Opel. When you compare two pieces of data, you have to have a reason. The temperature in Atlanta and the number of rows of bricks in the Washington monument are both valid pieces of data, but you only relate them to each other if there's a meaningful connection. That connection has to come from the theme of your argument.
The "cops are 18 times more likely to be killed by a black man than a black man shot by the cops" data point is implicitly suggesting a theme of "cops need to be worried about being shot by black men". However, the data being provided is incomplete. From that number all we can say is "cops get killed by black men more than they shoot black men, however we don't know if they get shot by black men more often than they get shot by white men or Asian men or by raccoons for that matter, cops may be safest around black men, but we weren't bothered to check because we stopped at a number that sounded scary"... They left out the rest of the narrative I included, because they didn't want you to follow their inner monologue.
You're right, it's a valid number (we'll, as I said earlier it doesn't actually pass a sniff test for 2014,but maybe she was using a compilation of other years which were worse) but the data is being used to make suggestions which it doesn't provide complete information for.
victor809 wrote:
