Critical race theory is so flawed as to be unsupportable.

For hundreds of years, Jews, Italians, Irish, Asians, and Hispanics faced discrimination. Notice a number of those groups are decidedly white. Discrimination was not racist, but tribal. Some of the "tribes" that face discrimination had black skin, some were white with darker skin, some were white with freckles, some had Asian tones, some were Native American, and some where multi racial like most Hispanics. Others were lily white but happened to practice the "wrong religion".

Even more confusing is some were African Americans whose mothers were white and descended from slave owners like Obama. So are you suggesting that Obama benefited from generations of inequity through his white mother?

By isolating on "race" critical race theory ignores that "tribalism" is prevalent everywhere and natural and here is the real zinger... it is not based on race.

Now let's look at your 3.25 statistic as an example of the stupidity of critical race theory. You statistic is based on the number of African Americans compared to the number of whites dividing each by the number of deaths in police encounters and then comparing those two numbers.

If race were driving this behavior, then we should find roughly 3.25 more African American grandmothers getting killed by police... but we find that is not the case. Are African American grandmothers less "African American" than other "African Americans".

In fact, "African American" grandmothers are far less likely to be killed by police than young white men. Are police discriminating in favor of African American grandmothers over young white men or could there be something else that predicts police deaths? My guess is something else.

In the above example, it is pretty obvious that younger people are more likely to be involved in violent encounters with police than grandmothers. Is that because young people commit more violent crime or police ignore violent crime by grandmothers...

Likewise men are far more likely to die in encounters with police than women. Does this mean police are discriminating against men? Or do men commit more violent crimes that result in more violent encounters with police? In other words, if I use your logic, we have now concluded that police are racially biased towards young white men and favor African American women... does that sound right to you? Me either... yet you are using that logic to make your point...

So here is what we know...

Young men are more likely to commit violent crimes than any other demographic group

The most "common" age for African American men is 27 and the most common age for white men is 58. Now throwing around the 3.5 statistic without accounting for age differences... is racist... since it intends to draw racial comparisons for the sole purpose of promoting a racial narrative...

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/30/most-common-age-among-us-racial-ethnic-groups/

Now let's look at violent crime in America based on race. One would expect violent crime rates to more closely mirror police encounters than pure population statistics. In other words, look at who is committing the crimes and get the "grandmothers" out of the population statistics.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/table-43

When you look at the most violent crimes : Murder, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated assault, the rate of police deaths relative to violent crime rates begin to appear very proportional.

In other words, this is one of many examples of alleged "discrimination" based on race, that simply does not stand up on close examination. Nothing confirms this conclusion more than the recent poll that showed 80% of African Americans wanting more or the same level of police presence in their communities. If they though police racism was a problem, it is highly unlikely they would be demanding "more racism".

And this get to the fundamental problem of critical race theory... it attempts to paint things using "race" as the lens through which everything is viewed and than uses half baked statistics to make its argument. Bottom line nearly all statistics used to support Critical Race Theory collapse under close examination which is why so many African American scholars reject it. Like all "pop" theories, it is appealing to some, especially those who feel they have been wronged, but theories need to stand rigorous examination to be true... CRT does not pass this test.

Now if someone wants to argue modern day "identity groups" are by their nature "tribal" organizations and that some of the members of every "identity group" embrace "racist" views, I can believe that... I have met racists of every color. But that calls for a different set of responses, then the inherent assumption not supported with facts that white people or any other racial group are all inherently racist.