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.
I wonder if this is also a possible cause of some communities' high crime rate.
What You Should Know About Lead Based Paint in Your Home: Safety Alert (http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5054.html - broken link)
So OK, then the solution seems to be, "Stop passing down traits adopted during slavery and Jim Crow".
It's as simple and a difficult as that.
At every socio-economic level, blacks, or more specifically, black males are statistically over represented on most negative attributes.
Doesn't really matter anymore where they originated, because the originating conditions are or are going away. What matters is moving forward.
One suggestion. Quit dwelling on the past, especially the 1800's, slavery, all that. To much of that and people simply tune it out. And with good reason. They have their own survival struggle to deal with, and they most likely didn't own any slaves.
You may want to rant about wealth that was created by exploiting slaves as Indentured_Servant likes to do. But I can easy go down to Alabama or anywhere else in the deep south and find folks that are still upset about the North having destroyed their wealth.
So bottom line is, Modern Southern whites feel ripped off by the Civil War, Northern whites don't feel responsible for slavery.
Right or wrong, that's the lay of the land. And with a black president and wealthy blacks on TV all the time, the Slavery and Jim Crow cards are wearing thin.
What is more apparent to non-blacks at present is that black areas are problem areas to avoid. Until the black community changes that perception, by changing the reality, nothing is going to change.
The racists will point at black areas and say "see I told you". Sypathetic non-blacks may be sympathetic, but pragmatically they will have come to same conclusion, that those are areas to avoid.
In the end it's just biological. Organism start to tune out things that are background noise. And trust me folks would love to tune this stuff out. What's worse than some loud boisterous african american woman doing all that "Honey Child my people were slaves...blah blah blah" thing? Trust me people would just rather not deal with black culture when it gets to that level.
It might seem simple to you, and I am not saying that these traits should be passed down. At the same time, you aren't accounting for the fact that
A)Jim Crow racism only ended about 45 years ago.
B)Those persons who could not make would often continue the cycle. Those persons who were able to make it out of the funk were the ones with high rates of success. Those who didn't fell victim to the perils of the 1970's. I am not saying that you should get an education. I am saying that the playing field needs to be fully leveled for everyone.
At every socio-economical level? I have not seen any proof of that. Give me proof of this. If that were true, then Cascade Heights in Atlanta would be a ghetto, in which it is not.
Quit dwelling on the past? Well ,the past events have a big part of what happens later on. You seem to act as if slavery had absolutely no factor in this. Well, here is something to think about. Slaves are sitting there, picking cotton, sugarcane, etc in order to build wealth for someone else. This is wealth that these same slaves will not get to benefit from because they were not allowed to benefit. There were a few Blacks who were able to get by or get somewhat wealthy, but most were unable to. After slavery ended, then Reconstruction. Blacks were able to gain marginal political power, until the Reconstruction troops were withdrawn from the South. After this, Jim Crow racism was rampant everywhere in the South and institutional racism was rampant everywhere. Blacks were often given unequal educational opportunities in comparison to Whites. Try this for about 90 years and see what happens? Those days might be over, but for many, it started a cycle that kept continuing to this day. Those who were about to make it out of that cycle attained alot of success. Those who were unable to make it would mired in even worse conditions.
The South got alot of wealth exploiting slaves. The fact is, only a few people were able to benefit from it, mainly the slave owners. The only reasons poor White Southerners were benefiting at all is because of Southern paternalism. Blacks didn't benefit one bit from it. Why are many upset? Well, I look at it this way: Wealth in the South was ill-gotten and if the North destroyed that wealth, I don't shed a tear for it.
Maybe some Southern Whites feel ripped off by the Civil War. Irony is alot of them probably don't have relatives who owned slavery. I can only present this theory: Many of the elite Southern Whites were stirring up the poor White population for the benefit of elite interests. The North benefited from slavery too, though in a different way. Rum, textile mills, all of those things were all up North. The raw materials had to come from somewhere, such as the South, where the cotton and sugar cane was being grown. The difference is that the wealth in the South was with land holders. In the North, the wealth was with the factory owners. One other thing to consider is this: Slaves were considered property, therefore, considered a source of wealth. The South had more wealth, but it was concentrated within a few people.
Sure, there are wealthy Blacks on TV, but they represented a relatively small percentage of the population. Blacks on average still have higher poverty rates, lower per-capita incomes, more likely to be born in environmentally unsafe areas, more likely to attend bad schools. This is what I feel should happen. Those wealthy Blacks you speak of, they need to go down to those poor areas and show the people down there that anything can happen. Yes, there is a Black president, but the view of Black America in general is still negative. Job discrimination is more likely to happen to African-Americans. There are still problems going on. Maybe after this administration, more Black children will feel encouraged to stay in school, to help their communities.
Well maybe those persons who feel like Blacks or Black areas should be avoided need to be doing what I am doing. I am on the internet searching out places like Cascade Heights(in Atlanta,GA), Windsor Park(in LA,CA), and other things that buck the stereotype and show African-Americans in a good like. I am tired of seeing bad things about people who look like me. I go and look behind the stats, search out the reasons, search out the good things that are going on among African-Americans. I don't see alot of people doing that. It starts when I ask "How does this help ME?" If I am being targeted because of the color of my skin, it isn't helping me.
How is it biological? And I can name alot of bad things besides what you just said. I have lived around alot of bad stuff. I have lived around the "redneck" population feeling that "The South Shall Rise" attitude. I have seen dysfunctional Whites as well as dysfunctional Blacks. That is why when I hear your statements, I ask "How does it help me? How does it help the individual who doesn't fit the stereotypes?" I ask because I know if I or any other Black person who doesn't fit your idea of things is being targeted, then it isn't helpful to those persons or me. It isn't helpful to the persons mired in the ghettoes who want to do better, but for some reason, is having a hard time of it.
I wonder if this is also a possible cause of some communities' high crime rate.
What You Should Know About Lead Based Paint in Your Home: Safety Alert (http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5054.html - broken link)
One way to find out: Have people in these poor areas tested for levels of lead in their system.
It might seem simple to you, and I am not saying that these traits should be passed down. At the same time, you aren't accounting for the fact that
A)Jim Crow racism only ended about 45 years ago.
B)Those persons who could not make would often continue the cycle. Those persons who were able to make it out of the funk were the ones with high rates of success. Those who didn't fell victim to the perils of the 1970's. I am not saying that you should get an education. I am saying that the playing field needs to be fully leveled for everyone.
Jim Crow ended only 45 years ago, less than half an average lifespan ago... and we have a black president. That's some rapid progress by most historical standards...
The playing field should be leveled. OK, does that mean the same affirmative action for poor whites as poor minorities? If not then it's just reverse discrimination. Reverse discrimination that discriminates against whites who have the same problem many blacks have...
How exactly do you propose to level the playing field? I mean really, should every time someone gets to the status of wealthy, should they have it taken from them? Granted a "level playing field" is a nice idea. But pragmatically, how are you going to do that fairly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
At every socio-economical level? I have not seen any proof of that. Give me proof of this. If that were true, then Cascade Heights in Atlanta would be a ghetto, in which it is not.
It doesn't have to be a ghetto. It just has to have higher crime rates than non-black communities of similar economic standing. I believe data on this is rather easy to find. Check the DOJ stats.
[quote=pirate_lafitte;14214534]
Quit dwelling on the past? Well ,the past events have a big part of what happens later on. You seem to act as if slavery had absolutely no factor in this.
[quote=pirate_lafitte;14214534]I
OK, fine. Should black conquistadores, i.e. The Moors be hit up for reparations? Should the Romans be hit up for enslaving my ancestors 1000 years ago in England? Where exactly does it end, and why should *your* standards apply? Especially when your group is causing the most problems?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
Well, here is something to think about. Slaves are sitting there, picking cotton, sugarcane, etc in order to build wealth for someone else. This is wealth that these same slaves will not get to benefit from because they were not allowed to benefit. There were a few Blacks who were able to get by or get somewhat wealthy, but most were unable to. After slavery ended, then Reconstruction. Blacks were able to gain marginal political power, until the Reconstruction troops were withdrawn from the South. After this, Jim Crow racism was rampant everywhere in the South and institutional racism was rampant everywhere. Blacks were often given unequal educational opportunities in comparison to Whites. Try this for about 90 years and see what happens? Those days might be over, but for many, it started a cycle that kept continuing to this day. Those who were about to make it out of that cycle attained alot of success. Those who were unable to make it would mired in even worse conditions.
You are aware, right(?) that there were black slave owners? That blacks in africa sold other blacks into slavery, that Irish and Scotts suffered discrimination, etc.? You seem to think blacks somehow have a corner on the market for "screwed over".
Yet, the other groups have pulled themselves up, have they not. Take lesson from them. Trust me, my "whiteness" has not helped me a whit. I've been better of to be Tiger Woods, Kobye, LT, or any of a bunch of other blacks.
I won't say the effects you cite don't exist. But if they were as *oppressive* as you claim, Oprah would be a cleaning woman, sitting at the back of the bus, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
The South got alot of wealth exploiting slaves. The fact is, only a few people were able to benefit from it, mainly the slave owners. The only reasons poor White Southerners were benefiting at all is because of Southern paternalism. Blacks didn't benefit one bit from it. Why are many upset? Well, I look at it this way: Wealth in the South was ill-gotten and if the North destroyed that wealth, I don't shed a tear for it.
Nor do I. But I am perturbed that it is quite possible my ancestors fought on both sides and killed each other over you guys. And you want reparations and affirmative action. I think you know what I think about that. I'm tired of being asked to pay for what slavers did, and I surely don't have any that great wealth you think was around. Do you realize how swept away by todays numbers, the increase of overall wealth that even in the last 10 years, even in this crash, that wealth is?
Orders of magnitude. I'd almost bet the the net worth of the blacks in the NFL and the NBA exceed it. Tiger Woods is a *billionaire*.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
Maybe some Southern Whites feel ripped off by the Civil War. Irony is alot of them probably don't have relatives who owned slavery. I can only present this theory: Many of the elite Southern Whites were stirring up the poor White population for the benefit of elite interests. The North benefited from slavery too, though in a different way. Rum, textile mills, all of those things were all up North. The raw materials had to come from somewhere, such as the South, where the cotton and sugar cane was being grown. The difference is that the wealth in the South was with land holders. In the North, the wealth was with the factory owners. One other thing to consider is this: Slaves were considered property, therefore, considered a source of wealth. The South had more wealth, but it was concentrated within a few people.
Nothing new there. Rich men declare wars. Poor men fight them. Same deal in the American Revolution. Hypothetically, everyone should just refuse to fight in such things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
Sure, there are wealthy Blacks on TV, but they represented a relatively small percentage of the population.
Same can be said for any other race. No? Really? TV stars represent a small part of the population. No s#it Sherlock. But because it's visible people notice. Just like all the black kids shooting hoops and dreaming of the NBA, of which there's maybe 900 in the whole world. We're all way to over affected by "Hollywood" and "Sports".
The point is, if blacks were as oppressed as you want to believe, they couldn't be in those millions a year jobs. They'd be janitors or still working agriculture. As it is, that's been dumped on hispanics for the most part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
Blacks on average still have higher poverty rates, lower per-capita incomes, more likely to be born in environmentally unsafe areas, more likely to attend bad schools.
The schools stay bad because you folks let black kids act like monkeys. Teach them to go to school and learn and this would change in a generation.
Black culture causes the continued propogation of black problems at this point in time. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU NEED TO WAKE UP TO.
Geezus, ask Bill Cosby if you won't believe anyone but a "brother".
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
This is what I feel should happen. Those wealthy Blacks you speak of, they need to go down to those poor areas and show the people down there that anything can happen. Yes, there is a Black president, but the view of Black America in general is still negative.
Because of black culture, as noted above. As I've said repeatedly, when the black culture changes... and then some time after that, when folks see the change to be real, this perception will change. May take more than our remaining lifetimes. Because it's a two part problem. The change... and the realization the change has occurred.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
Job discrimination is more likely to happen to African-Americans. There are still problems going on.
Yes it will. The problems are on both sides. But avoiding what one finds to be a problem and distasteful (i.e. the black culture at present) is just natural. People don't really want problems in thier lives. "Why take the risk? Why bother? What's the return on investment?" for better or worse is a rational point of view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
I
Maybe after this administration, more Black children will feel encouraged to stay in school, to help their communities.
Perhaps a few more will. But even more will look at Tiger Woods and say, "Yeah I wanna be like that, did you see all them white hoes he was...?" And, "Not only that, he makes more $$$ than the President."
Besides, Obama is a politician. Been quite some time, I think since kids actually looked up to politicians. Maybe since JFK, even.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
I
Well maybe those persons who feel like Blacks or Black areas should be avoided need to be doing what I am doing. I am on the internet searching out places like Cascade Heights(in Atlanta,GA), Windsor Park(in LA,CA), and other things that buck the stereotype and show African-Americans in a good like.
Even if those places are *GREAT* it doesn't matter. They are statistical anomalies. For an average person looking to have a nice life it just makes sense to avoid black areas. The stats show it to be true. As stated above, the change must come first, and have time to be assimilated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
I am tired of seeing bad things about people who look like me. I go and look behind the stats, search out the reasons, search out the good things that are going on among African-Americans. I don't see alot of people doing that. It starts when I ask "How does this help ME?" If I am being targeted because of the color of my skin, it isn't helping me.
Well, that's a start. Highlighting the good helps. But the broader black culture needs to wake up to the need for change or you're just fighting an uphill battle.
Look, a case can be made that all people suck. Especially when either times are very tough, or they get power. In the first case they feel justified in being extreme. In the second the are extreme because there's no repercussion. It's not 100% of everybody, but it's common.
"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Henry Kissinger
What is problematic in the black community, both from a pragmatic and wider perceptual standpoint, is the over representation of blacks, mostly in the violent crime arena. And that's mostly a black male issue, at least that's what I believe I heard on the Radio Show "Uprising". A pro black radio show on the west coast. See that. Even the radio show has an aggressive, violent name. "Uprising". As in "Violent Overthrow". LOL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
How is it biological?
That's open to debate. I speculate the african ecology fosters and aggressive and hyper reproduction strategy that not only affects humans, but other animals as well. From the perspective of strains of species that are not african... that means african strains are a *threat*.
One visible marker may be the average larger jaw of blacks. Generally that's a testosterone marker and testosterone fosters violence. But of course that's speculative. Though seems reasonable. The vestiges of 60's political correctness as well as the WWII issues, at present make taboo saying anything about genetic predispositions other than "we are all the same". Yeah? Same as who? Charles Manson, Mother Theresa? Someone else?
Pretty much begs that one suspends belief in what one can readily see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
I
And I can name alot of bad things besides what you just said. I have lived around alot of bad stuff. I have lived around the "redneck" population feeling that "The South Shall Rise" attitude. I have seen dysfunctional Whites as well as dysfunctional Blacks. That is why when I hear your statements, I ask "How does it help me? How does it help the individual who doesn't fit the stereotypes?" I ask because I know if I or any other Black person who doesn't fit your idea of things is being targeted, then it isn't helpful to those persons or me. It isn't helpful to the persons mired in the ghettoes who want to do better, but for some reason, is having a hard time of it.
Yes, there are problem demographics of all races. Never have said any different.
Here's the thing. As long as the broader black populace is percieved as being a problem group, treating all blacks as potential threats makes 100% sense. As in, "Why take a chance?"
So yes, if you way to the outside of the center of the curve, you do have a problem. But the problem is a reaction to the broader number and perceptions, and as such are entirely rational, even if not completely accurate in every case.
I mean really, if you were to stick you tongue in a socket and only got shocked some percentage of the time, how long would it be before you stopped doing that? LOL!
[quote=Jmadison2;14224460]Jim Crow ended only 45 years ago, less than half an average lifespan ago... and we have a black president. That's some rapid progress by most historical standards...
The playing field should be leveled. OK, does that mean the same affirmative action for poor whites as poor minorities? If not then it's just reverse discrimination. Reverse discrimination that discriminates against whites who have the same problem many blacks have...
How exactly do you propose to level the playing field? I mean really, should every time someone gets to the status of wealthy, should they have it taken from them? Granted a "level playing field" is a nice idea. But pragmatically, how are you going to do that fairly?
It doesn't have to be a ghetto. It just has to have higher crime rates than non-black communities of similar economic standing. I believe data on this is rather easy to find. Check the DOJ stats.
[quote=pirate_lafitte;14214534]
Quit dwelling on the past? Well ,the past events have a big part of what happens later on. You seem to act as if slavery had absolutely no factor in this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte
I
OK, fine. Should black conquistadores, i.e. The Moors be hit up for reparations? Should the Romans be hit up for enslaving my ancestors 1000 years ago in England? Where exactly does it end, and why should *your* standards apply? Especially when your group is causing the most problems?
You are aware, right(?) that there were black slave owners? That blacks in africa sold other blacks into slavery, that Irish and Scotts suffered discrimination, etc.? You seem to think blacks somehow have a corner on the market for "screwed over".
Yet, the other groups have pulled themselves up, have they not. Take lesson from them. Trust me, my "whiteness" has not helped me a whit. I've been better of to be Tiger Woods, Kobye, LT, or any of a bunch of other blacks.
I won't say the effects you cite don't exist. But if they were as *oppressive* as you claim, Oprah would be a cleaning woman, sitting at the back of the bus, right?
Nor do I. But I am perturbed that it is quite possible my ancestors fought on both sides and killed each other over you guys. And you want reparations and affirmative action. I think you know what I think about that. I'm tired of being asked to pay for what slavers did, and I surely don't have any that great wealth you think was around. Do you realize how swept away by todays numbers, the increase of overall wealth that even in the last 10 years, even in this crash, that wealth is?
Orders of magnitude. I'd almost bet the the net worth of the blacks in the NFL and the NBA exceed it. Tiger Woods is a *billionaire*.
Nothing new there. Rich men declare wars. Poor men fight them. Same deal in the American Revolution. Hypothetically, everyone should just refuse to fight in such things.
Same can be said for any other race. No? Really? TV stars represent a small part of the population. No s#it Sherlock. But because it's visible people notice. Just like all the black kids shooting hoops and dreaming of the NBA, of which there's maybe 900 in the whole world. We're all way to over affected by "Hollywood" and "Sports".
The point is, if blacks were as oppressed as you want to believe, they couldn't be in those millions a year jobs. They'd be janitors or still working agriculture. As it is, that's been dumped on hispanics for the most part.
The schools stay bad because you folks let black kids act like monkeys. Teach them to go to school and learn and this would change in a generation.
Black culture causes the continued propogation of black problems at this point in time. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU NEED TO WAKE UP TO.
Geezus, ask Bill Cosby if you won't believe anyone but a "brother".
Because of black culture, as noted above. As I've said repeatedly, when the black culture changes... and then some time after that, when folks see the change to be real, this perception will change. May take more than our remaining lifetimes. Because it's a two part problem. The change... and the realization the change has occurred.
Yes it will. The problems are on both sides. But avoiding what one finds to be a problem and distasteful (i.e. the black culture at present) is just natural. People don't really want problems in thier lives. "Why take the risk? Why bother? What's the return on investment?" for better or worse is a rational point of view.
Perhaps a few more will. But even more will look at Tiger Woods and say, "Yeah I wanna be like that, did you see all them white hoes he was...?" And, "Not only that, he makes more $$$ than the President."
Besides, Obama is a politician. Been quite some time, I think since kids actually looked up to politicians. Maybe since JFK, even.
Even if those places are *GREAT* it doesn't matter. They are statistical anomalies. For an average person looking to have a nice life it just makes sense to avoid black areas. The stats show it to be true. As stated above, the change must come first, and have time to be assimilated.
Well, that's a start. Highlighting the good helps. But the broader black culture needs to wake up to the need for change or you're just fighting an uphill battle.
Look, a case can be made that all people suck. Especially when either times are very tough, or they get power. In the first case they feel justified in being extreme. In the second the are extreme because there's no repercussion. It's not 100% of everybody, but it's common.
"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Henry Kissinger
What is problematic in the black community, both from a pragmatic and wider perceptual standpoint, is the over representation of blacks, mostly in the violent crime arena. And that's mostly a black male issue, at least that's what I believe I heard on the Radio Show "Uprising". A pro black radio show on the west coast. See that. Even the radio show has an aggressive, violent name. "Uprising". As in "Violent Overthrow". LOL!
That's open to debate. I speculate the african ecology fosters and aggressive and hyper reproduction strategy that not only affects humans, but other animals as well. From the perspective of strains of species that are not african... that means african strains are a *threat*.
One visible marker may be the average larger jaw of blacks. Generally that's a testosterone marker and testosterone fosters violence. But of course that's speculative. Though seems reasonable. The vestiges of 60's political correctness as well as the WWII issues, at present make taboo saying anything about genetic predispositions other than "we are all the same". Yeah? Same as who? Charles Manson, Mother Theresa? Someone else?
Pretty much begs that one suspends belief in what one can readily see.
Yes, there are problem demographics of all races. Never have said any different.
Here's the thing. As long as the broader black populace is percieved as being a problem group, treating all blacks as potential threats makes 100% sense. As in, "Why take a chance?"
So yes, if you way to the outside of the center of the curve, you do have a problem. But the problem is a reaction to the broader number and perceptions, and as such are entirely rational, even if not completely accurate in every case.
I mean really, if you were to stick you tongue in a socket and only got shocked some percentage of the time, how long would it be before you stopped doing that? LOL!
You get the idea.
It might be rapid progress, but the gap still needs to be closed.
If affirmative action is helpful for poor whites, and I think it is, then let it happen. I don't think it should be outlawed, but rather, reformed to help everyone, to level the playing field for EVERYONE to have the same access. Make it helpful for poor White people as well as poor minorities. And go into these neighborhoods and let people know there is a bigger world out there and if they want good things from it, let them know what has to be done and give them ALL, the same access.
I did a cartography project on crime in Atlanta. It was interesting. I found areas of concentrated violence occurring in predominantly White areas as well as predominantly Black areas. I also found a strong correlation with poverty. The areas with the most concentrated poverty had the most violence. I also looked at the areas with the lowest levels of violence. There were predominantly Black areas with low levels of violence. The crime that existed in those areas were a result of spillover, as in these nice areas were often next to the worst areas of Atlanta. What did it prove to me? Race doesn't determine crime rates. Location and other factors often can be big indicators.
I wasn't even talking about reparations. I was talking about the fact that things that happen now can have an effect later on.
Let me tell you something: There was alot of violence among the Irish and Scottish in the early days, and they were treated the worst. I don't deny that. What happened? When the Scotch-Irish came to this nation, most settled in the rural areas, and in many cases taking over lands once occupied by Native Americans. Not only that, many Europeans were brought over as indentured servants. After a certain time, they were freed. If an indentured servant ran away, you couldn't tell such person from any other White person. After Bacon's Rebellion, indentured servitude of Europeans stopped. Why? African slaves and indentured servants were getting together and causing a rebellion. The elites didn't want this. Because the servants were considered "White", they were given certain things such as more land, put on slave patrols. Blacks never benefited from any of that. There were some Black slaves. There were also "slave raids" were people were kidnapped and put into slavery. The Scottish and Irish were discriminated against, but once they were able to "become White", they were given the same advantages as other White people, given "White privilege". Blacks in America were never given that on any level.
I am not saying there aren't successful Black people out there. I am saying the effects of years of slavery, Jim Crow racism, and discrimination have played a role. All of that might be over, but now there are new challenges.
Like I said before, I never said there weren't any successful Blacks out there. Those were the persons who managed to rise out of the wreckage. They were helped somehow, or something happened. This doesn't happen for everyone.
I have another question then. If Black culture has everything to do with it, then where does this culture come from?
You admit discrimination exists. Now answer this for me: How does this help the Black persons who don't fulfill any of those stereotypes people seek to avoid? How does it help those persons if the persons I am speaking of are being targeted for discrimination?
Anomaly or not, those are still nice areas with large Black populations. Those areas go against what many people perceive. To ignore those areas is to say "nice, predominantly Black areas don't exist".
I am going to say to you what I said to another user. This "eugenics" talk has no benefit for the individual.
And why should I have to "get the idea"? I am not the one out there committing crimes. My family isn't doing any of that. Alot of Black people I know are not criminals and are doing good things. How is targeting people like me helpful to people like me?
Minorities are disproportionately investigated and prosecuted for non violent drug offences.
"Consider this: According to a 2006 report by the American Civil Liberties Union, African Americans make up an estimated 15% of drug users, but they account for 37% of those arrested on drug charges, 59% of those convicted and 74% of all drug offenders sentenced to prison. Or consider this: The U.S. has 260,000 people in state prisons on nonviolent drug charges; 183,200 (more than 70%) of them are black or Latino"
The belief that poor people and minorities make up a large portion of the illegal drug using population in this country is false. Bad policy in The War on Drugs only makes it appear that way.
I'm a legal immigrant to the US and have been here for almost 5 years now.
Have no exposure whatsoever to the cultural and racial history of the US, but even I have learned that if an area is filled mostly with blacks or hispanics, that's trouble.
And I'm not alone. My fellow Indians, Chinese, Japanese and other Asians who immigrate into the US somehow inherit this unwritten law about these two communities.
It's more telling when it comes to real estate. It's almost universally accepted that buying a house or moving into one of these areas is not very wise.
My ex-compatriots put it plainly in black and white. "Leave your wallet in a white area, come back after a week and you'll find it untouched. But when you are in a black or hispanic area, don't be surprised if your wallet gets taken"
It's very opinionated, but can be quite true. On the other hand, every rule has an exception. There can be good blacks and hispanics too. It's just that the bad eggs outnumber them and bring everybody down with them.
Minorities are disproportionately investigated and prosecuted for non violent drug offences.
"Consider this: According to a 2006 report by the American Civil Liberties Union, African Americans make up an estimated 15% of drug users, but they account for 37% of those arrested on drug charges, 59% of those convicted and 74% of all drug offenders sentenced to prison. Or consider this: The U.S. has 260,000 people in state prisons on nonviolent drug charges; 183,200 (more than 70%) of them are black or Latino"
The belief that poor people and minorities make up a large portion of the illegal drug using population in this country is false. Bad policy in The War on Drugs only makes it appear that way.
Quoting an ACLU study is like quoting Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton, and thinking you've made a balanced argument.
Minorities are disproportionately investigated and prosecuted for non violent drug offences.
"Consider this: According to a 2006 report by the American Civil Liberties Union, African Americans make up an estimated 15% of drug users, but they account for 37% of those arrested on drug charges, 59% of those convicted and 74% of all drug offenders sentenced to prison. Or consider this: The U.S. has 260,000 people in state prisons on nonviolent drug charges; 183,200 (more than 70%) of them are black or Latino"
The belief that poor people and minorities make up a large portion of the illegal drug using population in this country is false. Bad policy in The War on Drugs only makes it appear that way.
I had a feeling for a few years that the "War on Drugs" really wasn't about drugs. If you look at the time when the drug war was happening, the poorer, often predominantly minority communities were getting poorer and having more problems. Much of this was due to the decline of industrial jobs. These communities often became the places for "drug retail", and mainly those areas. Something about cocaine. It is expensive and used mainly(but not exclusively) by wealthy White people. When there were people in poor, predominantly minority areas feeling low and unhappy, some people turned to drugs. When it was found that cocaine could be turned into CRACK, things got a bit cheaper. Soon, anyone could get this drug. This is when the drug war became more heated. If this was really a war on drugs, then the idea is to go to the source. Logically, if you stop the flow of cocaine into the nation, then you can't make crack from it. Not really. People were targeted crack more. Laws against crack were harsher than for cocaine. 5mg of crack and you spend about 5 or 6 years in prison. That is the same sentence or more than a person would get for some sex offenses. Not for selling or distribution, but simple possession, and simple possession is considered a felony. Cocaine, however, is considered a misdemeanor and draws about one year in prison. Most crack users are minorities and most cocaine users are White. Sounds like a war against minorities.
The drug war did alot of bad things. It set off a wave of violence. Speaking of jobs in the industrial sector that were going away, it boiled down to money. Those persons who felt like they could make a quick buck got into drug dealing, especially crack. Similar thing with moonshine in the Prohibition era. Once alcohol was illegal, those who sold it became rich. It also set off a wave of violence. The violence ended once Prohibition ended. With the drug war, no such thing. Because it is illegal, alot of people are making money from it. Gang violence skyrocketed, mainly over "turf", drugs, and other things. Those who used crack suffered. Felonies for crack are steep and it sent alot of people to prison. Alot of people imprisoned, killed, dying, or other ill effects. My theory is that after the decline of the industrial sector, there were alot of people left without jobs. Some people call them "surplus population". In this instance, some people seek to get rid of or control the "population surplus". No jobs, alot of people without skills, and many them are considered "useless" in the eyes of many people. What do some people want to do? Jail them, get rid of them somehow. Rather than invest money in improving schools, helping to create new jobs, money is spent on building prisons, big ones. Prisons make alot of money for the government.
Minorities are disproportionately investigated and prosecuted for non violent drug offences.
"Consider this: According to a 2006 report by the American Civil Liberties Union, African Americans make up an estimated 15% of drug users, but they account for 37% of those arrested on drug charges, 59% of those convicted and 74% of all drug offenders sentenced to prison. Or consider this: The U.S. has 260,000 people in state prisons on nonviolent drug charges; 183,200 (more than 70%) of them are black or Latino"
The belief that poor people and minorities make up a large portion of the illegal drug using population in this country is false. Bad policy in The War on Drugs only makes it appear that way.
It could also be a war on those who are buying, using and selling drugs.
Just a thought...
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.
