Liberals Aghast!: '25 Most Dangerous Neighborhoods' ALL Happen To Be Black

[Mad_Cabbie]

One reason blacks are poor is because they are violent

disagree.

they are poor because they have become addicted to the BS that the Democrat party sells them

dependency and sloth and blaming "racism" for the social pathologies facing black communities rather than the poverty pimps and the crap people like Jesse Jackass sell them

Really? That'as it and nothing else?

 

[turtledude]

Allow me to clarify a few things for you:

1 Most problems in big cities are drug related.

2 Most people who live in poor neighborhoods are black.

3 White people who live in the bad parts of cities act just as badly.

4 Until the minimum wage becomes livable, people will opt for welfare.

5 Big cities love throwing their citizens in jail to 'prove' that they are tough on crime.


The problem with this thread is that it does not show why cities are violent or why blacks tend to live in cities. It suggest that blacks are intellectually inferior, but offers no proof or solutions.

not true-blacks commit far more murders or other violent crimes than similarly situated (economically) white people

meaning blacks making less than 25K a year commit more violent crime percentage wise than whites making less than 25K and blacks making over 100K commit more violent crime than whites making more than 100K a year

6% of the population (black males) commit more than HALF THE MURDERS. there is at least 6% of the US population that is POOR AND WHITE and they don't commit anywhere near as many murders as all the black males-rich poor or middle class-combined

 

[turtledude]

One reason blacks are poor is because they are violent

disagree.

they are poor because they have become addicted to the BS that the Democrat party sells them

dependency and sloth and blaming "racism" for the social pathologies facing black communities rather than the poverty pimps and the crap people like Jesse Jackass sell them

Really? That'as it and nothing else?

of course its not all-when dealing with several million people there are going to be lots of reasons

but that is a main one

before the Great Society BS that LBJ pushed to "wrap up the ****** vote" as he said, blacks had an illegitimacy rate that was less than 8%-not much different than whites

NOW its over 75%

 

[Rikurzhen]

The problem with this thread is that it does not show why cities are violent or why blacks tend to live in cities. It suggest that blacks are intellectually inferior, but offers no proof or solutions.

See post #70 to answer your question of "Why?"

Look at this chart and within you will find the refutation to the charge that poverty is the independent variable driving the dependent variable of poor educational outcome.

As for solutions to these problems, there aren't any. America has spent trillions of dollars over the last 3/4 of a century trying to make blacks into well behaved whites and it just DOESN'T WORK.

 

[Tank]

One reason blacks are poor is because they are violent

What came first? The chicken or the egg?

The low IQ

 

[JQPublic1]

So, what is your complaint?

My post was only to rebut JakeStarkey's feeling that poverty is the driver of crime; that poor people of both races commit crimes at equal rates. My stats show that the incident rates will never be comparable for poverty or any other factor; the disparity between the races is so wide that no amount of inventive comparisons can be forced into being. The numbers speak for themselves and his argument is just a defensive fantasy.

The statistics you provided shows the proportion of ARRESTS for various offense and does not account for exonerations and other unfounded arrests. Offenses “committed “are nowhere on your chart are they? Do you know the difference between “offenses committed “and “arrests?
You didn’t do a very good job of rebutting JakeStarkey. And, your purported knowledge of sociology is dismally fragile, to say the least. The numbers don’t speak for themselves. First of all the input necessary to arrive at those numbers weighs heavily on the outcome. No one here can really know just how accurate that input was to begin with. But, that isn’t the only concern. How those numbers are interpreted by lay people like you has a lot to do with the strategy behind them.
As expected, though, you join the chorus of angry white males who want to attach a genetic quality to
Black criminal activity while ignoring that of Caucasians or blowing it off as anomalous. But what do you say when it can be shown that the high crime rates in largely homogenous countries like Ukraine and Russia and Even the UK exceed that of the USA? There goes your genetic hypotheses.

 

[JQPublic1]

A hater like you ought to be glad Black criminals are eliminating themselves.

I don't want to see anyone criminally victimized but inventing alternate realities just so you don't have to recognize the hard truths isn't helping anything.

The only people seen inventing alternate realities are the low information right wing zealots who don’t understand statistics.

Your eagerness to label people speaks volumes about your character and intellectual integrity.

Thanks, I am glad we understand each other. You and your statistic fallacies are much better at labeling people than me.

It only demonstrates your bigotry and hate and inability to discuss this in a reasoned manner. Your hostility certainly doesn't frighten me and will not dissuade me from stating cold hard facts in the face of emotionalism, prejudice and histrionics.

Woooo! So you think I am trying to frighten you…on a message board? Pleassseeeee! Get outta here! :ROFLMAO:
BTW I’ve been one of the most reasonable people on these boards. I don’t have to use hostility or histrionics... The sword of truth is my weapon of choice!

 

[JQPublic1]

Good decent Blacks would certainly benefit the most if the criminals amongst them were rooted out by any means necessary. But, doesn't that hold true for White criminals too... from your perspective?

I don't care what race you are, do the crime do the time.

I wish the justice system was more like you. More often than not Blacks are treated more harshly than whites for the same crime.
I know you don’t believe that so here is one example:

Nearly 70 percent of the 242 people exonerated by DNA testing to date are people of color. These exonerations have spotlighted racial bias in the criminal justice system and the need for reforms that address these inequalities. The Innocence Project in Print recently sat down with Christina Swarns, Director of the Criminal Justice Project, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, who said "priority one must be decriminalization of the black community."

The Innocence Project - Racial Bias in the Justice System

Clarence M.Dunneville, a prominent Virginia attorney puts it succinctly:
“Unequal treatment of minorities characterizes every stage of the process. Black and Hispanic Americans, and other minority groups as well, are victimized by disproportionate targeting and unfair treatment by police and other frontline law enforcement officials; by racially skewed charging and plea bargaining deci- sions of prosecutors; by discriminatory sen- tencing practices; and by failure of judges, elected officials and other criminal justice pol- icy makers to redress the inequities that become more glaring every day.”

 

[JQPublic1]

;9608039]You are still 6 times more likely to be offed by a White thug than a Black one !

What orifice did you pull that stat from?
What are the conditions, qualifications and caveats for that lil' nugget?

You exemplify the meaning of “low information” RW zealot! That’s no aspersion, it’s just a fact. Here is the proof. READY?
Here we go:

Despite claims by right-wingers (both mainstream and overtly white supremacist) that violent crime by African-Americans is out of control — and that blacks are criminally victimizing whites at massive and disproportionate rates — the facts say otherwise. As I show in the below analysis:
* Only about 1 percent of African Americans — and no more than 2 percent of black males — will commit a violent crime in a given year;
* Even though there are more black-on-white interracial crimes than white-on-black interracial crimes, this fact is not evidence of anti-white racial targeting by black offenders. Rather, it is completely explained by two factors having nothing to do with anti-white bias: namely, the general differences in rates of criminal offending, and the rates at which whites and blacks encounter one another (and thus, have the opportunity to victimize one another). Once these two factors are “controlled for” in social science terms, the actual rates of black-on-white crime are lower than random chance would predict;
* No more than 0.7 percent (seven-tenths of one percent) of African Americans will commit a violent crime against a white person in a given year, and fewer than 0.3 (three-tenths of one percent) of whites will be victimized by a black person in a given year;
* Whites are 6 times as likely to be murdered by another white person as by a black person; and overall, the percentage of white Americans who will be murdered by a black offender in a given year is only 2/10,000ths of 1 percent (0.0002). This means that only 1 in every 500,000 white people will be murdered by a black person in a given year. Although the numbers of black-on-white homicides are higher than the reverse (447 to 218 in 2010), the 218 black victims of white murderers is actually a higher percentage of the black population interracially killed than the 447 white victims of black murderers as a percentage of the white population. In fact, any given black person is 2.75 times as likely to be murdered by a white person as any given white person is to be murdered by an African American.

http://www.timwise.org/2013/08/race...right-manipulates-white-fear-with-bogus-data/

 

[Rikurzhen]

;9608039]You are still 6 times more likely to be offed by a White thug than a Black one !

What orifice did you pull that stat from?
What are the conditions, qualifications and caveats for that lil' nugget?

You exemplify the meaning of “low information” RW zealot! That’s no aspersion, it’s just a fact. Here is the proof. READY?
Here we go:

Despite claims by right-wingers (both mainstream and overtly white supremacist) that violent crime by African-Americans is out of control — and that blacks are criminally victimizing whites at massive and disproportionate rates — the facts say otherwise. As I show in the below analysis:
* Only about 1 percent of African Americans — and no more than 2 percent of black males — will commit a violent crime in a given year;
* Even though there are more black-on-white interracial crimes than white-on-black interracial crimes, this fact is not evidence of anti-white racial targeting by black offenders. Rather, it is completely explained by two factors having nothing to do with anti-white bias: namely, the general differences in rates of criminal offending, and the rates at which whites and blacks encounter one another (and thus, have the opportunity to victimize one another). Once these two factors are “controlled for” in social science terms, the actual rates of black-on-white crime are lower than random chance would predict;
* No more than 0.7 percent (seven-tenths of one percent) of African Americans will commit a violent crime against a white person in a given year, and fewer than 0.3 (three-tenths of one percent) of whites will be victimized by a black person in a given year;
* Whites are 6 times as likely to be murdered by another white person as by a black person; and overall, the percentage of white Americans who will be murdered by a black offender in a given year is only 2/10,000ths of 1 percent (0.0002). This means that only 1 in every 500,000 white people will be murdered by a black person in a given year. Although the numbers of black-on-white homicides are higher than the reverse (447 to 218 in 2010), the 218 black victims of white murderers is actually a higher percentage of the black population interracially killed than the 447 white victims of black murderers as a percentage of the white population. In fact, any given black person is 2.75 times as likely to be murdered by a white person as any given white person is to be murdered by an African American.

Tim Wise » Race, Crime and Statistical Malpractice: How the Right Manipulates White Fear With Bogus Data

Tim Wise is a freaking joke. I wouldn't trust that guy if he told me he was a man. If you want people to read the evidence you present it would probably help to pick neutral and credible sources.

 

[Abatis]

The statistics you provided shows the proportion of ARRESTS for various offense and does not account for exonerations and other unfounded arrests. Offenses “committed “are nowhere on your chart are they?

Are you for real?

The only thing my stats show is victimization, the number of murders and the rates for the nation and the demographic I was discussing (male gun homicide victims aged 15-35 in the first post and homicide victims of both sexes and all ages in the second).

I'm taken aback that you are so profoundly incorrect about what you are reading (assuming you even read it).

Do you know the difference between “offenses committed “and “arrests?

Do you? Exactly how do you get to thinking that I cited anything about arrests?

The numbers don’t speak for themselves. First of all the input necessary to arrive at those numbers weighs heavily on the outcome. No one here can really know just how accurate that input was to begin with. But, that isn’t the only concern. How those numbers are interpreted by lay people like you has a lot to do with the strategy behind them.

The "input" is death certificates and police reports as recorded by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for their Mortality Index. Do you have a problem with the CDC?

Where did I do any "interpretation"? I restated some raw stats, doing the math assigning the White murder rate to Blacks and vice versa . . . only because that speaks so loudly to destroy JakeStarkey's point. All I've done is let the stats speak for themselves

As expected, though, you join the chorus of angry white males who want to attach a genetic quality to Black criminal activity while ignoring that of Caucasians or blowing it off as anomalous.

Where did I do all that?

But what do you say when it can be shown that the high crime rates in largely homogenous countries like Ukraine and Russia and Even the UK exceed that of the USA? There goes your genetic hypotheses.

I have not presented a genetic hypothesis. All I've done is present cold, hard stats and sat back and watched you misread everything I've posted and invent white supremacist castles in the sky to impugn simple government stats.

Just keep reading this simple truth until it sinks in:

If Blacks were killed at the White rate [2.53/100,000] it would have resulted in 1011 deaths (87% drop in the actual number of Black murder victims in 2011).

If Whites were killed at the Black rate [19.43/100,000] it would have resulted in 38,945 deaths (668% increase in the actual number of White murder victims in 2011).

I'm neither exaggerating or claiming anything about Black criminality nor am I ignoring or excusing White criminality. I'm just putting the facts out there to speak for themselves.

 

[Abatis]

The only people seen inventing alternate realities are the low information right wing zealots who don’t understand statistics.

sez the guy who can't recognize what he's reading and can't rebut any of my stats with reputable stats of his own or find any errors in my math using government stats.

Woooo! So you think I am trying to frighten you…on a message board? Pleassseeeee! Get outta here! :ROFLMAO:

Perhaps intimidate and employ red herrings would have been a better word and characterization. Your assignment of racism to me is meant to either intimidate or draw the discussion away from the topic to where I am defending myself as not being a racist. Your demeanor is that of a hothead and bully who is used to people caving to your lack of civility.

BTW I’ve been one of the most reasonable people on these boards. I don’t have to use hostility or histrionics... The sword of truth is my weapon of choice!

Thanks for the laugh. Of course no one has to demonstrate the hostility and the histrionics and the diversionary red herrings of hateful, prejudiced and boorish people.

To claim you don't need to use them but clearly choose to do anyway and call yourself "reasonable" just shows you are all those things and delusional, with poor reading comprehension thrown in for good measure (just to make your bigoted rants so much further divorced from reality); that's quite a combination!

You exemplify the meaning of “low information” RW zealot! That’s no aspersion, it’s just a fact. Here is the proof. READY?
Here we go:

Despite claims by right-wingers (both mainstream and overtly white supremacist) that violent crime by African-Americans is out of control — and that blacks are criminally victimizing whites at massive and disproportionate rates — the facts say otherwise. As I show in the below analysis . . .

And as usual, you are so intelligent you are arguing against an army of straw men of your own creation instead of rebutting what was actually stated.

Where have I said anything about Blacks victimizing Whites? All I have cited are crime stats of victimization with no mention of cross-racial offending . . .

And since when is a source like Tim Wise a reputable citation for "proof" of anything except unmitigated, galling bias?

 

[JQPublic1]

TO ABATIS:
When you said this:

My post was only to rebut JakeStarkey's feeling that poverty is the driver of crime; that poor people of both races commit crimes at equal rates. My stats show that the incident rates will never be comparable for poverty or any other factor; the disparity between the races is so wide that no amount of inventive comparisons can be forced into being. The numbers speak for themselves and his argument is just a defensive fantasy.

There is a nexus between the above post and these stats posted by you. If not, now is the time to clear things up. At the most you’ll have created a non-Sequitur.

No possible socioeconomic comparison / excuse / cover-up can ever overcome the simple statistics . . .

CDC / WISQARS stats.

Total population for the USA in 2011 = 311,587,816

White population = 200,439,088 (64.32%)
Black population = 39,964,923 (12.82%)

White homicides = 5,070, 2.53 per 100,000
Black homicides = 7,764, 19.43 per 100,000

If Blacks were killed at the White rate it would have resulted in annual 1011 deaths (87% drop)
If Whites were killed at the Black rate it would have resulted in annual 38,945 deaths (668% increase)

Are you confused? You accuse me of not reading your chart. Well. I took the liberty of consolidating the posts, where you are saying one thing, and your chart which is illustrating something different. It’s harder to hide and dodge the truth when it is right there in front of you. Here is the source of my grievance. In the Blue highlighted portion of your quote above you say that you are rebutting Jake’s “feeling that poverty is the driver of crime; that poor people of both races commit crimes at equal rates.”

Then you posit that :

My stats show that the incident rates will never be comparable for poverty or any other factor

I assumed you would follow a logical sequence in your exchange but when queried, you claim the chart refers to victimization. Well, if it does, it shouldn’t come on the heels of a rebuttal about Jake’s feelings that poverty is the driver of crime or that poor people commit crimes at equal rates. You aren’t talking about “victimization” there. You are talking about “committed crimes.”


__________________

 

[JQPublic1]

In a previous post I quoted Tim Wise:

Despite claims by right-wingers (both mainstream and overtly white supremacist) that violent crime by African-Americans is out of control — and that blacks are criminally victimizing whites at massive and disproportionate rates — the facts say otherwise. As I show in the below analysis . . .

You responded with:

And as usual, you are so intelligent you are arguing against an army of straw men of your own creation instead of rebutting what was actually stated.

And you don’t seem to know what you actually stated…your chart shows something entirely different than what you stated!

Where have I said anything about Blacks victimizing Whites? All I have cited are crime stats of victimization with no mention of cross-racial offending . . .

Perhaps learning to follow logical trains of thought might help you overcome those short term memory losses.

And since when is a source like Tim Wise a reputable citation for "proof" of anything except unmitigated, galling bias?

Care to dispute anything he said in that article? He lists references…did you check ‘em out?
BTW, you disputed the fact that Whites are 6 times more likely to be killed by other Whites than by Blacks. There are myriad sources, including the FBI Website that back me up. I chose Tim Wise’s narrative to articulate that fact because he i knows his statistics! Your petty nitpicking about him not being a reliable source shows how weak your arguments really are!

 

[JQPublic1]

;9608039]You are still 6 times more likely to be offed by a White thug than a Black one !

You exemplify the meaning of “low information” RW zealot! That’s no aspersion, it’s just a fact. Here is the proof. READY?
Here we go:

Despite claims by right-wingers (both mainstream and overtly white supremacist) that violent crime by African-Americans is out of control — and that blacks are criminally victimizing whites at massive and disproportionate rates — the facts say otherwise. As I show in the below analysis:
* Only about 1 percent of African Americans — and no more than 2 percent of black males — will commit a violent crime in a given year;
* Even though there are more black-on-white interracial crimes than white-on-black interracial crimes, this fact is not evidence of anti-white racial targeting by black offenders. Rather, it is completely explained by two factors having nothing to do with anti-white bias: namely, the general differences in rates of criminal offending, and the rates at which whites and blacks encounter one another (and thus, have the opportunity to victimize one another). Once these two factors are “controlled for” in social science terms, the actual rates of black-on-white crime are lower than random chance would predict;
* No more than 0.7 percent (seven-tenths of one percent) of African Americans will commit a violent crime against a white person in a given year, and fewer than 0.3 (three-tenths of one percent) of whites will be victimized by a black person in a given year;
* Whites are 6 times as likely to be murdered by another white person as by a black person; and overall, the percentage of white Americans who will be murdered by a black offender in a given year is only 2/10,000ths of 1 percent (0.0002). This means that only 1 in every 500,000 white people will be murdered by a black person in a given year. Although the numbers of black-on-white homicides are higher than the reverse (447 to 218 in 2010), the 218 black victims of white murderers is actually a higher percentage of the black population interracially killed than the 447 white victims of black murderers as a percentage of the white population. In fact, any given black person is 2.75 times as likely to be murdered by a white person as any given white person is to be murdered by an African American.

Tim Wise » Race, Crime and Statistical Malpractice: How the Right Manipulates White Fear With Bogus Data

Tim Wise is a freaking joke. I wouldn't trust that guy if he told me he was a man. If you want people to read the evidence you present it would probably help to pick neutral and credible sources.

Don't shoot the messenger! Just what is it in his article that you wish to impugn?
Try focusing on the information and documentation for a change, not the person who
presents it! Still waiting for a rebuttal!

 

[Rikurzhen]

You exemplify the meaning of “low information” RW zealot! That’s no aspersion, it’s just a fact. Here is the proof. READY?
Here we go:


Tim Wise » Race, Crime and Statistical Malpractice: How the Right Manipulates White Fear With Bogus Data

Tim Wise is a freaking joke. I wouldn't trust that guy if he told me he was a man. If you want people to read the evidence you present it would probably help to pick neutral and credible sources.

Don't shoot the messenger! Just what is it in his article that you wish to impugn?
Try focusing on the information and documentation for a change, not the person who
presents it! Still waiting for a rebuttal!

He's not the messenger, he's the analyst.

 

[JQPublic1]

Tim Wise is a freaking joke. I wouldn't trust that guy if he told me he was a man. If you want people to read the evidence you present it would probably help to pick neutral and credible sources.

Don't shoot the messenger! Just what is it in his article that you wish to impugn?
Try focusing on the information and documentation for a change, not the person who
presents it! Still waiting for a rebuttal!

He's not the messenger, he's the analyst.

So, analysts can't be messengers? answer the question... what is it you wish to impugn in his article?

 

[Abatis]

You accuse me of not reading your chart. Well. I took the liberty of consolidating the posts, where you are saying one thing, and your chart which is illustrating something different.

First, I didn't post any "charts", I never mentioned or alluded to anything pertaining to arrests. The stats in the two posts illustrate the same thing (the 1st being a subset of the 2nd) and my point in rebuttal has remained constant. That you are seeing an incongruity I think is caused by your misreading what I wrote and your fractured, tangential arguments you have thrown at me. IOW, you have confused yourself

I assumed you would follow a logical sequence in your exchange but when queried, you claim the chart refers to victimization. Well, if it does, it shouldn’t come on the heels of a rebuttal about Jake’s feelings that poverty is the driver of crime or that poor people commit crimes at equal rates. You aren’t talking about “victimization” there. You are talking about “committed crimes.”

I assumed that it is beyond dispute that when one breaks out victimization according to race you are also looking at offenders. BTW, this is a chart:

Homicide is a crime that is predominately intraracial. 84% of White victims were killed by Whites and 93% of Black victims were killed by Blacks (of course counting only closed cases where that info is known, it could be surmised that it is even higher, carrying the trend through open cases). See page 13, Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008, (1.3MB PDF) NCJ 236018, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

 

[Abatis]

And you don’t seem to know what you actually stated…your chart shows something entirely different than what you stated!

You can keep saying that but without any explanation you are just spouting nonsense . . . And where the heck are these charts you keep talking about?

Where have I said anything about Blacks victimizing Whites? All I have cited are crime stats of victimization with no mention of cross-racial offending . . .

Perhaps learning to follow logical trains of thought might help you overcome those short term memory losses.

So because I'm not following your red herrings I'm failing in logical thought? You're the one who claimed I was citing arrest data and took that and ran with it all the way to Timmy's house.

And since when is a source like Tim Wise a reputable citation for "proof" of anything except unmitigated, galling bias?

Care to dispute anything he said in that article? He lists references…did you check ‘em out?

No and No. None of what you cut and pasted had anything to do with anything I wrote. I know what his agenda is and I know where to find the official stats without spin.

BTW, you disputed the fact that Whites are 6 times more likely to be killed by other Whites than by Blacks.

No, I challenged your source of that nugget. I just wanted to see if you could muster a verifiable, respectable citation and demonstrate understanding of the underlying "conditions, qualifications and caveats" of that type of statistic. (Hint, you failed²).

I haven't done the math but the "6 times" seems close enough to me, given what I know about the overwhelming intraracial character of homicide. I don't find it very noteworthy as it is an unavoidable outcome of what I've been talking about.

I wonder, does Timmy mention what the reverse stat is; what the odds are for a Black man to be killed by another Black man? I'll look into that; I just know you would be very interested in that stat . . .

There are myriad sources, including the FBI Website that back me up.

That back up your red herrings?

I don't care.

I chose Tim Wise’s narrative to articulate that fact because he i knows his statistics!

And who was discussing anything pertaining to Timmy's narrative? You chose it because you wanted to divert the discussion from the narrow point I was discussing.

Your petty nitpicking about him not being a reliable source shows how weak your arguments really are!

If the thread drifts to what Timmy is talking about maybe I'll take the time to pull his arguments apart . . . Till then you are on your own.

.

 

[JQPublic1]

First, I didn't post any "charts", I never mentioned or alluded to anything pertaining to arrests. The stats in the two posts illustrate the same thing (the 1st being a subset of the 2nd) and my point in rebuttal has remained constant. That you are seeing an incongruity I think is caused by your misreading what I wrote and your fractured, tangential arguments you have thrown at me. IOW, you have confused yourself

OMG! Your obstinacy is astonishing. I know you realize the definition of “chart” is easily found in a dictionary but you refuse to subscribe to the classic lexicon. Am I responsible for your bizarre behavior? Are you saying that detailed graphic representation of “victimization” by race, which you posted, isn’t a CHART? You‘ve schooled both Webster’s Dictionary AND me. We thought we had it right, all along.
Naturally, you still think your “rebuttal” is one of the finest works of prose written anywhere. Even Shakespeare would have taken notice if he lived today. Yep; your grandiose self-praise hints of megalomania. I need not dwell on something so evident to others lurking here about!
The glaring deficit in your statement stands as a tribute to literary misappropriation!

I assumed that it is beyond dispute that when one breaks out victimization according to race you are also looking at offenders

then why you fight me so hard when I reacted to that “assumption” and brought it to light?
But some good has come out of all this. At last you have stumbled upon the answer to one of your significant questions posed to me. Do you finally see that whites are 6 times more likely to be homicide victims of other whites than by Blacks?