While this story has already been reported on last month, we have yet to see any meaningful coverage of it….until now. The Daily Caller is finally throwing their hat into the ring. Black Lives Matter protests on the use of force by police have been taking place for some time now.
At long last, we have access to a “rigorous academic” study that provides us with more information about the effects of these protests. The results have yet to be peer-reviewed, so it is important to take them with a healthy grain of salt. According to the preliminary research, these protests seem to be doing more harm than good, though.
Vox has more when it comes to the effects of the protests on the neighborhoods where they take place and our worst suspicions are being confirmed. “From 2014 to 2019, Campbell tracked more than 1,600 BLM protests across the country, largely in bigger cities, with nearly 350,000 protesters. His main finding is a 15 to 20 percent reduction in lethal use of force by police officers — roughly 300 fewer police homicides — in census places that saw BLM protests.
Campbell’s research also indicates that these protests correlate with a 10 percent increase in murders in the areas that saw BLM protests. That means from 2014 to 2019, there were somewhere between 1,000 and 6,000 more homicides than would have been expected if places with protests were on the same trend as places that did not have protests. Campbell’s research does not include the effects of last summer’s historic wave of protests because researchers do not yet have all the relevant data…
Omar Wasow, a professor at Princeton University who has done seminal research on the effect of protests, told Vox that the results are “entirely plausible” and “not surprising,” considering existing protest research.”
This is a wide range of numbers to parse. There is a major difference between 1,000 and 6,000. Let’s say that we can split the difference at 3,000. If these protests are leading to 300 fewer police homicides but causing an additional 3,000 overall, who’s to say that they are a net positive for their communities?
The Vox piece is well worth a full read, as they take a closer look at the mechanisms that can explain these findings. While they take a moment to discuss the presence of body cams, this is not determined to be a leading cause of reducing police shootings. Some might wonder if civilians are simply reducing the number of shootings by calling the police less. Vox could not find anything to support those numbers.
Meanwhile, they took a closer look at the Ferguson Effect. The Ferguson Effect is easy enough to understand. If police witness significant protests, they are more likely to tone down the aggression when they are doing their jobs. Vox believes that there is research to support this idea.
“Deepak Premkumar, a research fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, found in recently released research that police do reduce their efforts following officer-involved fatalities: Theft arrests fall by 7 percent, and for “quality of life crimes” like disorderly conduct or marijuana possession, arrests decline by up to 23 percent (weed possession alone declines by up to 33 percent).”
Now, we are getting somewhere. Less police interaction leads to less police shootings but criminals may also become emboldened by the lack of police presence. Vox decides to try and wrap everything into a neat little bow, claiming that everything returns to normal within a four-year period. The families of the homicide victims do not feel that way, though.
It’s hard to say that these people aren’t going to be feeling the effects, despite what Vox might have to say. The mainstream media has a vested interest in pretending that protests are fine and they ignore the numbers. Even if over 90 percent of protests are peaceful, you can’t just sweep the remaining violence under the rug because it suits your narrative. The progressives who dominate the media landscape need to learn this.