In regards to the black people being convicted of crime disproportionately question

I've seen a couple posts lately asking about this, and rightly so the immediate response is pointing out that this is convictions, not total actual crimes.

But in the spirit of conversation, I'd like to ask two questions regarding this response:

• Typically the person pointing out that the data is in regards to conviction, not actual crimes committed, would also say black people are disadvantaged in regards to income and wealth. So if that's true, then wouldn't this mean they're claiming income levels have no impact on likelihood of committing crimes? IE - If you're saying black people have less income and wealth (which is true), and that black people don't commit a disproportionate amount of crime, then don't you have to also be saying being economically disadvantaged has no impact on the likelihood of committing crimes?

• Is there a point where it's acceptable to make conclusions from imperfect or missing data? Yes, it's true that the data available is only for convictions; But I don't see a realistic way to get better data. Obviously we're not going to support a big brother camera system that tracks all human activities. So why would it not be acceptable to state "according to the best data that's available...."