But this is a good example of the problem with statistics and the public. Fryer’s analysis was highly touted, but not a single person I talked to could explain it to me or say why his results differed from other analysis.
I think the link you provided argues implicitly that looking at shootings as percentage of police interactions is wrong because policing practices may be biased (ie black population may be more policed than other segments of the population).
What I am saying is that you find a similar black over representation in crimes that are less likely to be overpoliced (homicides which stats should be fairly reliable, ie every incident accounted irrespective of the race of the author, and which if anything would be less policed in poor neighbourhoods where gang violence is more common and less effort is made to identify the author).
I don't think anyone is arguing black overrepresentation in crime. Rather is arrests to shooting ratio a good measure of racial bias. As Fryer himself notes, shootings are very different than almost anything else police do -- its a life changing event. In his own research he notes that excessive force does show racial bias, but it's not viewed as a life changing event for the cop.
In fairness to Fryer (and yourself), we may not have the tools to determine this definitively either way today. And really my more important point is that as a society we should approach with caution statistical claims where we don't have a good understanding of the methods and the pros/cons of the methods. After becoming familiar with Fryer's methods in this study I'm probably leaning toward his conclusions being wrong -- but I wouldn't wager large sums of money on my leaning.
But this is a good example of the problem with statistics and the public. Fryer’s analysis was highly touted, but not a single person I talked to could explain it to me or say why his results differed from other analysis.