>But it doesn't change the facts : No national database exists on police killings (AND whether officers are charged!) How about this - can we agree that there needs to be such a database? I'd like it if we agreed on something twice in one week hahaha
>
>Do you really think that every time a policeman kills a perpetrator that he should be charged?

No - but I think there should at least be a record of the shooting...and when the shoot was bad he should be charged. Sadly this is not what happens most of the time.

>I assume that sometime these perpetrators have their own guns and are shooting at people. But yes, I think that police shootings and their circumstances should be tracked.

Perhaps - but it's just an assumption, but no tracking so no clear answer. Obviously this is not the case all the time. And why else would the police NOT want to track this information? They don't want it tracked because they don't want us to know. Why do they not want us to know? Because they know who pissed everyone is going to get. Which is sort of what's happening these days - people see cops shooting unarmed man in the back & then planting a gun on him - or when the cops shoot over 100 rounds into a car of two unarmed guys - then NONE of the cops get charged. I see plenty of good reasons not to trust the police. I *think* most of them are good - but in this day and age, it's not safe to assume that.

>http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/02/1348891/-Fox-Distorting-the-Stats-on-Police-Killings-of-Black-People-Again
>
>LOL!!!! There are lies, damned lies and statistics. I have the same opinion of this web site as I do of the Huffington Post :)

Statistics are not completely useless though. Bill O'Reilly has been known for his Inaccuracy and skewed information forever (and he's not alone in this). This clown thinks racism is over and everyone on welfare is lazy.