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.
When a person calls you a racist because of your facts, they are working from the top down. They are not attacking the facts but rather the intention, the conclusion you expect readers to draw.
You are trying to work with a fact back to a general idea. Your fact expects readers to infer an idea, that a race is causing all the problems but you just don't come out and say it. You want the readers to say it for you. That is ineffective for those who know what you are trying to accomplish.
Look, I grew up with White supremacists. I have heard this since the 80s. I hear it at work today. It is racism. Don't be afraid of the word. Try to figure out why people may think of your post that way if that is not how you want to be viewed.
I've been trying since last night to express what was bothering me about the initial post. You have described it well.
My comment was not meant in the LITERAL sense...if it was construed that way, my apologies. It was a figure of speech to support the fact a small amount of people commit a majority of the crime and that could be white, black or any other.
Please explain what you meant then. By "purge" and "of course, it's not doeable" (paraphrasing)
Usually, in written form, people take care of the words they use, FYI.
There are many "Federal Reports" reports that outline crime... some of the people should read them. Don't get hung up on % for the sake of bias... because 100% of 13% can never equal 100% of 65%. Actual numbers tells the truths that people are glossing over.
Quote:
IF you want to talk crime; you truly need to go and learn more. In simple terms, turn on your own TV... there are 24/7 -365 Crime shows, based on REAL LIFE events, and they can run new shows everyday, showing every kind of crime imaginable "created by white people, upon and against other white people". "chart"
The news media may gloss over it, and they may turn it into a movie which makes you not see the reality, because you get hung up on the image of the actors recreating the crime and its activities. It's a form of trying to "sanitize white crime", by making movies of it, rather than headlines "news stories'... Yet, its the exact same crime and it damages lives, property, and engage every criminal act that people conjure up to create. You might want to try and delude yourself to 'pretend its not real", but go ask some of the parents of the victims, or ask some of the children who are victims, or as the families who have lost whole families, ask some of the people who've been robbed, swindled, stabbed, hacked up, shot up, beat up and every other vile thing that human beings can and have done to others. If they are at peace, because another white person committed the crime. I don't think you will be pleased with the answer you get.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Maybe even open your eyes
According to Kush Azrael of the Call and Post, “when the news speaks about gang-related deaths, it is treated almost exclusively as a black problem.” He went on to point out that The Bureau of Justice Statistics “showed that during the period of 1990 to 2008, 53% of gang homicides were committed by white offenders and 56.5% of gang homicide victims were white.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The media’s obsessed with black-on-black crime, but hardly, if ever, mentions concerns about white-on-white crime… or appears to notice that there is a problem. There is no outrage aired on the News at 5 from white communities
I have studied sociology for years. The majority of people consider where to live based on two main factors, economics, and living near others of their own race and/or ethnic background.
Well those decent black families that lived in the projects in Yonkers sure wanted to move to better neighborhoods in spite of the fact that they would be surrounded by white families. They wanted better education and a higher quality of living, segregating low income poor into on area was a doomed policy.
Quote:
The judge did not order specific action to desegregate the schools or housing, but said further proceedings would be held on the issues. He set a hearing for Dec. 18 at the United States Court House on Foley Square in lower Manhattan.
The ruling yesterday was issued in a five-year-old landmark Federal suit that charged Yonkers officials with causing school and housing segregation. Although the officials did not dispute the allegations of segregation, they denied having been responsible for actions that caused it.
That in a nutshell is the flux of the racial problems in America. When that second number comes down(and I think it will with time) so will the tension it creates among the general population.
i love when people reveal who they really are.. lol
Not committing crime is an easy thing to do, in my case anyway. Not being looked down because of your race, that is actually harder. You can control yourself, you can't control what someone else thinks of you.
especially when the data shows cops target minorities more even though the stats show white do more drugs and commit more crimes.
Stop and frisk in NYC has data showing they had to stop 2 to 3 times as many Black folk to get the same number of guns and drugs as white folk off the street.
However, I will note that it is widely known that felons have a markedly difficult time in finding jobs upon release from prison.
Keeping this fact in the background, we must go back to 1986, when Congress passed (and Reagan signed) the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which was primarily aimed at 'cocaine'.
At the time (and currently, I guess), there were two ways of ingesting cocaine: 'crack', and 'powdered'
Now, crack cocaine was the preference of blacks, since it was cheap. Powdered was preferred by the more affluent whites.
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act decided to impose a 100 to 1 ratio: it took 100 times as much 'powdered' cocaine as 'crack' cocaine in order for the criminal to receive one of the mandatory prison sentences: 5, 10 or 20 years (with no parole).
In other words, a person holding 50 grams of crack (the size of a candy bar), would receive a (say) 10 year sentence; another person would have to have 5,000 grams of powder (filling a briefcase) to get the same sentence.
What happened next is not difficult to understand: the incarceration rate of blacks rose sharply.
In 2010 Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act, that lowered the ratio to 18 to 1.
However, much of the damage had been done. It was tough enough for a black American to get a job. It became almost impossible with a felony tacked onto the resume.
So, let us not simply assume that 'black people' are more inclined to crime than whites. If there had been parity between crack and powder, you would have seen a lot more whites incarcerated.
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.
