription drugs

9% said cocaine

7% said ecstasy

Does Your Teenager Need Addiction Treatment?

If you notice any signs of addiction, now is the time to reach out to a professional. There is help for teenagers on drugs or alcohol, but the longer that substance abuse continues, the harder it will be for your child to recover over the long-term.

We know that it can be difficult to reach out for help - especially because our society often stigmatizes and shames people who are suffering from addiction. But your child's life is far more important than what your neighbors may think. Besides, real friends will offer love and understanding, not judgment.

Your professional of choice can help you determine the best course of action, and whether you should begin looking into substance abuse treatment options. Depending upon the severity of addiction, they might encourage inpatient or outpatient drug rehab. At that point, you'd need to look into insurance for rehab and any possible out-of-pocket costs of drug rehab treatment.

At TheRecoveryVillage.com, we can help you sort through those details - confidentially. You are not alone - call to speak with one of our addiction specialists today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Drug Use In High School: Facts & Statistics About Teens

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your teenager might enter high school as a child, but they will graduate as a young adult. This four-year period is transformational - full of growth, hardships and self-discovery. It's also an experimental time - and for millions of teens, that means trying drugs and alcohol.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teens in a just-released national study reported that nearly one in five of their classmates drink, use drugs and smoke during the school day, and more than a third said it is fairly easy to do so without getting caught.

More middle and high school students than ever know how to buy alcohol, marijuana or prescription drugs within a day and for the first time, private schools are no longer immune from drugs on campus.

The 17th annual back-to-school survey just released by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse focused this year on use at school -- and it's not good.

For the sixth consecutive year, 60 percent or more of teens in the survey reported that drugs are used, kept or sold at schools and 52 percent said there's a place on or near school grounds where students go during the day to use drugs, drink or smoke cigarettes.

In the survey by the center at Columbia University, 1,003 teens were surveyed. The results are national.

"Kids are feeling much more emboldened to use at school,'' said psychotherapist Elizabeth Jorgensen, who has a private practice treating teens in Ridgefield. "There is not the stigma among teenagers not to use drugs, even for high-achieving students. It used to be that kids understood that doing drugs would jeopardize their future, but that's no longer the case.''

The CASA report also shows, for the first time, a sharp rise in use at private schools.

In 2002, the survey found that 46 percent of students at public high schools said there was drug use at school compared to 24 percent in private high school.

But in 2012, 61 percent of public high school students said drugs were at school compared to 54 percent in private schools.

"It's not the schools' fault that kids are doing drugs, but that's where access is,'' Jorgensen said. "This is a culture problem. They think it's all right. Teenagers are concrete and decriminalizing marijuana makes them think it's legal."

Jorgensen has been in practice for 27 years, and said once it was the troubled teens with psychiatric problems who used drugs but now use is ubiquitous.

Research shows that more young people smoke marijuana than cigarettes these days, she said, and since June, when marijuana was decriminalized for medical use, she's had young clients come in shocked they'd been arrested.

"More teens don't feel any fear about trying drugs,'' she said.

Sandy Atanasoff, coordinator of pupil services for Danbury public schools, hadn't yet read the report, but said she would take it seriously.

"It does sound concerning to me," she said. "I'd like to think the security advocates would keep control of the scene at the high school. Are there things in place yes? Can we step up efforts? Yes."

She agreed that the Connecticut decriminalization for small amounts of marijuana has become problematic.

"Taking the risk is a little easier than it was in the past," she said.

She thinks a lot of the prescription drugs are coming from the home and wants more parents to attend the drug education programs the Housatonic Valley Coalition Against Drug Abuse offers.

If parents express strong opposition of drug or alcohol use, teens are less likely to use them, the study found.

The Newtown Parent Connection, which helps parents struggling with their teens, has more parents attending support groups, co-founder Dorrie Carolan said Thursday.

"We have four to five new people every week. These people are struggling with their kids. They don't know what to do," she said.

Schools need to educate staff about substance abuse, she said, and schools, parents, and police need to work together to combat drug and alcohol abuse.

Carolan also thinks schools and parents need to be tougher about setting boundaries and then following through on consequences as soon as teenagers get into substance abuse, instead of calling it a "rite of passage.''

"We're not just talking about something petty. We had a kid overdose yesterday but they revived him. We're talking about saving people's lives,'' she said.

For the first time, the study looked at social media, which found that 75 percent of teens said that seeing pictures on social network site of kids partying encourages other teens to want to party like that.

"It changes the norm,'' Jorgensen said. "The pictures show other teens that it's not such a big deal."

The high-risk kids or novelty-seeking teens who are pictured online, end up having a much stronger influence on their peer group, Jorgensen said.

Before social networking, kids had to be at the party to be part of the scene.

eileenf@newstimes.com; 203-731-3333.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More teens using drugs at school, study shows

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teens in a just-released national study reported that nearly one in five of their...