It is NOT racism

[Montrovant]

The per capita stats don't require the number of people in each group committing the crimes. They merely show the number of crimes committed per person within the population. Per capita basically means 'per person', although I think it more directly translates to 'by head'.

You absolutely implied that whites are not hard working and are more widely criminal. When asked why blacks might commit more crimes per perpetrator, you gave the reason as blacks are hard working (implying whites are not so) and that blacks get blamed for a few repeat criminals (implying whites are not blamed for a few repeat criminals, which would instead mean crime is more common among whites). I don't know what you mean by "your historians imply that."

Kind of convenient and non specific right? The only way per capita would be a solid data source is if it did count the number of each people in each group committing the crimes. For example if Blacks are 12 out of 100 and only 2 black people steal 24 apples and whites are 70 out of 100 and all steal 1 apple each which group is more likely to be criminals? The data would show whites are more likely to be criminals simply because more whites stole an apple.

Your white historians have documented the crimes of whites. Not to signify that they were crimes but to glorify them as great accomplishments. Having pride in being criminals shows the mindset of the white culture. They value brute force, lying, stealing, rape, murder enslavement, etc etc.

Per capita is not a data source at all. As far as I know the FBI crime statistics are the data source in question here. Per capita is simply one way to describe the data. Total number of crimes committed by each race is another.

Per capita crime numbers do not accurately tell if a member of one group is more or less likely to commit a crime than another group. It simply describes how many crimes were committed per person within each group. I've already said that there are data limitations involved.

Yes, in your hypothetical you might say that whites are more likely to commit crimes. However, the per capita numbers would not change. Whites would still be committing crimes at a lower per capita rate in that example. That just highlights why the per capita stat is not enough on its own to draw those kinds of conclusions, at least not with the data set being used.

Which white historians value brute force, lying, stealing, rape, murder, enslavement etc.? Are you perhaps saying that merely describing the US in a positive light is showing those things as being valued because of the history of slavery, war, and occupation?

Per capita is indeed a data source its just obviously a very poor one to accurately describe reality. Precisely because the rates wouldnt change tells me is really pretty useless. Since it disregards reality its irrelevant which is why I dont use it.

Claiming 4 out 5 people did an action when only 1 person really did the action 4 times is silly math.

Pretty much most of them. You shouldnt describe something in a positive or negative light if youre a historian. You should present the facts....all the facts...even the ones that paint a less glorious picture of your races violent tendencies.

How is per capita a data source? That doesn't make sense. You don't get data from per capita. Per capita is a way to describe the data you have. The data comes from the FBI, that's the source. Per capita may be an inaccurate way to describe the data, but that doesn't make it a source of data.

You are not understanding. Per capita does not claim how many people committed crimes. It describes how many crimes were committed per person in the population. If the population consists of 100 people, and 10 crimes are committed, there is a crime committed once for every 10 people. It doesn't matter if 1 person committed every crime, or if 10 people did, there is still 1 crime committed for every 10 people in the population.

Pretty much most of them...that is one hell of a vague answer. And is it only white historians who value these things you've described in vague terms? Do historians of other races only present facts with no biases?

You do get data from per capita. GDP has a per capita category as well. The validity of the data is what I consider shaky to put it diplomatically. Keeping with my example...

4 out of 5 whites arrested stole apples. Thats definitely data.

I understand just fine what per capita means. I know what it does and doesnt do. My point is that its only valid for guessing not actually realizing true numbers.

I've never seen other races glorify and lie about history to make themselves look good. However, I havent read all historians of every race. Most of my knowledge is from Black and white historians.

You do not get data from per capita. Data is the raw numbers. You describe data with per capita (or average, or range, or percentile), you don't get any data.

 

[Asclepias]

Kind of convenient and non specific right? The only way per capita would be a solid data source is if it did count the number of each people in each group committing the crimes. For example if Blacks are 12 out of 100 and only 2 black people steal 24 apples and whites are 70 out of 100 and all steal 1 apple each which group is more likely to be criminals? The data would show whites are more likely to be criminals simply because more whites stole an apple.

Your white historians have documented the crimes of whites. Not to signify that they were crimes but to glorify them as great accomplishments. Having pride in being criminals shows the mindset of the white culture. They value brute force, lying, stealing, rape, murder enslavement, etc etc.

Per capita is not a data source at all. As far as I know the FBI crime statistics are the data source in question here. Per capita is simply one way to describe the data. Total number of crimes committed by each race is another.

Per capita crime numbers do not accurately tell if a member of one group is more or less likely to commit a crime than another group. It simply describes how many crimes were committed per person within each group. I've already said that there are data limitations involved.

Yes, in your hypothetical you might say that whites are more likely to commit crimes. However, the per capita numbers would not change. Whites would still be committing crimes at a lower per capita rate in that example. That just highlights why the per capita stat is not enough on its own to draw those kinds of conclusions, at least not with the data set being used.

Which white historians value brute force, lying, stealing, rape, murder, enslavement etc.? Are you perhaps saying that merely describing the US in a positive light is showing those things as being valued because of the history of slavery, war, and occupation?

Per capita is indeed a data source its just obviously a very poor one to accurately describe reality. Precisely because the rates wouldnt change tells me is really pretty useless. Since it disregards reality its irrelevant which is why I dont use it.

Claiming 4 out 5 people did an action when only 1 person really did the action 4 times is silly math.

Pretty much most of them. You shouldnt describe something in a positive or negative light if youre a historian. You should present the facts....all the facts...even the ones that paint a less glorious picture of your races violent tendencies.

How is per capita a data source? That doesn't make sense. You don't get data from per capita. Per capita is a way to describe the data you have. The data comes from the FBI, that's the source. Per capita may be an inaccurate way to describe the data, but that doesn't make it a source of data.

You are not understanding. Per capita does not claim how many people committed crimes. It describes how many crimes were committed per person in the population. If the population consists of 100 people, and 10 crimes are committed, there is a crime committed once for every 10 people. It doesn't matter if 1 person committed every crime, or if 10 people did, there is still 1 crime committed for every 10 people in the population.

Pretty much most of them...that is one hell of a vague answer. And is it only white historians who value these things you've described in vague terms? Do historians of other races only present facts with no biases?

You do get data from per capita. GDP has a per capita category as well. The validity of the data is what I consider shaky to put it diplomatically. Keeping with my example...

4 out of 5 whites arrested stole apples. Thats definitely data.

I understand just fine what per capita means. I know what it does and doesnt do. My point is that its only valid for guessing not actually realizing true numbers.

I've never seen other races glorify and lie about history to make themselves look good. However, I havent read all historians of every race. Most of my knowledge is from Black and white historians.

You do not get data from per capita. Data is the raw numbers. You describe data with per capita (or average, or range, or percentile), you don't get any data.

I guess we just have to agree to disagree.

 

[dave p]

So, name the list of Blacks on this forum which don't participate in prejudices against Whitey?

Can you point to any black poster that has said white people are intellectually inferior to black people ?

I mean should be easy if this place is full of black supremacists. Right ?

You have said it, when you talked about what your father taught you.

 

[dave p]

dave p comment's illustrate how to create his own racist comments.

Sure, blacks can be racists.

Most of them are not as vile as dave p, though.

I haven’t said anything vile. Just pointing out the hypocrisy. Please try to be honest.

 

[dave p]

So, name the list of Blacks on this forum which don't participate in prejudices against Whitey?

Can you point to any black poster that has said white people are intellectually inferior to black people ?

I mean should be easy if this place is full of black supremacists. Right ?

So, name the list of Blacks on this forum which don't participate in prejudices against Whitey?

Can you point to any black poster that has said white people are intellectually inferior to black people ?

I mean should be easy if this place is full of black supremacists. Right ?

Black users here consistently imply that Whites are inferior in terms of morality, and in terms of prowess.

It doesn't have to be mental inferiority, to be "Racist"

Where would you get an idea like that, exactly?

So you can't point to any black poster that has said that white people are intellectually inferior.

Where as white people (white supremacists) have spent THE LAST FIVE HUNDRED YEARS trying to prove that black people are intellectually inferior.

But you can't point to ONE example of any black (hell, I'll make it easier you) or non white poster that has said white people are intellectually inferior.

But USMB is full of black supremacists. Right ?

hou have, IM2 has Al Sharpton has. Stone up,and be honest.

 

[dave p]

There is FAR less crime in white neighborhoods than in black neighborhoods. I stand by that statement.

OK. In that case then Bernie Madoff (a white man who lived in a white neighborhood) got caught stealing 65 000 000 000 dollars. The fact that you probably have not heard of him is telling.

Can you imagine a black man stealing 65 billion dollars and not heard of him ?

Robert De Niro just made a movie about his life "Wizard Of Lies"

And that's another thing when white people do crime it's glorified and sexy and they're seen as cool and cunning. GoodFellas ? Sopranos ? Al Capone ? Bonnie and Clyde....anyone ?

Now, I would like you to show me a single black american embezzler who has stolen by fraud lets say at least 100 million dollars.

Should be easy...right ? That is, if you stand by your statement that black neigbourhoods and black people are just so criminal

But to you robbing some 7-11 and getting a few 100 bucks or whatever is the ultimate evil act. See I’m pretty certain Bernie Madoff would not rob in stores but he robs in others ways.

It's also good to remember that one Bernie Madoff can actually put whole towns out of business, with all its jobs and houses and population, black or white. And they have done so.

what are you saying?? people haven't heard of Madoff???
they made movies/documentaries/etc of him

difference is the violence used

A white man Bernie Madoff has stole more money (65 billion) than all the black robberies combined. One white man.

one robber vs many black robbers-many violent black robbers--
I ask you, who would you want to live by..many violent black robbers or Bernie??
I do not even have to ask---I know the answer

Your answer to everything.
Blame the black man.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Idiot

 

[JakeStarkey]

dave p comment's illustrate how to create his own racist comments.

Sure, blacks can be racists.

Most of them are not as vile as dave p, though.

I haven’t said anything vile. Just pointing out the hypocrisy. Please try to be honest.

I wish you ilk were honest. Whites commit almost 70% of crime in America.

 

[dave p]

dave p comment's illustrate how to create his own racist comments.

Sure, blacks can be racists.

Most of them are not as vile as dave p, though.

I haven’t said anything vile. Just pointing out the hypocrisy. Please try to be honest.

I wish you ilk were honest. Whites commit almost 70% of crime in America.

I have been nothing but honest. You on the other hand are a tool for an ideology. You are incapable of logical conversation. Please, please open your mind and look outside your little box.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

dave p comment's illustrate how to create his own racist comments.

Sure, blacks can be racists.

Most of them are not as vile as dave p, though.

I haven’t said anything vile. Just pointing out the hypocrisy. Please try to be honest.

I wish you ilk were honest. Whites commit almost 70% of crime in America.

And make up 70 percent of the population thus the amount committed equals the amount of percent of the population. meanwhile 12 percent of the population commits 28 percent of the crime.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

70 percent now remind us how 12 percent commit 28 percent of the crime and it is somehow more of a problem with whites?

 

[dave p]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

 

[Asclepias]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

Whites commit the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

Whites commit the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

Not by population which you know and keep pretending is not true.

 

[Asclepias]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

Whites commit the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

Not by population which you know and keep pretending is not true.

The white population commits the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

Whites commit the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

Not by population which you know and keep pretending is not true.

The white population commits the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

Not by population.

 

[Asclepias]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

Whites commit the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

Not by population which you know and keep pretending is not true.

The white population commits the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

Not by population.

Yes the white population commits the vast majority of crime. 69% to be exact.

 

[MizMolly]

Whites do not commit the more violent crimes. I would rather have someone steal my apple than shoot me for that apple.

 

[Asclepias]

Whites do not commit the more violent crimes. I would rather have someone steal my apple than shoot me for that apple.

Whites absolutely commit more violent crimes. You have way more chance of getting shot by a white person for your apple than a Black person.

Whites committed almost 4k murders. Mostly other whites.

They committed nearly 9k rapes. Mostly against other whites.

You need more?

 

[IM2]

You admit, dave p, that whites commit almost 70% of the crimes.

What is their percentage of population in the country.

The percentage of white crime is equal to the percentage of population. While percentage of black crime is over double of their population. What is your point other than the one on your head?

If we go by your simple minded assessment you are saying it's fine for whites to commit 70 percent of the crimes.