Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is real and systematic racism keeping black people away from gainful employment.
There's also the cultural racism within the black community that does not value education and many black kids are discouraged from studying, getting good grades, graduating, and basically "acting like whitey". Again, it's the self-defeatism/crab bucket kind of attitude with many poor black communities that holds them all back. The vicious cycle of teen pregnancy, fatherless families, and high school drop-outs needs to end. Immigrant blacks do not suffer from any of these issues and they thrive in the US, so you can't blame it "systematic racism".
So do you believe white-on-white crime is rising and will occur in upcoming years?
??
Where did you see that in any of the quote you just made?
Intra racial crime is still 90% of all crime. Almost all whites tend to victimize other whites. Almost all blacks victimize other blacks.
The statistic pointed out that in the exception of the more rare 'extraracial race based crime' (one person attacks another person of a different race because of their race) whites lead the pack. The same goes with attacking others due to sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity (different than race).
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunny days
Goodness, read it once again.
I did not say this was only in one county, I used the county as an example but also stated for you to look at the prison population across the country.
Very easy to see that every single prison is over loaded with one race and that race has far less total amounts of people.
Heard second hand. Do you research anything at all.
National statistics say the opposite? Prove that statement.
The percentage of males in prisons across the country are blacks by a long shot.
YOu either ignored the last 2 posts I replied to you or you are continuing it argue a point thats already been shot down factually.
I posted the research, genuis, you STILL PRETEND NOT TO SEE IT. The UCR hate crime data, and sentencing disparity statistics.Ill post again. Pretend not to see the post again, and Ill re-repost it.
Here, Ill repost it-
Correlation between POVERTY and CRIME more direct than RACE and CRIME.
(http://capaassociation.org/newsletter_N009/Articles/PovertyCrime.htm - broken link)
Originally Posted by Tindo on prison population by race
Yes, thats because on average african americans and latinos (and natives) are prosecuted more serverely than whites. You are arguing the results of sentencing is a direct reflection if crimes committed. Most criminal justice officials are nonblack and nonhispanic. Judges, lawyers, police, etc. And usually, these parties feed into a stereotype that they believe, 'blacks are violent criminals by nature and latinos are violent thieves and natives are savages.'
The statistics strongly support this information. In a study conducted by the Rand Corporation in 1983, it was estimated that Blacks and Hispanics received longer sentences and spent more time in jail than their white counterparts who were convicted of similar crimes and with similar criminal records. (Silas, 1983 p. 1355). It was also discovered that the courts in California imposed sentences six and a half months longer for Hispanics, and 1 and a half months longer for Blacks when compared to white inmates. The study also came to the conclusion that blacks and Hispanics were more likely to serve a "greater portion" of their sentence in comparison to their white counterparts.
Again, thats in BIG RED LETTERS. Ill give you the benefit of the doubt and guess you just missed the last time I posted it, so here it is again. Now, what were you saying about 'research', and wheres yours?
You said that white crime is rising. I wonder how many cases are there of white people fatally terminating their spouse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tindo80
??
Where did you see that in any of the quote you just made?
Intra racial crime is still 90% of all crime. Almost all whites tend to victimize other whites. Almost all blacks victimize other blacks.
The statistic pointed out that in the exception of the more rare 'extraracial race based crime' (one person attacks another person of a different race because of their race) whites lead the pack. The same goes with attacking others due to sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity (different than race).
YOu either ignored the last 2 posts I replied to you or you are continuing it argue a point thats already been shot down factually.
I posted the research, genuis, you STILL PRETEND NOT TO SEE IT. The UCR hate crime data, and sentencing disparity statistics.Ill post again. Pretend not to see the post again, and Ill re-repost it.
Here, Ill repost it-
Correlation between POVERTY and CRIME more direct than RACE and CRIME.
(http://capaassociation.org/newsletter_N009/Articles/PovertyCrime.htm - broken link)
Again, thats in BIG RED LETTERS. Ill give you the benefit of the doubt and guess you just missed the last time I posted it, so here it is again. Now, what were you saying about 'research', and wheres yours?
You said that white crime is rising. I wonder how many cases are there of white people fatally terminating their spouse.
Sorry bud, I said 'white crime is rising EQUALLY to black crime'
Quote:
Originally Posted by tindo80
2. Blacks do not commit the majority of crime, and WHITE crime is actually on equal rise as black and hispanic crime, which is standard during recessions.
There hasn't really been a huge increase in black unemployment since the meltdown since so few blacks per capita had any meaningful employment statistics worth boasting about before the meltdown. That is not for lack of trying. There is real and systematic racism keeping black people away from gainful employment.
What is the unemployment figure for blacks, 20%? That means that 80% of blacks are gainfully employed. How can there be 'real and systematic racism keeping black people away from gainful employment' with 80% of black people employed?
I realize that black unemployment is higher than 20% in some poor, inner city black neighborhoods but there are other reasons besides racism for these folks being less employable or unemployable. This racism charge is nonsense. It's just excuse making for the fact that many of these people simply lack the mental capacity, ability, initiative or inclination to compete in this capitalistic society.
These people simply cannot or will not produce even what they need to survive and must be carried by the rest of society. This 'blame white people' racism charge is being perpetuated in order to shift the blame and escape responsibilty. The theory being that if it's the white man's fault then the white man should pay. People are so afraid that these entitlements may dry up, i.e welfare reform during the 1990's, unless we can keep the blame focused on white people.
I'm sorry. I guess this point was a little deep for some people. Let me use a simple example.
With a single crime, if the victim and witnesses say it was a black man who perpetrated the crime then 100% of the stops should be black. If any non-blacks are stopped it represents a waste of time. This would be the case even if blacks were only 10% of the population. This would not be racial profiling. Do you understand now?
So with city wide crime, if victims and witnesses say 80% of the crime is perpetrated by blacks then blacks should be 80% of the stops despite their being 24% of the population. That's not racial profiling.
It seems pretty simple to me.
- Reel
So you advocate random stops by the police? Well, I have this to say about it. It doens't help me one bit. I sound a bit like and "entitlement attitude", but I don't think I should have to be harrassed by the police. How does me getting stopped by the police help me? Please explain.
After reading some of the posts on this thread, some of the responses, well, I think I need to be the one to say this. I see this Black vs White thing going on. It doesn't surprise me one bit. This has been going on since the colonial days. The first settlers to colonize this nation didn't come here for "more freedom" when you think about. The reason was for more power, more land. Many of these persons were starving, poor, couldn't make it in Europe, some were convicts. I don't really believe freedom was the main reason because in some of the old colonies, if you weren't a Puritan, you were punished for it and if you were deemed a witch, you would be killed. The Native Americans were being displaced and their land being taken away after a while. It wasn't all about freedom. It was about land and power especially. This was also during the time of the slave trade. You wonder about why there are so many African-Americans here. They are here because their forbears were brought here. They didn't come for freedom, power, or land, or even a better life. They didn't even have a say on whether or not they wanted to come. They were just stuffed on the ships and brought to the New World, as slaves, to build wealth for others but never really getting the fruits of that labor. You also had European indentured servants coming over. Eventually, some European indentured servants and African slaves were realizing they were getting screwed over by the powers that were, that is, the elite planter class/slave owners. What happened? African slaves and European indentured servants rebelled together. Go read Bacon's Rebellion. Some of the elites were realizing that if there persons of peasant status were outnumbering them and they were rebelling, you either had to kill them all of co-op some of them. The elites couldn't kill them all because then no one would work. The elites weren't going to do the work because the idea was to be a person of leisure. This is where this concept ofc "whiteness" came in. The European servants were convinced to identify with the ruling class on the basis of skin color. They were given a little bit of land, allowed to testify in court, put on slave patrols. They were given preferences for being "white" and were being convinced that the slaves were the problem. African slaves were basically kept at a subservient status. Blacks and Whites were turned against each other and it stayed that way. Fast forward to the Civil War. Elite slave owners in the South admitted that they were prepared to secede because they wanted to keep slavery, and that was the only reason publically articulated. Most elites weren't going to fight, so they convinced the poor, White population of the South that if they didn't fight, slaves would take their jobs. Once again, divide and conquer. Most Whites in the South didn't own slaves. Why would they want to fight?
When you look at it, the reason for all of the ills of society have to do with the way this system was set up. From day one, the system was set up as to keep other people down. The idea of divide and conquer was used to keep people from rebelling against the system, but it favored Whites and kept Blacks at a very low position. Like Julian Bond said "Color has consequences". Being Black had consequences. It meant being on the lowest rung on the ladder. Basically, all of the stuff that did happen in the past, well, it had its consequences. The stuff that happened in the sixties regarding the riots, well, I am not advocating rioting. I am saying it was a reaction to 300 years of oppresion, racially, socially, and economically. Yes, new laws were passed, but that was not enough. The old system needed to be done away with in favor of a new system. Reforms were not the solution, a totally new system was needed. Radical change was needed. Affirmative action hasn't worked either. Combine the decline of industrial jobs, "white flight" and a dropping tax base in the city, well, add crack to the equation and things got really bad. Police brutality against African-Americans has been nothing new. Racial profiling has been going on for ages. Now we just have a name for it. I here people calling it issues with mental capacity, culture, etc. Well, what does mental capacity have to do with it? Another thing to think about is this: Where did this destructive culture come from? The love of money. Hip-hop came out of a issues involving the tearing down of the housing projects in the 1960's, which were torn down to make way for freeways. Hip-hop came out as a reaction to the issues in the ghettoes of New York City. Much of it was about social consciousness. It got bad when the love of money got involved. There are people who want to make socially conscious rap music. Many rappers do. Dead Prez, Mos Def, etc. You have gospel rappers like Reverend Run and Kirk Franklin. It is the rappers that glorify violence and other stupid stuff that makes the money. You want to blame culture, blame it on the love on money, because people produce whatever will sell. I could say more, but it would take days.
Lack of respect for the police, well , I am not surprise. Suspicion, fear, and lack of respect for the police, well, much of that could be traced back through America's history. Given the history between African-Americans and law enforcement, well, it doesn't surprise me there is alot of anger and resentment and suspicion.
Last edited by green_mariner; 11-21-2009 at 09:50 AM..
crime is much more directly tied to socio-economics than race. Just happens that AA's tend to be on lower side of that scale. Race is really a mute issue in the topic
Why don't areas like eastern Kentucky or West Virginia have sky high violent crime rates? Those areas are very poor, but people there don't have to worry about being shot for walking outside. I'm not saying there are no crimes committed, but there's a difference between stealing a lawn mower and shooting someone.
I live in a small town of 7500 people which is equally split between blacks and whites, and I know for a fact that about 90% of the police calls are to the black neighborhoods. Lately since many blacks are moving into traditionally white neighborhoods the crime seems to following them, so the whites are moving outside of town to the rural areas. This isn't just a big city thing, it's happening in the small towns too.
Why don't areas like eastern Kentucky or West Virginia have sky high violent crime rates? Those areas are very poor, but people there don't have to worry about being shot for walking outside. I'm not saying there are no crimes committed, but there's a difference between stealing a lawn mower and shooting someone.
I live in a small town of 7500 people which is equally split between blacks and whites, and I know for a fact that about 90% of the police calls are to the black neighborhoods. Lately since many blacks are moving into traditionally white neighborhoods the crime seems to following them, so the whites are moving outside of town to the rural areas. This isn't just a big city thing, it's happening in the small towns too.
WHy do you think that is the case? I think you should ask "why"? rather than to just accept things as is.
So you advocate random stops by the police? Well, I have this to say about it. It doens't help me one bit. I sound a bit like and "entitlement attitude", but I don't think I should have to be harrassed by the police. How does me getting stopped by the police help me? Please explain.
No I don't advocate random stops. I don't believe stops are random. Stops are made for a reason. If a cop is out there making truly random stops he will be found out and dealt with.
I think you miss the point of my posts. What I am saying is that if blacks are stopped in greater numbers than their percentage in the population it is not necessarily racial profiling as long as they are not stopped in greater numbers than the rate at which they perpetrate crimes.
For example, if blacks are 24% of the population but perpetrate 80% of the crime, stopping blacks 80% of the time would not be racial profiling. If the police are getting reports of young black males perpetrating crime and they are not getting reports of young white males perpetrating crime then young black males are going to get stopped more.
It's too simplistic to suggest that because blacks only make up 24% of the population they should not be stopped more than 24% of the time.
- Reel
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
