White-hating racists get Stormfront booted off the internet ! FIRST AMENMENT IS DEAD

[Humorme]

The White murder rate in the U.S isn't much different than Scotland, or Finland.

However, 1/4th of U.S.A, (Blacks, and Hispanics) commit about 3/4th of the murder.

So, what is the white murder rate in the US and what is the murder rate in Scotland or Finland and how many people in Scotland or Finland aren't white?

I'd love to know that you're not talking out of your ass, but I get the feeling you just made this stuff up.

The fact that many of the murders in the US are committed by blacks or Hispanics and the fact that 1/4 of blacks and Hispanics are in poverty, might go some way to explain why blacks and Hispanics commit so many crimes.

What do you think the crime rate is like by income? I'd bet you'd find that middle class black people commit about the same amount of murders as middle class white people.

Let's have a look

in 2013 52.2% of murderers arrested were black people.
45.3% were white (which includes Hispanics)

10.1% of all white people (which includes Hispanics) were in poverty.
28.9% of black people were in poverty.

There are 40 million black people. Which means that 11.56 million black people are in poverty
There are 233 million white people (including Hispanics). Which means 23 million are in poverty.

This doesn't quite amount to 52.2% of black people being arrested. If there were direct corrolation then it would be about double for white people, but it's not. That's because it's not just about poverty. Crime is much higher in inner city areas, and it's those inner city ghettos that are often the problem and often filled with black people or Hispanics.

Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia

If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle.

US poverty data: 1 in 15 people among America's poorest poor

"Just over 7% of all African-Americans nationwide now live in traditional ghettos, down from 33% in 1970."

7% of 40 million is 2.8 million. That's a lot of black people living in ghettos, inner city areas where there is no hope in life.

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

 

[Humorme]

Actually there are more like 30,000 people killed by guns in the United States each year. There are more than that killed by drunk drivers. But, we tolerate alcohol.

As a nonsmoker in the United States, your chances of being killed by second hand smoke is FIVE TIMES greater than your chance of being killed by a firearm - and that includes military and police actions! Adding insult to injury, cigarettes kill more Americans per year than any war ever fought by the American people. Still, cigarettes are legal.

Since we could reduce gun violence without gun gun control and choose not to do so, maybe we will have to learn how to live with terrorist acts - at least until some American puts a slug in a would be terrorist and the LEO community has a conniption fit with that worn out line "you can't take the law into your own hands."

Cigarettes are different because it's about personal choice. Drink driving is a problem that should be addressed.

The US has a 31% level of accidents involving alcohol, Germany has 9%. Why the difference? Well there are probably reasons, like dealing with the issue. In the US it doesn't really get dealt with that much.

Same in the US, why such a difference? Seems to be many liberal states are the ones dealing with the issues, and many conservative states not.

The problem here is that there are those that want to control what the people do, and they use terrorism as an issue which allows them put in policies which wouldn't be acceptable without this threat. Terrorist activities will become headline news, whereas gun shootings are normal everyday events. People are scared of being killed by terrorists, but just accept normal gun shootings because that's how people want it.

Nonsmokers subjected to cigarette smoke have no choice and firearms are protected by law.

There's a difference between having smoking allowed everywhere, and limited places where you can smoke. Laws banning smoking in enclosed public spaces is essential.

Firearms are protected by law, so are cigarettes.

A sick and cancer prone society, being necessary to insure the exorbitant rates of hospital care, the right of the people to keep and smoke cigarettes shall not be infringed.

Which Amendment is that again?

I'm sorry, what are you doing?

You said "Firearms are protected by the law", you did NOT say "protected by the Constitution".

Very little difference in the eyes of the judges. You say law the purists get pissed; say Constitution, the left goes nuts. Can't please everybody.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, what is the white murder rate in the US and what is the murder rate in Scotland or Finland and how many people in Scotland or Finland aren't white?

I'd love to know that you're not talking out of your ass, but I get the feeling you just made this stuff up.

The fact that many of the murders in the US are committed by blacks or Hispanics and the fact that 1/4 of blacks and Hispanics are in poverty, might go some way to explain why blacks and Hispanics commit so many crimes.

What do you think the crime rate is like by income? I'd bet you'd find that middle class black people commit about the same amount of murders as middle class white people.

Let's have a look

in 2013 52.2% of murderers arrested were black people.
45.3% were white (which includes Hispanics)

10.1% of all white people (which includes Hispanics) were in poverty.
28.9% of black people were in poverty.

There are 40 million black people. Which means that 11.56 million black people are in poverty
There are 233 million white people (including Hispanics). Which means 23 million are in poverty.

This doesn't quite amount to 52.2% of black people being arrested. If there were direct corrolation then it would be about double for white people, but it's not. That's because it's not just about poverty. Crime is much higher in inner city areas, and it's those inner city ghettos that are often the problem and often filled with black people or Hispanics.

Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia

If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle.

US poverty data: 1 in 15 people among America's poorest poor

"Just over 7% of all African-Americans nationwide now live in traditional ghettos, down from 33% in 1970."

7% of 40 million is 2.8 million. That's a lot of black people living in ghettos, inner city areas where there is no hope in life.

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

Oh, how did it get debunked exactly? Because you decided it was so?

The world doesn't work by you deciding you don't like something so everyone else has to stop using it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Cigarettes are different because it's about personal choice. Drink driving is a problem that should be addressed.

The US has a 31% level of accidents involving alcohol, Germany has 9%. Why the difference? Well there are probably reasons, like dealing with the issue. In the US it doesn't really get dealt with that much.

Same in the US, why such a difference? Seems to be many liberal states are the ones dealing with the issues, and many conservative states not.

The problem here is that there are those that want to control what the people do, and they use terrorism as an issue which allows them put in policies which wouldn't be acceptable without this threat. Terrorist activities will become headline news, whereas gun shootings are normal everyday events. People are scared of being killed by terrorists, but just accept normal gun shootings because that's how people want it.

Nonsmokers subjected to cigarette smoke have no choice and firearms are protected by law.

There's a difference between having smoking allowed everywhere, and limited places where you can smoke. Laws banning smoking in enclosed public spaces is essential.

Firearms are protected by law, so are cigarettes.

A sick and cancer prone society, being necessary to insure the exorbitant rates of hospital care, the right of the people to keep and smoke cigarettes shall not be infringed.

Which Amendment is that again?

I'm sorry, what are you doing?

You said "Firearms are protected by the law", you did NOT say "protected by the Constitution".

Very little difference in the eyes of the judges. You say law the purists get pissed; say Constitution, the left goes nuts. Can't please everybody.

The difference is actually quite large, but if you don't know this, then why the fuck are you here?

 

[sealybobo]

And why the fuck does he care what other whites have done and what some blacks haven't done? I could find a black man smarter than him and a better chess player, one with more money, better SAT scores.

And what would that prove, you simpleton? You don't even know what an average is. Like all traits, intelligence is spread out over a wide range so of course there are some smart black people just like there are people 7 feet tall. But there aren't very many smart blacks and there never will be. THINK, you miserable white-hating racist wretch.

Yeah but you wouldn't be a smart black. Dumb whites aren't as smart as average blacks and you're dumb.

And I'm white dummy

 

[sealybobo]

So, what is the white murder rate in the US and what is the murder rate in Scotland or Finland and how many people in Scotland or Finland aren't white?

I'd love to know that you're not talking out of your ass, but I get the feeling you just made this stuff up.

The fact that many of the murders in the US are committed by blacks or Hispanics and the fact that 1/4 of blacks and Hispanics are in poverty, might go some way to explain why blacks and Hispanics commit so many crimes.

What do you think the crime rate is like by income? I'd bet you'd find that middle class black people commit about the same amount of murders as middle class white people.

Let's have a look

in 2013 52.2% of murderers arrested were black people.
45.3% were white (which includes Hispanics)

10.1% of all white people (which includes Hispanics) were in poverty.
28.9% of black people were in poverty.

There are 40 million black people. Which means that 11.56 million black people are in poverty
There are 233 million white people (including Hispanics). Which means 23 million are in poverty.

This doesn't quite amount to 52.2% of black people being arrested. If there were direct corrolation then it would be about double for white people, but it's not. That's because it's not just about poverty. Crime is much higher in inner city areas, and it's those inner city ghettos that are often the problem and often filled with black people or Hispanics.

Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia

If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle.

US poverty data: 1 in 15 people among America's poorest poor

"Just over 7% of all African-Americans nationwide now live in traditional ghettos, down from 33% in 1970."

7% of 40 million is 2.8 million. That's a lot of black people living in ghettos, inner city areas where there is no hope in life.

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

Notice it's the Steve bannon alt righties stoking the flames? This thread is proof the racists have been emboldened.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

So, what is the white murder rate in the US and what is the murder rate in Scotland or Finland and how many people in Scotland or Finland aren't white?

I'd love to know that you're not talking out of your ass, but I get the feeling you just made this stuff up.

The fact that many of the murders in the US are committed by blacks or Hispanics and the fact that 1/4 of blacks and Hispanics are in poverty, might go some way to explain why blacks and Hispanics commit so many crimes.

What do you think the crime rate is like by income? I'd bet you'd find that middle class black people commit about the same amount of murders as middle class white people.

Let's have a look

in 2013 52.2% of murderers arrested were black people.
45.3% were white (which includes Hispanics)

10.1% of all white people (which includes Hispanics) were in poverty.
28.9% of black people were in poverty.

There are 40 million black people. Which means that 11.56 million black people are in poverty
There are 233 million white people (including Hispanics). Which means 23 million are in poverty.

This doesn't quite amount to 52.2% of black people being arrested. If there were direct corrolation then it would be about double for white people, but it's not. That's because it's not just about poverty. Crime is much higher in inner city areas, and it's those inner city ghettos that are often the problem and often filled with black people or Hispanics.

Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia

If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle.

US poverty data: 1 in 15 people among America's poorest poor

"Just over 7% of all African-Americans nationwide now live in traditional ghettos, down from 33% in 1970."

7% of 40 million is 2.8 million. That's a lot of black people living in ghettos, inner city areas where there is no hope in life.

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

Perhaps you could give some examples of how these people dealt with it ?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I would imagine that a lot of good people have worked hard to influence this decision and I applaud them for that.

The way forward has to be in lobbying the organisations that support these types.

Where do they bank,who are there lawyers and so on.

The "nice" people are happy enough to take the shilling but less keen to be associated with hate.

A few thousand people turning up at their bank head office or even at the bank presidents home would concentrate their minds immensely. And its a lot less stressful than beating up bubba.

A few years ago I was involved with a campaign group and we did just this. It was very effective.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The White murder rate in the U.S isn't much different than Scotland, or Finland.

However, 1/4th of U.S.A, (Blacks, and Hispanics) commit about 3/4th of the murder.

So, what is the white murder rate in the US and what is the murder rate in Scotland or Finland and how many people in Scotland or Finland aren't white?

I'd love to know that you're not talking out of your ass, but I get the feeling you just made this stuff up.

The fact that many of the murders in the US are committed by blacks or Hispanics and the fact that 1/4 of blacks and Hispanics are in poverty, might go some way to explain why blacks and Hispanics commit so many crimes.

What do you think the crime rate is like by income? I'd bet you'd find that middle class black people commit about the same amount of murders as middle class white people.

Let's have a look

in 2013 52.2% of murderers arrested were black people.
45.3% were white (which includes Hispanics)

10.1% of all white people (which includes Hispanics) were in poverty.
28.9% of black people were in poverty.

There are 40 million black people. Which means that 11.56 million black people are in poverty
There are 233 million white people (including Hispanics). Which means 23 million are in poverty.

This doesn't quite amount to 52.2% of black people being arrested. If there were direct corrolation then it would be about double for white people, but it's not. That's because it's not just about poverty. Crime is much higher in inner city areas, and it's those inner city ghettos that are often the problem and often filled with black people or Hispanics.

Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia

If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle.

US poverty data: 1 in 15 people among America's poorest poor

"Just over 7% of all African-Americans nationwide now live in traditional ghettos, down from 33% in 1970."

7% of 40 million is 2.8 million. That's a lot of black people living in ghettos, inner city areas where there is no hope in life.

Prince George's County, Maryland says otherwise, despite being a solidly middle class county, and above mostly, with low poverty rates, and a massive Black population.

Prince George's County, Maryland still manages to have a high murder rate.

As for the White murder rate in the U.S.

Here's a couple of charts which put things into perspective.

Firstly, we're not dealing with absolutes. We're not saying if you have one and one you get two. This is far more complex than this. You can have places that will have higher murder rates because maybe there's a family who are complete scumbags and prefer to murder people.

As I've said in another post. Poverty increases the chances people will commit crime. As do many other factors like educational achievement, being in an inner city area and other such things.

Prince George's County in Maryland has a large population, 800,000 people. That means there will be different areas within this county. Rich areas, poor areas. Many US govt facilities are in the area.

As you can see crime is higher the closer it is to DC.

Also the areas closest to DC are the poorest areas, while those further away are richer.

It's not difficult to see that the issues here are not ones of race, but ones of poverty and other issues. There are other statistics that I can't find, like a map of education achievement. But I'd bet the closer you get to DC, the lower this achievement is.

Simply said this county is too big to provide you with simple statistics to prove anything.

The areas closest to DC are more black, but areas away from DC also have quite a lot of black people too, and aren't as crime ridden, because it's not about race.

I don't think you grasp the proportionate differences.

The fact is all the middle class, and rich parts of Prince George's County, Maryland, which are nearly 95% of the county, should be enough to pull the crime rate down.

That's just not the case.

Many poorer White areas in the U.S.A, and also Europe also don't have such high murder rates as Prince George's County, Maryland.

Heavily White Places from modest income Scranton, Pennsylvania, to poor Ukraine have lower murder rates than high income Prince George's County, Maryland, despite the glaring wealth disparity between these regions, favoring the heavily Black PG county in income by a lot.

No, it's not the case. But you haven't analysed so much. What's the compatible difference between this and other counties that sit next to large, violent cities? You don't know, because you didn't look it up. DC only fits into a certain size, but the reality is this county makes up part of the city of Washington. The crime spills over. DC has major crime problems and they leak out into this city.

How many of the crimes in this city are committed either by people living in DC, or people who live very close to it?

Also, why do you have lots of black people in DC? Those reasons are mainly historical. Now, if you have areas with large black populations, what do the govts do for these black people? Not much. How much has the federal govt done for DC?

This is because of the racism and problems the US has suffered for hundred of years. It's impacted area with lots of black people, who are mostly poor. Poverty rates are around 25% for black people today, go back 100 years and you'd have been looking up much higher figures than that. This has a massive impact on how the children do in society.

Scranton Pennsylvania. You want a comparison that you couldn't be bothered to actually do.

Population of 77,000, more than ten times smaller than that of Prince George's. No where near Philli, or Pittsburgh which would make it comparable to Prince George's. In fact Scranton is in a valley, to either side there's nothing but countryside.

Different factors play here. It's not just poverty, it's poverty and some more, and large inner city poverty plays out differently than rural poverty for many different reasons.

But just going "look at the statistics, blacks commit more crimes" doesn't tell you anything unless this is all you want to know.

Black Americans actually have high incomes on a global scale, despite having high murder rates.

Even when you adjust for poverty, you can't explain it all away.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, what is the white murder rate in the US and what is the murder rate in Scotland or Finland and how many people in Scotland or Finland aren't white?

I'd love to know that you're not talking out of your ass, but I get the feeling you just made this stuff up.

The fact that many of the murders in the US are committed by blacks or Hispanics and the fact that 1/4 of blacks and Hispanics are in poverty, might go some way to explain why blacks and Hispanics commit so many crimes.

What do you think the crime rate is like by income? I'd bet you'd find that middle class black people commit about the same amount of murders as middle class white people.

Let's have a look

in 2013 52.2% of murderers arrested were black people.
45.3% were white (which includes Hispanics)

10.1% of all white people (which includes Hispanics) were in poverty.
28.9% of black people were in poverty.

There are 40 million black people. Which means that 11.56 million black people are in poverty
There are 233 million white people (including Hispanics). Which means 23 million are in poverty.

This doesn't quite amount to 52.2% of black people being arrested. If there were direct corrolation then it would be about double for white people, but it's not. That's because it's not just about poverty. Crime is much higher in inner city areas, and it's those inner city ghettos that are often the problem and often filled with black people or Hispanics.

Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia
Poverty in the United States - Wikipedia

If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle.

US poverty data: 1 in 15 people among America's poorest poor

"Just over 7% of all African-Americans nationwide now live in traditional ghettos, down from 33% in 1970."

7% of 40 million is 2.8 million. That's a lot of black people living in ghettos, inner city areas where there is no hope in life.

Prince George's County, Maryland says otherwise, despite being a solidly middle class county, and above mostly, with low poverty rates, and a massive Black population.

Prince George's County, Maryland still manages to have a high murder rate.

As for the White murder rate in the U.S.

Here's a couple of charts which put things into perspective.

Firstly, we're not dealing with absolutes. We're not saying if you have one and one you get two. This is far more complex than this. You can have places that will have higher murder rates because maybe there's a family who are complete scumbags and prefer to murder people.

As I've said in another post. Poverty increases the chances people will commit crime. As do many other factors like educational achievement, being in an inner city area and other such things.

Prince George's County in Maryland has a large population, 800,000 people. That means there will be different areas within this county. Rich areas, poor areas. Many US govt facilities are in the area.

As you can see crime is higher the closer it is to DC.

Also the areas closest to DC are the poorest areas, while those further away are richer.

It's not difficult to see that the issues here are not ones of race, but ones of poverty and other issues. There are other statistics that I can't find, like a map of education achievement. But I'd bet the closer you get to DC, the lower this achievement is.

Simply said this county is too big to provide you with simple statistics to prove anything.

The areas closest to DC are more black, but areas away from DC also have quite a lot of black people too, and aren't as crime ridden, because it's not about race.

I don't think you grasp the proportionate differences.

The fact is all the middle class, and rich parts of Prince George's County, Maryland, which are nearly 95% of the county, should be enough to pull the crime rate down.

That's just not the case.

Many poorer White areas in the U.S.A, and also Europe also don't have such high murder rates as Prince George's County, Maryland.

Heavily White Places from modest income Scranton, Pennsylvania, to poor Ukraine have lower murder rates than high income Prince George's County, Maryland, despite the glaring wealth disparity between these regions, favoring the heavily Black PG county in income by a lot.

No, it's not the case. But you haven't analysed so much. What's the compatible difference between this and other counties that sit next to large, violent cities? You don't know, because you didn't look it up. DC only fits into a certain size, but the reality is this county makes up part of the city of Washington. The crime spills over. DC has major crime problems and they leak out into this city.

How many of the crimes in this city are committed either by people living in DC, or people who live very close to it?

Also, why do you have lots of black people in DC? Those reasons are mainly historical. Now, if you have areas with large black populations, what do the govts do for these black people? Not much. How much has the federal govt done for DC?

This is because of the racism and problems the US has suffered for hundred of years. It's impacted area with lots of black people, who are mostly poor. Poverty rates are around 25% for black people today, go back 100 years and you'd have been looking up much higher figures than that. This has a massive impact on how the children do in society.

Scranton Pennsylvania. You want a comparison that you couldn't be bothered to actually do.

Population of 77,000, more than ten times smaller than that of Prince George's. No where near Philli, or Pittsburgh which would make it comparable to Prince George's. In fact Scranton is in a valley, to either side there's nothing but countryside.

Different factors play here. It's not just poverty, it's poverty and some more, and large inner city poverty plays out differently than rural poverty for many different reasons.

But just going "look at the statistics, blacks commit more crimes" doesn't tell you anything unless this is all you want to know.

Black Americans actually have high incomes on a global scale, despite having high murder rates.

Even when you adjust for poverty, you can't explain it all away.

Poverty is often related to the society you are in. The only reason black people have more money than others in other countries is because of the exchange rate and nothing more. Sure, if those black people were to go to Vietnam, they'd find themselves rich, but they're not in Vietnam, they're in a place where they can't afford the rent of a decent house to get a decent school to escape the ghetto.

 

[Humorme]

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

Oh, how did it get debunked exactly? Because you decided it was so?

The world doesn't work by you deciding you don't like something so everyone else has to stop using it.

The rest of the world is well within their rights to be wrong in their opinions, but it still gets old. It doesn't solve anything and it doesn't allow people to move forward.

The woe is me attitude about slavery breeds generations of people that think the world owes them a living. THAT is the primary reason you have non-whites declaring war against the whites in this country, providing fertile ground for racists on both sides.

But, back to your original question:

During slavery the majority of black slaves were paid for their work, families were kept together if possible, and blacks were better fed than their blue collar, white counterparts. Two university professors did an in depth study back in the 1970s and debunked many of the beliefs that people have about slavery.

The book is entitled Time on the Cross, The Economics of American Negro Slavery.

https://www.amazon.com/Time-Cross-E...c=1&refRID=RMM32PSJ3ECCA3VZ3R4Q&tag=ff0d01-20

It is, by no stretch of the imagination, a racist book. It will make you think and it will challenge you. So, before you try to debate what's in the book, you should try reading it.

 

[Humorme]

Nonsmokers subjected to cigarette smoke have no choice and firearms are protected by law.

There's a difference between having smoking allowed everywhere, and limited places where you can smoke. Laws banning smoking in enclosed public spaces is essential.

Firearms are protected by law, so are cigarettes.

A sick and cancer prone society, being necessary to insure the exorbitant rates of hospital care, the right of the people to keep and smoke cigarettes shall not be infringed.

Which Amendment is that again?

I'm sorry, what are you doing?

You said "Firearms are protected by the law", you did NOT say "protected by the Constitution".

Very little difference in the eyes of the judges. You say law the purists get pissed; say Constitution, the left goes nuts. Can't please everybody.

The difference is actually quite large, but if you don't know this, then why the fuck are you here?

That's a non-responsive post. You'll have to elaborate if you expect a response.

 

[Humorme]

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

Notice it's the Steve bannon alt righties stoking the flames? This thread is proof the racists have been emboldened.

In all honesty, I don't know much about Steve Bannon. It wasn't until a week or two ago that the tv show 20 / 20 did a piece about the white nationalists, the nazis, and Antifa that I even had an inkling what they were about. It's like a lot of separate factions of the KKK / National Alliance / Nazis versus a radical communist left.

I had the polar opposite thought when the white activist factions woke up one day to find they no longer had the Internet. I don't see racists as being emboldened; I see them as being a defeated and frustrated -political position that has long been separated from their culture to play the blame game with the left.

 

[Harry Dresden]

And why the fuck does he care what other whites have done and what some blacks haven't done? I could find a black man smarter than him and a better chess player, one with more money, better SAT scores.

And what would that prove, you simpleton? You don't even know what an average is. Like all traits, intelligence is spread out over a wide range so of course there are some smart black people just like there are people 7 feet tall. But there aren't very many smart blacks and there never will be. THINK, you miserable white-hating racist wretch.

Yeah but you wouldn't be a smart black. Dumb whites aren't as smart as average blacks and you're dumb.

And I'm white dummy

like i said bobo the guy is a top 3 dumbshit....and he put me on ignore because he cant counter what i say about him....he is also one of the biggest pussies around here.....

 

[Humorme]

What did I just miss? You wrote:

"If you want to take a few simple facts and try and understand a very complex issue, you're going to struggle."

INCLUDED in your post are misleading statistics. You are trying to say, without actually saying it, that poverty = higher rates of crime.

While poverty can play a large role, it is not the only factor OR maybe even the main factor.

Georgia has 159 counties. Within each county you have at least one or more police precincts (the county I live in has at least four that I know of.) I cannot find a total number of precincts. Be that as it may, at least HALF of the violent crimes committed in this state come from only FIVE precincts. All of those precincts are in predominantly (meaning 75 percent or more ) black neighborhoods.

By contrast, some of the smaller, predominantly low income, white counties have crime rates on the lower end of the scale. So, in my view poverty is not the magic excuse you need to explain away the numbers. And how about Chicago? How is their poverty any greater than New York? Which city do you think is the most violent by a whopping margin?

Could it be that non-whites cannot assimilate into a white Christian culture due to some difference other than poverty?

Well you seem to have missed the bit where I said that there isn't a direct correlation and you need to take other factors into account, such as the impact of inner cities.

With a massive range of statistics taken from local levels, looking at many different things, you start to see things more clearly. I don't have all these statistics. I did something about London where there are quite a lot more local level statistics and you see the issue isn't race at all, it's merely the conditions that people live in.

Poverty doesn't cause crime. This is what you wanted to read into what I said so you could bash it. Whatever. But people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. People in inner city ghettos are also more likely to commit crimes. Men are more likely to commit crimes. People with lower levels of education are more likely to commit crimes.

None of these things automatically leads to people committing crimes. They just increase the chances.

So, you are trying to make a case for your part of the world, and you see that the main crime areas are black neighborhoods. This doesn't tell me anything. I don't know the factors that exist that lead to there being more crime. I'm betting the more you look into it, the less you're going to see it's about the color of people's skin.

But then you didn't provide a single bit of evidence. Just what you perceive.

Could it be that these black people can't assimilate into white Christian society? I'd say it's probably the other way around, that white Christian society has made such people outcasts. I mean the evidence is there. Slavery, you're in Georgia, segregation, and what came after that which some people try and pretend wasn't discrimination, but there's been a lot of discrimination.

Such discrimination has an impact on people. When people believe that crime is their only way to make money, they're more likely to accept that role.

First and foremost, we are in America. Our culture is much different that that of London. Add to that we have 280 million more people at a minimum. So, we have quite a spread of income levels and even areas of population density.

We are in agreement that poverty does not cause crime. OTOH, you are sorely mistaken to conclude that wealth breeds a law abiding society. It does not. If you look at the very top of the food chain, you start seeing people like George Soros, Donald Trump and his Goldman Sachs buddies and you can also find the people like Mike Bloomberg. Aside from them, you find lots of shady professions from organized crime to the lawyer lobby, bankers, etc.

NOBODY can provide you the evidence to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt that they have THE answer. You blame segregation, but I've been in Chinatown in San Francisco and I've seen other smaller communities where people of one kind congregate and flourish.

There is one constant in all of this. Sometimes the facts ARE there to prove a proposition, just nobody wants to consider them and even when they do, they don't intend to do a damn thing about it. Case in point:

Most mass murders (and we're talking in excess of 95 percent) are committed by only two categories of people:

The first group is your political jihadists - the overwhelming majority are Muslim and

The second group being white males between 17 and 34 or so. virtually ALL of them have been under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist or other mental health official (and known to pose a threat) and / or on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs... in my own research I've yet to find a non-political mass murderer who was not on SSRIs.

It's getting old to blame slavery. The United States was not the first country to adopt it and while everyone is pointing to how superior they think the rest of the world is, many of those countries have experienced slavery just as third world enclaves like Haiti has. So, the slavery excuse is good for a generation or two, but today's blacks have to go back MANY generations to even find a slave in their past.

I knew a lot of people that would go to third world African countries and begin building up communities to be self sufficient with the capability to become much like us. But, many Peace Corps volunteers would say that the white man's religion and culture would leave when the white man would leave.

One guy in particular told me that he returned five years after he left. The running water (via hand dug irrigation trenches) was not kept up and the people were back to hauling water on the top of their heads in buckets. Farm tractors were overgrown with weeds and bushes.

Some people simply do not accept foreign cultures like you think. At any given time in the U.S. different people have had to fight for acceptance and then they have built a community in short order. The Irish, Italians... even the Mormons have been outcasts and locked out of society, but were eventually able to succeed.

Despite guaranteed jobs, government programs, and a decided preference in the new society, the blacks are represented by hate mongering liberals that blame their every failure on the whites. Butm any time you want to get down to hair splitting and examining the stats, we'll do it... but be prepared for some long posts.

Yes, London is different. Everywhere is different, that doesn't mean you bury your head in the sand and pretend that it's completely different.

London is a very populous area, just like big cities in the US. The size of the US doesn't matter here. The UK is far more densely populated than the US, which in turn would suggest more problems.

Yes, I didn't say that wealthy people don't commit crimes. Often their crimes are different. Often they're able to legitimize their crimes.

No, I didn't blame segregation as different races living in different areas, I blamed segregation as an official policy back before the 1960s.

It might be getting old to blame slavery, but it's also getting old to make an argument to brush off things that happened and still have an impact today. It's simply not a good argument to say "it's getting old..."

Slavery led to segregation, segregation led to discrimination, all of this is seen by people today, it comes out as discrimination in the modern era, but you have to think that for people suffering such discrimination they will look back at slavery and see not much difference between that slavery and the present discrimination.

But burying your head under "it's getting old...." will get you no where.

When a theory has been debunked, it gets old to try and use it any more. At one time or another lots of people have been subject to slavery, discrimination, etc.

Perhaps you could give some examples of how these people dealt with it ?

My exchanges were quite long and I'm not sure what you're asking.

Throughout history, many people have faced slavery, discrimination, racism, etc., etc. Though I disagree with their religion, the Mormons faced religious persecution, discrimination, etc. when times were much worse than they are today. But, they went to a place where they thought they should be and carved out a piece of the American pie for themselves.

Today, a LOT of people disagree with the Mormons. But we respect their ideology of self reliance, self sufficiency, independence and survival. Liberals should take a page out of the Mormons playbook on that.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

What's amusing is that the racists are surprised that others are against racism.

You support affirmative action which means YOU support racism. You want jobs handed out based on skin color!!

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Black Americans actually have high incomes on a global scale, despite having high murder rates.
.

HAHAHA. You libs always count welfare checks as "income" and you can't do that, you fool.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

During slavery the majority of black slaves were paid for their work, families were kept together if possible, and blacks were better fed than their blue collar, white counterparts. Two university professors did an in depth study back in the 1970s and debunked many of the beliefs that people have about slavery.
.

People are idiots and judge things by what they are called. If slaves were called indentured servants nobody would care.

 

[Humorme]

During slavery the majority of black slaves were paid for their work, families were kept together if possible, and blacks were better fed than their blue collar, white counterparts. Two university professors did an in depth study back in the 1970s and debunked many of the beliefs that people have about slavery.
.

People are idiots and judge things by what they are called. If slaves were called indentured servants nobody would care.

You have a practical point. Today, you can force a man to go to an employment agency in order to get a job. Today's generation never saw a paper application for a job. So, you go to the employment agency and sell yourself into slavery. Some guy gets part of your check for a period of time and literally owns you unless and until an employer offers you a position.

Then you give up a portion of your wages via the income tax. The income tax steals from the worker the sweat of his brow simply because he produces. It's a plank out of the Communist Manifesto.

You don't have real Rights - only the illusion.

 

[Faun]

During slavery the majority of black slaves were paid for their work, families were kept together if possible, and blacks were better fed than their blue collar, white counterparts. Two university professors did an in depth study back in the 1970s and debunked many of the beliefs that people have about slavery.
.

People are idiots and judge things by what they are called. If slaves were called indentured servants nobody would care.

You have a practical point. Today, you can force a man to go to an employment agency in order to get a job. Today's generation never saw a paper application for a job. So, you go to the employment agency and sell yourself into slavery. Some guy gets part of your check for a period of time and literally owns you unless and until an employer offers you a position.

Then you give up a portion of your wages via the income tax. The income tax steals from the worker the sweat of his brow simply because he produces. It's a plank out of the Communist Manifesto.

You don't have real Rights - only the illusion.

Who do you think should pay taxes?