@edgarblythe,
My argument directly addresses the article you posted. If you didn't want it to be part of the discussion, you should not have provided the link.
No one has to say "all cops are bad" to promote the narrative I am suggesting is not only inaccurate but dangerous: That there are "many" racist white cops looking for the opportunity to beat up or kill black men. This is precisely what some of you or raging or insinuating.
There are people (some in this forum) that have been decrying a police state in America for years. And saying that "it is almost that bad" is as bad.
We should, as citizens be mindful of how the police are armed and how they act. They are the agents of government coercion, and they can easily be used to advance political agendas of any stripe, but there is a difference between keeping a watchful eye on them and exaggerating the frequency and motivations of isolated incidents.
As for some of the stats provided. Alone, they can be interpreted in different ways. That police violence is rising while violent crimes are decreasing, may not be enigmatic at all. It may be cause and effect. The Stop & Frisk procedure is a perfect example of the tension between security and liberty.
It is undeniable that the procedure was effective in reducing crime and the number of guns on the street, while rare, some of what essentially boiled down to confrontations may have escalated to a situation where police violence was required. Now that the procedure has been forbidden, crime and guns will increase. The people of NY, by voting as they did, apparently are OK with that equation. I wouldn't be but I don't live in NY. I doubt as many New Yorkers as voted for the new mayor will be OK with it either, but there were plenty of "experts" playing with stats and telling voters it never really worked anyway.
NY is on the down side of a cycle it's been through before. You'd think they would learn, but obviously they don't.