And how do you base this conclusion ? Have any data supporting the conclusion?
Was wondering that myself. As the statement seems wildly unlikely to be true.
Why are you questioning this conclusion? Have you any data supporting the contrary?
The statement in question: "The vast majority of law-enforcement officers are upstanding, if not outstanding."
Anecdotal "evidence" to the contrary isn't evidence at all. It's anecdote.
Even a large number of events to the contrary, even recorded on video, only supports the statement, if the number of events is but a tiny percentage of all events.
For example, let's say you managed to record 10,000 such events. Whoopee!
But let's examine that in the light of logical, reason, and rational analysis:
Given:
1. Let's temporarily assume you find evidence of 10,000 events of police brutality per year.
2. Briefings by the local police department report there are approximately 1,100 citizens in the U.S. for every police officer.
3. U.S. Census data reports there are 317 million citizens.
4. Do the math: 317,000,000/1,100 = 288,182 police officers.
5. Checking the math, the
Bureau of Labor and Statics claims there are 780,000, not 288,181. Thus, the actual ratio is 406 to 1, not 1,100 to 1.
6. The average citizen interacts with law enforcement once every three years. Thus, there are 106 million interactions per year.
7. Out of 106 million interactions per year, you're holding up evidence of 10,000 events of police brutality.
8. Do the math: 10,000 / 106,000,000 * 100 = 0.009434%, or 1 event of police brutality for every 10,600 interactions.
One in 10,600.
THAT'S how I base this conclusion.
To be fair, the actual number of cases of police brutality are far, far less than 10,000 per year. In fact,
here's a list of key cases for the last 60 years. It's a short list.
Even if you managed to find 10,000 cases each year, it would still come to just ONE case of brutality out of 10,600 interactions, lending tremendous credence to my statement, "The vast majority of law-enforcement officers are upstanding, if not outstanding."
The only way anyone could make any claim to the contrary is if they're incapable of doing basic math, or totally incapable of rational thought.