Black Crime

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by alexb123, Aug 29, 2005.

  1. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    I was thinking about South Africa and its wicked high crime rate, and why doesn't the rest of Africa have such high crime rates?

    Well, South Africa is one of the few industrialized nations in Africa, so it makes sense that they have such high crime, as they're really the only country that is counting up the crime!

    But then I think, why doesn't Ghana have nearly as many problems?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    You think they don't have cities in the Appalacian areas of the nation??? Of course they do!! And the crime rates are not nearly as high as the black, innercity crime. Why?

    The Mexican crime in LA is high ...but not as high as with black areas.
    The Chinese crime is not nearly as violent ...they seem intent on making money, not making dead bodies!
    The Vietnamese gangs here in Dallas are slowly becoming a problem and they're especially vicious. But it's not nearly the problem as the blacks in the major cities of the nation.
    Italian or Irish crime is including in the white crime, so even if it's terrible, it's not nearly what the crime is with the blacks in the cities.

    As to Africa, my best guess is that the crime is NOT reported like it is in other nations of the world. I'm still reading the new National Geo magazine about Africa, so I might have something to add later.

    Baron Max
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    Statistics please.

    Data please.

    That's some sort of weird non sequitur. Since they're Italian, it's not as bad as black crime? Ever hear of the mafia? Did you ever watch gangs of New York?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Jerome Registered Member

    Messages:
    11
    [
    Just because evidence is anecdotal does not mean that it is wrong. It means that it may not be highly reliable.

    It sounds as though you may like some statistics. I personally find statistics to be somewhat irrelevant to most issues and extremely fallible.

    Here goes:

    According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics as of 2001, 16.6% of the entire US black male population was incarcerated in a Federal prison, compared to 7.7% of the hispanic male population, and 2.6% of the white male population (I'm guessing that they didn't bother with a calculation for people of Asian/South Asian descent, and what the heck is hispanic? I thought we had agreed on the universal term "latino(a)"?), http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm.

    Additionally, based on current trends, a black male in the united states has a 32% chance of being incarcerated in a State or Federal prison at some point during their lifetime, compared to 17% for latin males, and 5.9% for white males, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#lifetime.

    I consider homicide to be the most violent of all crimes. Just my anectdotal take on violence, but I think its valid. And again here in the USA, black males out perform whites. According to the same compilation of statistics in 2002, Blacks were 7 times more likely than whites to commit murder, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm In correlation, blacks were also overrepresented as victims of homicide for the years 1976-2000 (see prior URL).

    What does all of this mean? It means that blacks commit the vast amount of crime in the United States. Of those crimes, blacks are far more likelier than whites to commit murder. And when blacks do commit murder, they usually do so against other blacks.

    I didn't make this stuff up. Our own government compiled these statistics.


    I won't profess to know everything about black people, but I have lived in black communities.

    I grew up in Baltimore which is two-thirds black, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore#Demographics, and I have lived and worked in the ghettoes of Baltimore, and I have lived in the ghetto of Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn, NYC. So, I have experienced black communities first hand.

    I can say with authority that they are the most disgusting and chaotic communities that I have ever lived or worked in. The residents would regularly behave in a loud, violent, animalistic manner. The residents of these communities would regularly defile their own homes with all manner of filth, trash, and illicit drugs. The men would primarily roam the neighborhoods while drinking malt liquor and smoking marijuana cigarettes. Yes, it is that brazen.

    I have been regularly threatened and goaded by the black residents of these communities. Luckily, I am athletically built and don't make for a promising victim; so, I have not yet been attacked, but I know firsthand plenty of individuals who have been.


    Yes, really!

    I just gave you statistical evidence.

    The black culture of which I speak is one born of the urban ghetto. It is a culture of violence that denigrates women and ridicules education.

    Being someone who is grounded in science, I do not share the view that the violent/chaotic behavior of urban black culture is one born of biology. On the contrary, I believe that is a culture wholly born of prior segrationist policies and an earlier unwillingness to accept blacks into integrated society.

    Based on what we know of genetics and evolution any predisposition by blacks towards violence and chaos is negligibly attributable to biology (there is evidence of higher testosterone levels among blacks but that is negligible, http://www.gladwell.com/1997/1997_05_19_a_sports.htm).

    This culture is separate from the general cultures of the United States. It is a subculture that is reinforced from within. If someone tries to break out, they are accused of not being a "real black man/woman" by both blacks and whites.


    I do admit to a personal bias against hippies because they wear ugly shoes and stink of cat urine ("patchouli" I think they call it).

    I gave you the sources for all of the statistics that I presented, and I gave you my firsthand observations as someone who has lived and worked in black communities.

    But, statistics are merely a tool. They are a starting point for discussion and reasoning through to solutions. Statistics are not the end of an argument.


    No one should be allowed to make excuses for violent crimes or crimes based on greed.

    I've established some facts, and I am ready for an honest discussion. Are you?

    That is one manifestation, yes.

    This could possibly lead to a misguided perception. However, we know that statistically this is true, and I personally have witnessed and experienced "black crime". So, that is not true in this case.

    You've got me there, hippy. I don't have that information, and I don't see how it is relevant either.

    Yes, being an educated individual, I am aware of these things.

    [/QUOTE]

    Unfortunately, individuals who cling to the notion that there is actually such a thing as "race" will not be able to perceive facts in a sensible manner. Science has proven that genetically there is no such thing as "race".
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2005
  8. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Excellent post and links, Jerome ....thanks!

    Baron Max
     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    Jerome:

    Welcome to sciforums. It is interesting that you choose as your first post to respond to comments which were a response to somebody else's post. Anyhow...

    I agree.

    Interesting that you say this, then go on to rely on statistics.

    Could be due to over-policing of blacks, for example. Have you considered that?

    Given that the black socioeconomic circumstances are, on average, much worse than those of the white population, this could well be due to environmental reasons. And, of course, we're only counting the murders where the perpetrators were caught, here.

    No. It means that blacks are convicted and incarcerated for more crimes than white people, on average. Not the same thing at all.

    So, it's really ghetto culture, not black culture. Put white people in a ghetto and see what happens.

    Only "earlier unwillingness"? Are you claiming there's no racism these days? Anyway, at least you're not supporting the biological determinist stance taken by many of the racists here.

    Every multicultural society has subcultures. In fact, even societies considered "mono-cultural" have subcultures, grouped by common interest, for example.

    You speak as if subcultures are inherently bad. Do you want a completely homogeneous society?

    That's a debate for another time.
     
  10. Jerome Registered Member

    Messages:
    11
    Yes, it is.
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    Jerome:

    It can be a chicken and egg situation. More policing doesn't necessarily mean less crime. In fact, it is guaranteed to lead to more convictions and hence more recorded crime.

    Not surprising in primarily black communities, is it?

    Good question. Prisons don't seem to be a good answer. The USA is very keen on locking people away, but it doesn't seem to reduce crime significantly.

    Now that is an interesting idea. Could be worth a try.

    Again, I am not surprised that your personal experience would be different as a white person living in a black ghetto than if you were living in a white ghetto. But can you generalise from your personal experience? I'm not convinced.

    Many reasons - almost all social. Unemployment, feelings of disenfranchisement, overcrowding, etc. etc.

    I don't think your generalisation is valid.

    No, it is not completely a creation of whites.

    Again, I don't see any evidence to support your step from "some black people" to "black people in general". The same can be said of some white people. Why make it a racial issue?

    All the more reason to totally reject bigotry, I would think. Otherwise, you're just descending to the same level as the people who set out to hurt you.

    The "black" part of "urban black ghetto culture" is not the important part. Surely you can see that?

    Bravo.

    And exactly the same can be said of white communities.
     
  12. Jerome Registered Member

    Messages:
    11
    Look, I can't argue with an idealist who obviously has never had to live in the ghetto amongst the crazies. It's not bigotry to be ready to defend yourself when you see black skin; it's survival.
     
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    Your real concern is not black skin, it seems. It is with people threatening you. Why confuse two separate issues?
     
  14. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Oh, so true, so true!! Any comment one makes concerning reality, the idealist can just invent a new ideal to counter it! ...LOL! Everything is or shoud be perfect for idealists.

    But don't worry, Jerome, there actually are sensible people in the world ...it's just that we've made laws against it, so we have to hide in closets. Any sensible comments are instantly dismissed by call the person nasty names.

    All people are created equal ...it's just that some people are more equal than others!

    Baron Max
     
  15. Jerome Registered Member

    Messages:
    11
    You're half right. The fact is that the only people who threaten me or my friends and family have black skin. The only people who continually try and physically intimidate me or my family and friends have black skin. So, you see, black skin is a warning sign for violent criminal behavior. Should you ignore what you know to be true? I don't turn the other cheek, and I don't ignore empirical evidence.

    Does the behavior come innately from the skin? Of course not, but for some reason they are linked. And I stand ready to defend myself by any means necessary against black brutality. The questions of how and why go out the window when someone is trying to take what you have.

    Come live in Baltimore City or any of the other black metropolises south of the Mason Dixon, or heck, you could even try 6 months in Detroit, Camden, or Newark, and then tell me about your idealism. It won't be so easy.

    After you or your loved one has been threatened or worse, see how your idealism holds up. It's not so easy then, and the questions become somewhat moot. Then you must deal with the reality of black urban violence.

    So come to Baltimore, we love idealists.
     
  16. Koolz Registered Member

    Messages:
    24
    hmm... try putting a different warning sign other than the color of a persons skin. Like, wears all red, every single day. Or, puts on masks before walking into convinient stores. Or, my personal favorite, the president of any country condemned by the World Court For International Terrorism. Seriously, its so easy to avoid racial issues entirely when you just ignore a persons skin color, and look for other simularities.
     
  17. apendrapew Oral defecator Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    577
    JamesR:
    If this is so, correct me. Please pick my last post apart, so I can understand what you are thinking so I can destroy your argument.

    From reading your posts, it's getting unclear as to whether or not you acknowledge the existence of a black problem because you blame it on their 'socioeconomical situation' and then point out the problems with using statistics to come to conclusions, as if there is not sufficient evidence indicating a black crime problem.

    Basically, what I'm asking for is clarification on your stance in this argument. Do you agree that blacks are generally more violent than whites (regardless of their causes) or not? If you don't, what could I do to convince you otherwise ?

    If you do, what do you think its causes are? (obviously for you, biology is completely out of the question). What I'm getting from you is that their disparity in crime is due to socioeconomics and racism. Is there anything else I'm missing? Please disclose yourself.


    Every time I look for crime statistics broken down by ethnicity, it reveals that blacks are consistently more violent than other ethnicities. If I could demonstrate that to you, would you consider it evidence?

    Furthermore, blacks have much higher testosterone levels and lower IQs than whites, which are two factors known to correlate a lot with crime (with all ethnicities). These two factors are characteristic of blacks. In other words, they are biological. If I could demonstrate these facts, would you consider them as evidence?
     
  18. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    So if ten times in a row when one goes downtown at night, he gets beat up and robbed by a bunch of black thugs, then the next time he goes downtown, the eleventh time, he should IGNORE skin color? ....and look for something like height or weight?? How can you expect anyone with any brains to do that??

    Baron Max
     
  19. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    No, they won't, Apendrapew, they prefer to live in the ideal little world that they've created for themselves! They can give you a gazillion "reasons" why the stats are wrong or swayed by racism or other "bury my head in the sand" excuses.

    Until we, as humans, begin to admit to the realities of life and violence, we're never, ever going to solve any of it. We're much, much too quick to "justify" black crime that it's become an encouragement in itself for just more of the same.

    Baron Max
     
  20. Cottontop3000 Death Beckoned Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,959
    I recant this stupid, stupid position. Did I write this? There is NOT more black on anybody crime. Racists can suck my bloody *&^%! If you sucking little racists don't like it, you know where I am. What was I thinking?!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Well, geez, Cotton, now you're saying that you can't read statistics charts and tables?

    Baron Max
     
  22. Jerome Registered Member

    Messages:
    11
    It's funny. When I avoid blacks, I have a peaceful day. If I ignore skin color, some violently loud black kid usually ruins my day. So, you tell me.
     
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,360
    :

    I do not agree that blacks are generally more violent than whites.

    To take one example, consider the historical picture. Who forcibly colonised "new" countries, such as the USA, for example? Black people, or white people? In the US, who killed large segments of the Indigenous population? Blacks or whites? Who had a program of institutionalised slavery? Blacks or whites? Who had violent segregationist policies for half of the 20th century? And that's just one example.

    What could you do to convince me that black people are generally more violent than whites? Well, for a start, using the USA as your sole example probably won't work. There are many countries with almost solely black communities which are far less violent than the US. And yes, there are counterexamples.

    The problem is in assuming you know the answers - assuming that race is essentially the one and only cause of criminality. Quite obviously, that is not true. And in fact, you cannot even show with any reliability that it is a significant cause, in and of itself.

    Biology is not out of the question, but so far I see no convincing evidence for a biological relationship between race and violence. And, let's face it, why should the amount of melanin in somebody's skin affect their propensity for violence? It doesn't make much sense.

    I didn't mention racism as a cause of any disparity in crime. In fact, I dispute that there is a disparity in crime across the board between black and white people. What I've said is that people in poor socioeconomic circumstances are more likely to commit crime, regardless of race.

    You ought to be more wary of crime statistics. Crime rates are a function of many things. For example, if the police have a crack down on a certain type of crime, or a certain class of offender, the rate of arrests for that crime or those offenders will increase, and the statistics will record a higher crime rate. Is such a rise real? No. If there were no police, there'd by a zero arrest rate and no people in prison. Would that mean there's no crime? Obviously not. And that's just one example, again.

    I dispute your first claim. As for your second claim, there is evidence that IQ scores depend on many factors, some socioeconomic. To mention just one factor, at random, IQ scores vary depending on the person's experience in taking written tests, and IQ tests in particular. You can verify that yourself by practicing IQ tests on the Web. Over time, you'll find you can boost your IQ score. Does that mean you're getting smarter? I'll leave you to answer that.

    Now think about that with regard to average black vs. white IQ scores. Can you think of a reason why black IQ scores might be lower, now, apart from innate lack of intelligence?

    The problem with racists (and I'm not specifically labelling you, yet) is that they see everything in simplistic "black and white" terms (sorry for the pun). They never consider extraneous factors, because they believe they already have the only possible answer. BTW, racists statistically have lower IQs too...
     

Share This Page