It is NOT racism

[Coyote]

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.

Now it's a matter of scale. Think big... or think small. One white guy thinks big and banks big. Lots of black out there think small and bank petty cash. Same thing with business, think big, build big. If more blacks would think big, they'd do a lot better.

You really need to STFU with your opinions on blacks.

You know...your awfully free with your opinions on whites, like you know all there Is to know about them. But when some one does that with blacks you tell them to STFU?

Yep. Because whites are telling us things we see are not so. You guys gaslight all the time. We talk about what whites have done and it's documented. We have to hear about how black families are by people who haven't been part of a black family for example. Again I will explain it to you. We grow up having to learn how whites do things and must do them as whites do to survive. Whites don't have to do that. All information from whites is given an assumption of authority by whites and if we present information from blacks about any subject unless it's done in a way whites like, then it's dismissed even when it's true. We have been educated by white standards. We have socialized with whites far more than the opposite. How many parties did you go to where you were the only white among nothing but blacks in your life? How many jobs have you worked where the staff was almost all black and you were the only white? How many classrooms did you ever sit in where you were the only white surrounded by blacks?

Everyone has their opinions about other races including you. Look at what you said...”you whites”. How whites do things...as if whites were monolithic in their behavior and culture. You present information on whites that is as skewed as you say theirs is on blacks because if you are going to look at it through the lens of race that is all you get. Like crime statistics.

We blacks spend lifetimes in these situations but we can't possibly have learned anything about whites?

Sure...you learn something about some whites. But not “you whites”. You are busy telling us what we think and what we feel with out regard to diversity.

In the meantime you have whites here who don't think I'm black because they claim to know one black person who doesn't talk to them about race so I just can't black. Or how we can't speak for all blacks when we say you whites are wring, yet we are always talking about all whites unless we post a disclaimer. I grew up in a town that was 90 percent white. I moved to Portland Oregon the whitest city in the country. I think that after 57 years living in a majority white nation hat we may have learned some things about whites. You guys don't have the same exposure to us and for some white person to try telling us how we think, well sorry, but that's going to be told to STFU.

They are allowed their opinion however silly...but I am not speaking for or claiming to speak for all whites. That is impossible. I agree your experiences give you perspective many whites lack but is it any more so than that of whites growing up in majority black areas? Would you tell them stfu?

 

[AKIP]

It is not racist to point out that 12 percent of the US population is black yet 50 percent of all murders are committed by blacks, nor is it racist to note that in all categories of violent crime blacks account for 30 percent or more of those criminals.Further it is NOT racist to point out that black communities do NOT care and do nothing to help themselves from this rampant crime. In fact they complain when the cops are forced to shoot a black criminal while he is committing a crime.

Of course it's not. What's likely racist is your motive in pointing it out. Observations are NEVER racist. The racism is in the EXPLANATION.

 

[IM2]

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

Now it's a matter of scale. Think big... or think small. One white guy thinks big and banks big. Lots of black out there think small and bank petty cash. Same thing with business, think big, build big. If more blacks would think big, they'd do a lot better.

You really need to STFU with your opinions on blacks.

You know...your awfully free with your opinions on whites, like you know all there Is to know about them. But when some one does that with blacks you tell them to STFU?

Yep. Because whites are telling us things we see are not so. You guys gaslight all the time. We talk about what whites have done and it's documented. We have to hear about how black families are by people who haven't been part of a black family for example. Again I will explain it to you. We grow up having to learn how whites do things and must do them as whites do to survive. Whites don't have to do that. All information from whites is given an assumption of authority by whites and if we present information from blacks about any subject unless it's done in a way whites like, then it's dismissed even when it's true. We have been educated by white standards. We have socialized with whites far more than the opposite. How many parties did you go to where you were the only white among nothing but blacks in your life? How many jobs have you worked where the staff was almost all black and you were the only white? How many classrooms did you ever sit in where you were the only white surrounded by blacks?

Everyone has their opinions about other races including you. Look at what you said...”you whites”. How whites do things...as if whites were monolithic in their behavior and culture. You present information on whites that is as skewed as you say theirs is on blacks because if you are going to look at it through the lens of race that is all you get. Like crime statistics.

We blacks spend lifetimes in these situations but we can't possibly have learned anything about whites?

Sure...you learn something about some whites. But not “you whites”. You are busy telling us what we think and what we feel with out regard to diversity.

In the meantime you have whites here who don't think I'm black because they claim to know one black person who doesn't talk to them about race so I just can't black. Or how we can't speak for all blacks when we say you whites are wring, yet we are always talking about all whites unless we post a disclaimer. I grew up in a town that was 90 percent white. I moved to Portland Oregon the whitest city in the country. I think that after 57 years living in a majority white nation hat we may have learned some things about whites. You guys don't have the same exposure to us and for some white person to try telling us how we think, well sorry, but that's going to be told to STFU.

They are allowed their opinion however silly...but I am not speaking for or claiming to speak for all whites. That is impossible. I agree your experiences give you perspective many whites lack but is it any more so than that of whites growing up in majority black areas? Would you tell them stfu?

I'm taking about what whites do here in this section of USMB Coyote. I know not all whites think like most of these guys here. So let's drop the stupid because I am not going to post a disclaimer every time I post because of this straw man you whites here want to build. And this is the race and racism section so race will be looked at. Why have you whites decided that only you get to sound off with lies about blacks but it's only becomes a fucking problem when we start presenting what whites have done?

I've not presented a damn thing that's skewed. The history of this nation is documented. The fact is that whites created advantages for themselves through law and policy for at least 188 years. That is fact. Add up the number of years from 1776 until 1964 and that's what you get. The total number of crimes is recorded. Whites commit the most. They commit 2-3 times more crime than blacks. I've looked at these numbers since 1994 and that's the way it;s been. So you aren't getting skewed information from me.

Stop the false equivalences. And don't pretend race means nothing. That's part of the gaslighting I'm talking about. Whites made race the issue and have made it an issue for 242 years. There are plenty of whites who have a tremendous understanding of issues in the black community, unfortunately most of them are not at USMB.

 

[Montrovant]

Whites made up per capita? It may have been a white or whites who came up with the idea, but I sincerely doubt the concept was created for whites to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Per capita is just Latin for 'by head'. It's a way to look at statistics. How some may use it in regards to race and crime statistics doesn't make it a white or racist concept.

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Black men aged 13-30 are four times as likely to commit murder than whites. I know ratios are too complicated for you but that doesn't make it untrue.

This makes it untrue.



Why the Gigantic, Decades-Long Drop in Black Youth Crime Threatens Major Interests
Mike Males
Published: August 15, 2013

Imagine that a time-liberated version of vigilante George Zimmerman sees two youths walking through his neighborhood: black, hoodied Trayvon Martin of 2012, and a white teen from 1959 (say Bud Anderson from Father Knows Best). Based purely on statistics of race and era, which one should Zimmerman most fear of harboring criminal intent? Answer: He should fear (actually, not fear) them equally; each has about the same low odds of committing a crime.

For nearly all serious and minor offenses, including homicide, rates among black teenagers nationally were lower in 2011 than when racial statistics were first collected nationally in 1964. Black youths’ murder arrest rates are considerably lower today than back when Bill Cosby was funny (long, long ago).

We don’t associate Jim and Margaret Anderson’s 1950s cherubs with juvenile crime—but that’s based on nostalgia and cultural biases, not fact. Back then, nearly 1 in 10 youth were arrested every year; today, around 3 in 100. Limited statistics of the 1950s show juvenile crime wasn’t just pranks and joyriding; “younger and younger children” are committing “the most wanton and senseless of murders… and mass rape,” the chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency warned in 1956.

Since the sainted Fifties, America has seen rapid teenage population growth and dramatic shifts toward more single parenting, more lethal drugs and weapons, increased middle-aged (that is, parent-age) drug abuse and imprisonment, decreased incarceration of youth, decreased youthful religious affiliation, and more violent and explicit media available to younger ages. Horrifying, as the culture critics far Right to far Left—including Obama, who spends many pages and speeches berating popular culture as some major driver of bad youth behavior—repeatedly insist.

And after 50 years of all these terrible changes in American culture? Today’s young African Americans display the lowest rates of crime and serious risk of any generation that can be reliably assessed.

In the last 20 years in particular, the FBI reports, rates of crime among African American youth have plummeted: All offenses (down 47%), drug offenses (down 50%), property offenses (down 51%), serious Part I offenses (down 53%), assault (down 59%), robbery (down 60%), all violent offenses (down 60%), rape (down 66%), and murder (down 82%).

New, 2012 figures from California’s Criminal Justice Statistics Center reveal that the state’s black youth show the lowest level of homicide arrest since statewide racial tabulations were first assembled in 1960. Nearly every type of offense—felony, misdemeanor, and status—is much rarer among black youth today than in past generations.

The black youth crime drop is not due to “getting tough”—just the opposite. In 2012, a record-low 231 California black youth were locked up in state correctional facilities, compared to over 2,000 in the mid-1990s, and 800 in 1959, the first year numbers were kept. “Status crime” policing of black youth, reflected in curfew, loitering, and other non-criminal-stops, also has fallen to record lows. Little solid evidence connects policies to reduced crime, except maybe for the correlation with increased college enrollment.

You can see from these paragraphs why the huge improvements in behavior among America’s, and particularly California’s, African American teenagers over the last 20 to 40 years is a distressing development for so many powerful interests across the spectrum.

According to everyone’s pet theories and fine-tuned profit prospectus, this wasn’t supposed to happen. And so, on rightist Fox and liberal MSNBC, from President Obama and the local Tea Party legislator, from pundits reactionary to radical, any notion of praising young African Americans even for the most obvious and mammoth improvements in behavior is utterly taboo.

For example, FBI clearance and arrest tabulations now indicate black youths under age 18 account for just 2% of the nation’s homicides. See if you can find that vital perspective in any politician, expert, or major-media commentary.

Rather, the time period when all interests felt their headiest was the early 1990s. Police, pundits, politicians, and News@11 gushed with the terrors of the crack epidemic, “adolescent superpredators,” teenage “sociopaths,” murderous gangs marauding from inner city to suburb to Mayberry, and an ever worsening “crime storm” of dark-skinned zombies slavering to “murder, rape, rob, assault, burglarize, deal deadly drugs, and get high…so long as their youthful energies hold out.”

Indeed, the statistics of California in 1990 were alarming:

• 221 black youths were arrested for murder,
• 4,235 for drug offenses
• 6,884 for violent felonies,
• 22,441 for all felonies, and
• 45,703 for all offenses.

In 2012, in a California black-youth population of similar size (around 250,000 age 10-17) and a similarly complete statewide crime report:

• 20 black youths were arrested for murder,
• 1,019 for drug offenses
• 2,886 for violent felonies,
• 8,288 for all felonies, and
• 24,889 for all offenses.

How can this mammoth decline not be front-page news—especially to inform the ongoing Trayvon Martin and Fruitvale murder discussions?

The sad reality is that authorities, academic experts, politicians, and geriatric-media reporters (the average age of news consumers is well over 50) of 2013 simply do not know how to deal with a young black population that is not committing shootings, robberies, drug mayhem, and gangsterisms in mass numbers—let alone one that is dramatically less criminal than the older generations deploring them.

Listen to today’s media panels, politician speeches, even academic forums: the last 20 years never happened. Only young people commit crime and use and sell drugs, the commentariat herd recites. From CNN’s Anderson Cooper to First Lady Michelle Obama, young black men are always misrepresented as getting more violent.

America’s warped crime and social policy establishment badly needs black youth to be killers and thugs, to retreat into the comforts of 1990, nostalgia for a past that never existed, and smug, politically and fiscally profitable prophecies of demographic doom. In America of 2013, just as in 1913, feared scapegoats on which to blame social problems remain a hotter commodity than scientific analysis and effective policy.

Why the Gigantic, Decades-Long Drop in Black Youth Crime Threatens Major Interests — Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice

I didn't see anything in there that made black men aged 13-30 committing murder at 4 time the rate of whites untrue. I have no idea if that's a valid statistic, I just don't see anything that invalidates in in the article. Could you point out where it does so?

The article seems to be talking about how crime rates have dropped for young blacks over the last 50 years. That's certainly a good thing, but without comparing the particular rates being discussed here (murder rates for black men aged 13-30 and white men of the same age) it doesn't actually tell us anything about how those rates compare.

As I've said, even if that particular statistic is true, it should only be a starting point.

That's because you didn't want to see it. We have a person who made a comment with no source and you think is true just because you're white and have chosen to believe it. If you don't know if what said was a valid statistic then how can you make the claim you just did?

You are ridiculous. I very specifically said "I have no idea if that's a valid statistic," yet you immediately reply by saying I think it is true. You also add that I believe it because I'm white. You clearly aren't going to bother discussing the things I actually say and instead are going to treat it as though I'm saying what you think a white person would say.

I said that I did not see anything in the article that refuted the statistic. It doesn't matter if that statistic is true or not if there is nothing there that refutes it. If I said that 40% of all first-time mothers breast feed, and you provided an article about how fewer women are having children before they are 25, someone could say that your article did not refute my statistic, whether that statistic is true or false.

In other words, don't try to refute something with evidence that isn't directly related to that something.

 

[Montrovant]

Wrong. Per capita is not the total number of crimes.

Per capita is a dream stat whites made up to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Wake me when 1.7 people rob me.

Whites made up per capita? It may have been a white or whites who came up with the idea, but I sincerely doubt the concept was created for whites to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Per capita is just Latin for 'by head'. It's a way to look at statistics. How some may use it in regards to race and crime statistics doesn't make it a white or racist concept.

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

I'll ask again: what percentage of crime would be acceptable for whites to commit? Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Also, the idea that "you can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes" is something you might want to consider applying to other situations, such as blaming all whites for the actions of some.

 

[Coyote]

Now it's a matter of scale. Think big... or think small. One white guy thinks big and banks big. Lots of black out there think small and bank petty cash. Same thing with business, think big, build big. If more blacks would think big, they'd do a lot better.

You really need to STFU with your opinions on blacks.

You know...your awfully free with your opinions on whites, like you know all there Is to know about them. But when some one does that with blacks you tell them to STFU?

Yep. Because whites are telling us things we see are not so. You guys gaslight all the time. We talk about what whites have done and it's documented. We have to hear about how black families are by people who haven't been part of a black family for example. Again I will explain it to you. We grow up having to learn how whites do things and must do them as whites do to survive. Whites don't have to do that. All information from whites is given an assumption of authority by whites and if we present information from blacks about any subject unless it's done in a way whites like, then it's dismissed even when it's true. We have been educated by white standards. We have socialized with whites far more than the opposite. How many parties did you go to where you were the only white among nothing but blacks in your life? How many jobs have you worked where the staff was almost all black and you were the only white? How many classrooms did you ever sit in where you were the only white surrounded by blacks?

Everyone has their opinions about other races including you. Look at what you said...”you whites”. How whites do things...as if whites were monolithic in their behavior and culture. You present information on whites that is as skewed as you say theirs is on blacks because if you are going to look at it through the lens of race that is all you get. Like crime statistics.

We blacks spend lifetimes in these situations but we can't possibly have learned anything about whites?

Sure...you learn something about some whites. But not “you whites”. You are busy telling us what we think and what we feel with out regard to diversity.

In the meantime you have whites here who don't think I'm black because they claim to know one black person who doesn't talk to them about race so I just can't black. Or how we can't speak for all blacks when we say you whites are wring, yet we are always talking about all whites unless we post a disclaimer. I grew up in a town that was 90 percent white. I moved to Portland Oregon the whitest city in the country. I think that after 57 years living in a majority white nation hat we may have learned some things about whites. You guys don't have the same exposure to us and for some white person to try telling us how we think, well sorry, but that's going to be told to STFU.

They are allowed their opinion however silly...but I am not speaking for or claiming to speak for all whites. That is impossible. I agree your experiences give you perspective many whites lack but is it any more so than that of whites growing up in majority black areas? Would you tell them stfu?

I'm taking about what whites do here in this section of USMB Coyote. I know not all whites think like most of these guys here. So let's drop the stupid because I am not going to post a disclaimer every time I post because of this straw man you whites here want to build. And this is the race and racism section so race will be looked at. Why have you whites decided that only you get to sound off with lies about blacks but it's only becomes a fucking problem when we start presenting what whites have done?

I've not presented a damn thing that's skewed. The history of this nation is documented. The fact is that whites created advantages for themselves through law and policy for at least 188 years. That is fact. Add up the number of years from 1776 until 1964 and that's what you get. The total number of crimes is recorded. Whites commit the most. They commit 2-3 times more crime than blacks. I've looked at these numbers since 1994 and that's the way it;s been. So you aren't getting skewed information from me.

Stop the false equivalences. And don't pretend race means nothing. That's part of the gaslighting I'm talking about. Whites made race the issue and have made it an issue for 242 years. There are plenty of whites who have a tremendous understanding of issues in the black community, unfortunately most of them are not at USMB.

I'm not being "stupid" IM2, I can only go by what you say and it often sounds like you are talking beyond USMB. I agree though, with what you say about many conversations about race that occur here, that is very true.

 

[Paul Essien]

I've already said that anyone using the per capita numbers without taking anything else into account is not looking at the whole picture. The same is true of only looking at the total numbers without taking anything else into account.

The per capita crime numbers should, IMO, lead to someone trying to find out the reasons why blacks have that higher rate. Simply pointing out that number does nothing to explain the underlying cause, but it is true that blacks commit more crime per capita based on the FBI or DOJ crime stats. It should be a starting point, not an ending point.

Name one police department or officer that has been PUNISHED by the DOJ for harming Black people ?.Name just one.

Yeah sure the DOJ will do a report and say "Yup there's racism in Ferguson" "Yup there's racism in Baltimore" "Yup there's racism in ther criminal justice system"

But where is the punishment ? Black people are punished to the LETTER OF THE LAW and given very specific court dates when we screw up

I don't like repeat something I've already written

But you also uses the FBI for your source about black crime but the FBI have illegally sabotaged & assassinated every black leader from Garvey to MLK

The FBI have a history with black people of

• Planting false stories in the press.
• Planting false witnesses in court trials.
• Sending false letters to create distrust and division among leaders.
• Planting informers everywhere and then falsely named others as informers.
• Got people fired at work.
• Breaking up marriages.
• Breaking into people’s houses to search them.
• Arresting leaders for minor traffic violations.
• Framing people for murder and other false charges – to lock them up or at least keep them tied up in court till something stuck.
• Committing murder.

They killed Fred Hampton (A black panther leader in Chicago) That was proved in court.

They had the Chicago police break down his door in the middle of the night and gun him down. The FBI had been keeping a file on him even before he joined the Panthers.

They framed Geronimo Pratt (Below) for murder

And they made sure one of his defence lawyers was an FBI informer

Panthers secretly working for the FBI talked about the FBI blowing up department stores and giving the police an excuse to arrest top panthers and throw them in prison.

The press and the police did the FBI’s bidding. The Panthers found much of its leadership killed, sent to prison or driven out of the country.

Dick Gregory was such a powerful opponent against systematic racism, J. Edgar Hoover ordered the FBI to use the mafia to murder him.

And J Edgar Hoover was a cross dressing gay man who hated black people and he had a lover who was one of his top FBI Agents. Also the FBI wrote an anonymous letter to Martin Luther King encouraging him to kill himself ?

Or how about MKULTRA and those deeds? FBN and CIA connections with international crime syndicates and co-operation to bring in tons of drugs for the consumption of inner city blacks.

That started in the 1940’s and devastated whole cities eventually. A book about that and the whole war on drugs by Douglas Valentine: The Strength of the Wolf: The secret history of America’s war on drugs.

Even today the FBI has just released BIE (Black Identity Extremists). Another crock of B.S

Their objective is to murder innocent black people and use this BIE thing to kill even more of us. So when black folks protest or file citizen complaints about illegal searches and seizures, police theft of property, police violence in the form of needless beatings and brutality; cases of blatant police disrespect for the dignity of black people and actual state-sanctioned murders by police, their names will be placed on the terrorist watch list by the FBI.

So black people are being extreme if we hate or distrust an institution brimming with white supremacists.

What's your opinion on this ?

 

[Asclepias]

Per capita is a dream stat whites made up to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Wake me when 1.7 people rob me.

Whites made up per capita? It may have been a white or whites who came up with the idea, but I sincerely doubt the concept was created for whites to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Per capita is just Latin for 'by head'. It's a way to look at statistics. How some may use it in regards to race and crime statistics doesn't make it a white or racist concept.

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

 

[Montrovant]

I've already said that anyone using the per capita numbers without taking anything else into account is not looking at the whole picture. The same is true of only looking at the total numbers without taking anything else into account.

The per capita crime numbers should, IMO, lead to someone trying to find out the reasons why blacks have that higher rate. Simply pointing out that number does nothing to explain the underlying cause, but it is true that blacks commit more crime per capita based on the FBI or DOJ crime stats. It should be a starting point, not an ending point.

Name one police department or officer that has been PUNISHED by the DOJ for harming Black people ?.Name just one.

Yeah sure the DOJ will do a report and say "Yup there's racism in Ferguson" "Yup there's racism in Baltimore" "Yup there's racism in ther criminal justice system"

But where is the punishment ? Black people are punished to the LETTER OF THE LAW and given very specific court dates when we screw up

I don't like repeat something I've already written

But you also uses the FBI for your source about black crime but the FBI have illegally sabotaged & assassinated every black leader from Garvey to MLK

The FBI have a history with black people of

• Planting false stories in the press.
• Planting false witnesses in court trials.
• Sending false letters to create distrust and division among leaders.
• Planting informers everywhere and then falsely named others as informers.
• Got people fired at work.
• Breaking up marriages.
• Breaking into people’s houses to search them.
• Arresting leaders for minor traffic violations.
• Framing people for murder and other false charges – to lock them up or at least keep them tied up in court till something stuck.
• Committing murder.

They killed Fred Hampton (A black panther leader in Chicago) That was proved in court.

They had the Chicago police break down his door in the middle of the night and gun him down. The FBI had been keeping a file on him even before he joined the Panthers.

They framed Geronimo Pratt (Below) for murder

And they made sure one of his defence lawyers was an FBI informer

Panthers secretly working for the FBI talked about the FBI blowing up department stores and giving the police an excuse to arrest top panthers and throw them in prison.

The press and the police did the FBI’s bidding. The Panthers found much of its leadership killed, sent to prison or driven out of the country.

Dick Gregory was such a powerful opponent against systematic racism, J. Edgar Hoover ordered the FBI to use the mafia to murder him.

And J Edgar Hoover was a cross dressing gay man who hated black people and he had a lover who was one of his top FBI Agents. Also the FBI wrote an anonymous letter to Martin Luther King encouraging him to kill himself ?

Or how about MKULTRA and those deeds? FBN and CIA connections with international crime syndicates and co-operation to bring in tons of drugs for the consumption of inner city blacks.

That started in the 1940’s and devastated whole cities eventually. A book about that and the whole war on drugs by Douglas Valentine: The Strength of the Wolf: The secret history of America’s war on drugs.

Even today the FBI has just released BIE (Black Identity Extremists). Another crock of B.S

Their objective is to murder innocent black people and use this BIE thing to kill even more of us. So when black folks protest or file citizen complaints about illegal searches and seizures, police theft of property, police violence in the form of needless beatings and brutality; cases of blatant police disrespect for the dignity of black people and actual state-sanctioned murders by police, their names will be placed on the terrorist watch list by the FBI.

So black people are being extreme if we hate or distrust an institution brimming with white supremacists.

What's your opinion on this ?

I absolutely think that racism and racial bias in law enforcement and the legal system should be looked at and remedied wherever problems are found. I think that police or FBI who are found to have broken the law or their own rules do need to be punished, and that there is almost certainly some degree of covering up bad actions that occurs.

However, I think that you take things to an extreme I find difficult to credit, so it's hard to look at your claims without taking a large grain of salt with them.

 

[Montrovant]

Whites made up per capita? It may have been a white or whites who came up with the idea, but I sincerely doubt the concept was created for whites to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Per capita is just Latin for 'by head'. It's a way to look at statistics. How some may use it in regards to race and crime statistics doesn't make it a white or racist concept.

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

 

[IM2]

Per capita is a dream stat whites made up to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Wake me when 1.7 people rob me.

Whites made up per capita? It may have been a white or whites who came up with the idea, but I sincerely doubt the concept was created for whites to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Per capita is just Latin for 'by head'. It's a way to look at statistics. How some may use it in regards to race and crime statistics doesn't make it a white or racist concept.

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

I'll ask again: what percentage of crime would be acceptable for whites to commit? Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Also, the idea that "you can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes" is something you might want to consider applying to other situations, such as blaming all whites for the actions of some.

I have never blamed all whites for anything. But it appears some of you whites here at USMB have it bad that mentioning the word white by anyone black has to mean we are talking about every white there is. That's your problem and you need to fix it. The major problem with your silly comment is how do we quantify the number of whites who are racists? I am not going to pay attention to this strawman. You just need to face what whites have done to make me say the things I am saying.. I say whites have been given the most from the government. Well that's true. I say whites benefited from racist laws and policies. Well that is true. Just like I have to accept the unpleasant fact of blacks being enslaved and treated like second class citizens with basically no rights until 1965, or covert white racism that is being denied now, you have to face what whites have done. Always complaining about somebody making a comment about whites that is accurate just because you want blacks to always say not all whites so you can feel better, while trying to justify a lie based on rate and not totals is something for you to deal with. You don't get to tone police because we are telling the truth and you don't like hearing it.

Whites here have determined that totals mean nothing but we will divide the numbers by a per 100,000 rate so we can say that blacks commit more crimes. That's retarded end yet your dumb ass keeps asking how many crime or what percentages of crime should whites commit to be satisfactory. Well you damn sure shouldn't be committing 70 percent of all crimes per year. You whites have 70 percent of the population. You whites have more than 70 percent of the money. You whites own more than 70 percent of the property. You whites control more than 70 percent of the jobs. You whites have had more than 70 percent of the law makers at every level since this nation began. Everything people who work with crime says causes crime do not exist in the large majority of white communities. You whites control almost very institution in the nation and still commit 70 percent of the crime then excuse yourselves for it because you are 70 percent of the mother fucking population. That's stupid and it shows an arrogance and an attitude of entitlement you do not deserve.

 

[IM2]

I've already said that anyone using the per capita numbers without taking anything else into account is not looking at the whole picture. The same is true of only looking at the total numbers without taking anything else into account.

The per capita crime numbers should, IMO, lead to someone trying to find out the reasons why blacks have that higher rate. Simply pointing out that number does nothing to explain the underlying cause, but it is true that blacks commit more crime per capita based on the FBI or DOJ crime stats. It should be a starting point, not an ending point.

Name one police department or officer that has been PUNISHED by the DOJ for harming Black people ?.Name just one.

Yeah sure the DOJ will do a report and say "Yup there's racism in Ferguson" "Yup there's racism in Baltimore" "Yup there's racism in ther criminal justice system"

But where is the punishment ? Black people are punished to the LETTER OF THE LAW and given very specific court dates when we screw up

I don't like repeat something I've already written

But you also uses the FBI for your source about black crime but the FBI have illegally sabotaged & assassinated every black leader from Garvey to MLK

The FBI have a history with black people of

• Planting false stories in the press.
• Planting false witnesses in court trials.
• Sending false letters to create distrust and division among leaders.
• Planting informers everywhere and then falsely named others as informers.
• Got people fired at work.
• Breaking up marriages.
• Breaking into people’s houses to search them.
• Arresting leaders for minor traffic violations.
• Framing people for murder and other false charges – to lock them up or at least keep them tied up in court till something stuck.
• Committing murder.

They killed Fred Hampton (A black panther leader in Chicago) That was proved in court.

They had the Chicago police break down his door in the middle of the night and gun him down. The FBI had been keeping a file on him even before he joined the Panthers.

They framed Geronimo Pratt (Below) for murder

And they made sure one of his defence lawyers was an FBI informer

Panthers secretly working for the FBI talked about the FBI blowing up department stores and giving the police an excuse to arrest top panthers and throw them in prison.

The press and the police did the FBI’s bidding. The Panthers found much of its leadership killed, sent to prison or driven out of the country.

Dick Gregory was such a powerful opponent against systematic racism, J. Edgar Hoover ordered the FBI to use the mafia to murder him.

And J Edgar Hoover was a cross dressing gay man who hated black people and he had a lover who was one of his top FBI Agents. Also the FBI wrote an anonymous letter to Martin Luther King encouraging him to kill himself ?

Or how about MKULTRA and those deeds? FBN and CIA connections with international crime syndicates and co-operation to bring in tons of drugs for the consumption of inner city blacks.

That started in the 1940’s and devastated whole cities eventually. A book about that and the whole war on drugs by Douglas Valentine: The Strength of the Wolf: The secret history of America’s war on drugs.

Even today the FBI has just released BIE (Black Identity Extremists). Another crock of B.S

Their objective is to murder innocent black people and use this BIE thing to kill even more of us. So when black folks protest or file citizen complaints about illegal searches and seizures, police theft of property, police violence in the form of needless beatings and brutality; cases of blatant police disrespect for the dignity of black people and actual state-sanctioned murders by police, their names will be placed on the terrorist watch list by the FBI.

So black people are being extreme if we hate or distrust an institution brimming with white supremacists.

What's your opinion on this ?

I absolutely think that racism and racial bias in law enforcement and the legal system should be looked at and remedied wherever problems are found. I think that police or FBI who are found to have broken the law or their own rules do need to be punished, and that there is almost certainly some degree of covering up bad actions that occurs.

However, I think that you take things to an extreme I find difficult to credit, so it's hard to look at your claims without taking a large grain of salt with them.

Except that if you do the research you'll find that what he has said is true.

 

[IM2]

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

No, you are wrong. The OP started with a lie and we have countered that lie.

 

[Asclepias]

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

I think the difference is that I dont accept crime as a inevitable part of society. There are many African cultures that have/had zero or low crime rates. Its only when whites or white philosophy is introduced into the mainstream do we see crime skyrocket.

I already answered that. Whites have no excuse for committing crime. They havent been economically deprived by racism. In fact they have been economically enabled by that system.

 

[there4eyeM]

I've already said that anyone using the per capita numbers without taking anything else into account is not looking at the whole picture. The same is true of only looking at the total numbers without taking anything else into account.

The per capita crime numbers should, IMO, lead to someone trying to find out the reasons why blacks have that higher rate. Simply pointing out that number does nothing to explain the underlying cause, but it is true that blacks commit more crime per capita based on the FBI or DOJ crime stats. It should be a starting point, not an ending point.

Name one police department or officer that has been PUNISHED by the DOJ for harming Black people ?.Name just one.

Yeah sure the DOJ will do a report and say "Yup there's racism in Ferguson" "Yup there's racism in Baltimore" "Yup there's racism in ther criminal justice system"

But where is the punishment ? Black people are punished to the LETTER OF THE LAW and given very specific court dates when we screw up

I don't like repeat something I've already written

But you also uses the FBI for your source about black crime but the FBI have illegally sabotaged & assassinated every black leader from Garvey to MLK

The FBI have a history with black people of

• Planting false stories in the press.
• Planting false witnesses in court trials.
• Sending false letters to create distrust and division among leaders.
• Planting informers everywhere and then falsely named others as informers.
• Got people fired at work.
• Breaking up marriages.
• Breaking into people’s houses to search them.
• Arresting leaders for minor traffic violations.
• Framing people for murder and other false charges – to lock them up or at least keep them tied up in court till something stuck.
• Committing murder.

They killed Fred Hampton (A black panther leader in Chicago) That was proved in court.

They had the Chicago police break down his door in the middle of the night and gun him down. The FBI had been keeping a file on him even before he joined the Panthers.

They framed Geronimo Pratt (Below) for murder

And they made sure one of his defence lawyers was an FBI informer

Panthers secretly working for the FBI talked about the FBI blowing up department stores and giving the police an excuse to arrest top panthers and throw them in prison.

The press and the police did the FBI’s bidding. The Panthers found much of its leadership killed, sent to prison or driven out of the country.

Dick Gregory was such a powerful opponent against systematic racism, J. Edgar Hoover ordered the FBI to use the mafia to murder him.

And J Edgar Hoover was a cross dressing gay man who hated black people and he had a lover who was one of his top FBI Agents. Also the FBI wrote an anonymous letter to Martin Luther King encouraging him to kill himself ?

Or how about MKULTRA and those deeds? FBN and CIA connections with international crime syndicates and co-operation to bring in tons of drugs for the consumption of inner city blacks.

That started in the 1940’s and devastated whole cities eventually. A book about that and the whole war on drugs by Douglas Valentine: The Strength of the Wolf: The secret history of America’s war on drugs.

Even today the FBI has just released BIE (Black Identity Extremists). Another crock of B.S

Their objective is to murder innocent black people and use this BIE thing to kill even more of us. So when black folks protest or file citizen complaints about illegal searches and seizures, police theft of property, police violence in the form of needless beatings and brutality; cases of blatant police disrespect for the dignity of black people and actual state-sanctioned murders by police, their names will be placed on the terrorist watch list by the FBI.

So black people are being extreme if we hate or distrust an institution brimming with white supremacists.

What's your opinion on this ?

I believe most Americans would understand how this poster might feel this way.

 

[Asclepias]

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

No, you are wrong. The OP started with a lie and we have countered that lie.

Exactly. The premise was that Black people are more criminal even though whites commit 69% of the crime in the US. Again thats 69% which substantially over half the crime. The premise is faulty for a number of reasons. First whites lead in total crimes. Thats pretty obvious and reflective of the raw data. Secondly and more importantly, whites have absolutely no reason to be criminals. They are on the plus side when it comes to wealth. So we have an economically disadvantaged racial group vs a economically advantaged racial group and the one that has no reason to be criminals are committing the vast majority of the crimes.

 

[Montrovant]

Whites made up per capita? It may have been a white or whites who came up with the idea, but I sincerely doubt the concept was created for whites to make themselves feel better about being criminals. Per capita is just Latin for 'by head'. It's a way to look at statistics. How some may use it in regards to race and crime statistics doesn't make it a white or racist concept.

Whites are the ones here arguing using per capita to try making less crime into more crime.

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

I'll ask again: what percentage of crime would be acceptable for whites to commit? Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Also, the idea that "you can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes" is something you might want to consider applying to other situations, such as blaming all whites for the actions of some.

I have never blamed all whites for anything. But it appears some of you whites here at USMB have it bad that mentioning the word white by anyone black has to mean we are talking about every white there is. That's your problem and you need to fix it. The major problem with your silly comment is how do we quantify the number of whites who are racists? I am not going to pay attention to this strawman. You just need to face what whites have done to make me say the things I am saying.. I say whites have been given the most from the government. Well that's true. I say whites benefited from racist laws and policies. Well that is true. Just like I have to accept the unpleasant fact of blacks being enslaved and treated like second class citizens with basically no rights until 1965, or covert white racism that is being denied now, you have to face what whites have done. Always complaining about somebody making a comment about whites that is accurate just because you want blacks to always say not all whites so you can feel better, while trying to justify a lie based on rate and not totals is something for you to deal with. You don't get to tone police because we are telling the truth and you don't like hearing it.

Whites here have determined that totals mean nothing but we will divide the numbers by a per 100,000 rate so we can say that blacks commit more crimes. That's retarded end yet your dumb ass keeps asking how many crime or what percentages of crime should whites commit to be satisfactory. Well you damn sure shouldn't be committing 70 percent of all crimes per year. You whites have 70 percent of the population. You whites have more than 70 percent of the money. You whites own more than 70 percent of the property. You whites control more than 70 percent of the jobs. You whites have had more than 70 percent of the law makers at every level since this nation began. Everything people who work with crime says causes crime do not exist in the large majority of white communities. You whites control almost very institution in the nation and still commit 70 percent of the crime then excuse yourselves for it because you are 70 percent of the mother fucking population. That's stupid and it shows an arrogance and an attitude of entitlement you do not deserve.

For the umpteenth time, I have not denied the long history of the white majority oppressing minorities in this country.

I am not complaining about accurate statements about whites, such as the fact that whites commit the majority of crimes. What I am complaining about is the way you want to say that any statistic which does not fit your narrative is invalid or racially biased. Yes, people can and do use particular statistics to promote a racist agenda. However, the idea that any racial group ought to be proportionally represented when it comes to crimes (or employment, or number of law enforcement officers, or number of doctors, or what have you) is not the preposterous thing you make it out to be. You consistently decry the use of rates or other descriptive statistics, putting forth the idea that only total numbers can ever matter. That is just silly.

Whites have not determined that totals mean nothing. Maybe some whites are, like you, ignoring a statistic that doesn't fit their narrative.

You are the one who implied that whites committing crimes approximately commensurate with their representation in the overall population was unacceptable. I have repeatedly asked why that is, what percentage of crimes being committed by whites would be appropriate. Your answer seems to be "whites shouldn't commit as many crimes." Well, I hate to break it to you, but whites are not some sort of monolithic, homogeneous group in which one white will always have the back of any other white. There are poor whites, downtrodden whites, whites who experience various forms of discrimination, whites who simply look for the easy way through crime, etc. etc. You seem to have this idea in your head that because blacks have been oppressed, life must therefore be easy for whites. It is yet another example, IMO, of the way generalizing and stereotyping is so divisive and wrong.

Whites may have less to overcome in general, but that doesn't mean everything is puppies and rainbows for anyone born white. For someone as convinced as you are that you understand whites, I think posts like these clearly indicate that you do not. Trying to understand an entire race of people is probably a fool's errand to begin with, but you seem to be perfectly comfortable assuming that a group which is somewhere around 200 million large (in the US) pretty much all think alike and are looking out for each other.

 

[Montrovant]

Who may be using the concept here, and why, has nothing to do with where it came from or what else it may be used for. Per capita is used in all sorts of statistical analyses.

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

I think the difference is that I dont accept crime as a inevitable part of society. There are many African cultures that have/had zero or low crime rates. Its only when whites or white philosophy is introduced into the mainstream do we see crime skyrocket.

I already answered that. Whites have no excuse for committing crime. They havent been economically deprived by racism. In fact they have been economically enabled by that system.

So being economically deprived by racism is a valid excuse for committing crimes? Does that mean being economically deprived for other reasons is not? Being poor isn't a reason for crime, but if the being poor can in any way be linked to racism, well, that's OK?

 

[Montrovant]

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

No, you are wrong. The OP started with a lie and we have countered that lie.

Exactly. The premise was that Black people are more criminal even though whites commit 69% of the crime in the US. Again thats 69% which substantially over half the crime. The premise is faulty for a number of reasons. First whites lead in total crimes. Thats pretty obvious and reflective of the raw data. Secondly and more importantly, whites have absolutely no reason to be criminals. They are on the plus side when it comes to wealth. So we have an economically disadvantaged racial group vs a economically advantaged racial group and the one that has no reason to be criminals are committing the vast majority of the crimes.

Why don't you give a list of reasons that people have to be criminals. So far, it seems as if that lists consists of being victims of systemic racism, and that's it.

By the way, while you are certainly right that whites commit the most crimes, you apparently don't realize that whites make up the most poor people in the country, too. 1. Demographic trends and economic well-being

Now, you'll see that the article states that blacks are poor at a much higher percentage than whites, but since apparently percentages don't mean anything and only total numbers do, you have to determine the actual numbers of poor involved. If you take the actual population numbers and multiply them by the percentages involved, you will find that that would equate to more than 26 million whites and just under 11 million blacks. If economic hardship is a valid reason for crime, then it appears whites committing crimes 2.5 times as many crimes as blacks makes sense.

Of course, just looking at total numbers does not give the entire picture.

 

[Asclepias]

Per capita is an invalid measure to use for this issue. You can only measure crime and race by the participants of each race that commits the crimes. To think that you can commit 68 percent of all crime but that's OK because that's more in line with your population is retarded.

Why is committing an amount of crimes approximately equal to the percentage of the population bad?

Could it be because crime by definition is bad? Again you miss the point. The point is and always has been that whites commit the vast majority of crime here in the US. Trying to use quantum physics to prove Blacks are the ones that commit the most crime is simply white deflection from the raw data.

You are ignoring the whole premise here. Crime happens. It always has, it likely always will. Once one accepts that, is there some percentage of crimes committed that is acceptable for whites to commit? Is the amount of crime committed by every race unacceptable, because all crime in unacceptable, or is it only a problem for whites?

Of course whites commit the majority of crime. That should be the case because whites are the majority of the people in the country.

Lowering crime is a good thing. That is not what this discussion has been about, however; it's been about why whites committing a certain percentage of crime is bad. You seem to look at any description of data as somehow inherently bad.

And I have not said that blacks commit the most crime. No one is trying to "use quantum physics." There have merely been some statistical descriptions used, sometimes poorly.

I think the difference is that I dont accept crime as a inevitable part of society. There are many African cultures that have/had zero or low crime rates. Its only when whites or white philosophy is introduced into the mainstream do we see crime skyrocket.

I already answered that. Whites have no excuse for committing crime. They havent been economically deprived by racism. In fact they have been economically enabled by that system.

So being economically deprived by racism is a valid excuse for committing crimes? Does that mean being economically deprived for other reasons is not? Being poor isn't a reason for crime, but if the being poor can in any way be linked to racism, well, that's OK?

Where did I say anything excused crime? Youre doing the white dude deflection thing again.