Source?

fatherly.com/…/police-brutality-and-domestic-viol…

…temple.edu/…/do-40-of-police-families-experience…

Found these links 🤷

TLDR, during a 1983? survey of 728 officers and 479 police spouses, "Approximately, 40 percent said that in the last six months prior to the survey they had behaved violently towards their spouse or children."

The interesting part is that nobody reacts to this. Just hours ago they were screaming fake and then, nothin. No rebuttal, no evidence to the contrary. I‘m not saying it must be true then but I am upset by the harshness of the first reactions and none to the sources.

This isn’t a rebuttal, I don’t have one, but some nuance I hope is appreciated.

I looked at the studies a while back and read some discussions on the validity of them. I’ll summarize what I recall. many people were misrepresenting them quite a bit. The people quoting this number often aim to shed cops in a bad light and will do so intentionally.

If I recall, 40% is the domestic violence coming from either member in the household. Not just the police officer.

Another thing was what the offers reported as violence. if I recall correctly “violence” could be defined as raising your voice to behaving violently. So I suppose that leaves room for some interpretation. But when the numbers are brought up, the claim is generally “40% of cops are wife beaters”.

Lastly, these were studies from the 90s and the researcherd generally did their studies on a single urban police departments. So old data and not representative sample.

I don’t trust the number at all with the data we have. The actual rate could be higher or lower, we need better data.

My memory could also be way off.

I agree fully that the numbers can very well be off.

In science, you need to prove a theory multiple times for it to become valid. Indicators like this dont mean a lot. But they do not mean nothing either.

So saying „40% of cops are wife beaters“ is as wrong as „thats bullshit“. Neither side knows really but one has at least some data which we should check.

Well i disagree, “that’s bullshit” doesn’t just apply to something false but also to anything not proven.

Because saying a number implies it comes from a correct calculation based on valid data. So if your data is old, not statistically significant, or/and not relevant, it’s just a opinion, not information. It’s bullshitting…

So, saying we have 8 billion people in the world is bullshit because its not accurate?

It is assumed it’s a approximation based on the real number that we all know comes from a trustworthy source. The number is common knowledge, unlike a lot of other statistics.

The real number can be approximated to some extent, using good data and calculations. Any lack of accuracy after that expose our lack of knowledge, saying we have the exact number to one human would be bullshit for exemple.