Listen to what they want to tell you, and ask what they think about lead as an environmental and racial justice issue. It's not your responsibility to correct statistical misapprehensions they might have about the incidence of black crime or police use of force unless you are asked, there are plenty of people doing that already. If they're interested and and question your dataset, you can reply that you went with the most scientifically conservative statistics you could find and it's still a huge problem.

> It's not your responsibility to correct statistical misapprehensions they might have about the incidence of black crime or police use of force unless you are asked, there are plenty of people doing that already.

Whose responsibility is it? If someone is debating an issue I would hope they are familiar with and understand the underlying statistics relevant to their claims. If they claim conclusion X based on statistics Y but omit (intentionally or out of ignorance) that conclusion P is also plausible based on statistics Q, it is the responsibility of anyone aware of statistics Q to inform those claiming conclusion X that X isn't the only plausible conclusion one can arrive at because statistics Q exists that suggests conclusion P.

Are you seriously suggesting that someone aware of a different dataset that supports a different conclusion only bring attention to that dataset if those claiming the original conclusion are interested? That's preposterous.

https://byrslf.co/the-null-hypothesis-loves-you-and-wants-yo...