So 1 in 1,000 adjusted 'per capita' means that 'group B' has a rate of 1,000 in 1,000,000 even though 'group B' committed only one crime it's crime carried roughly 167 times as much weight as each crime committed by 'group A'. I want to say that there was around 78,000 LEOs in Texas around the first of the year and 1.2 million LTCs. So each crime a LEO commits carries around 15 times the weight each crime an LTC commits.imkopaka wrote: ↑Sat Aug 18, 2018 12:29 pmI disagree. Every time I've seen these statistics, they are "per capita," meaning that the actual figures are proportionally expanded or reduced to reflect what they would be if the population samples were the same size. While these figures are not exact and can be thrown off by extremely small sample sizes, there are enough LTC's and LEO's to make an accurate per capita comparison.G.A. Heath wrote: ↑Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:40 amI suspect the main factor in the statistics for police committing more crimes than license holders is due to a number of factors. First is the fact that there are far fewer officers, so each time an officer is convicted of a crime it has far more weight from a statistical point of view. All other factors combined probably are not half as significant as this one reason alone. Consider a situation where 'group A' which has 1,000,000 members and 6 commit a crime. 'group B' has 1,000 members and 1 commits a crime. Group A has a rate of 6/1,000,000 or 0.0006% while group B has a rate of 1/1000 or 0.1%. Group B is roughly 167 times more likely to commit a crime than group A based on statistics but Group A committed 6 times as many crimes in actuality.
Edited to restore everything after first sentence which I accidentally deleted prior to originally posting my reply.