"White flight." Racist or not?

[JQPublic1]

It's the 6th most dangerous city and you contend that means it's run well? About the only thing it's being run is into the ground. Been there lately.

The conversation was between Meathead and me. We were discussing the list he posted citing the ten most SEGREGATED cities. Off the top of my head I brought to his attention the fact that Atlanta, a black run city, was NOT on that list. In contrasting Atlanta and Detroit I noted that Atlanta was nowhere near as badly managed . Further, Atlanta is managed better than some White run cities.

My source indicates Atlanta is 9th on the list of Most Dangerous Cities in the USA. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency does not equate to poor management or governance. It is nothing like Detroit or White run failing cities like Stockton, CA. do you understand now?

Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together.

Stop trying to modify my position to give substance to your strawman. I never said Atlanta was well managed I just said it was better managed than many white run cities. If you cannot see the difference between Atlanta and Detroit or White run Stockton California, there's no benefit in continuing our conversation . BTW, your insistence that," Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together," would mean your champion of governance, Ronald Reagan, was a failure. After all, the crime rate for the entire country under his tenure was even higher than it is today.

In this article we apply age-standardization methods to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Crime Survey (NCS) to determine whether the drop in the nation's Crime Rate from 1980 to 1988 (the Reagan period) is due to changes in the age structure of the population.

Our major findings are that the age-adjusted Crime Index increases 7% in the UCR but declines 7% in the NCS. This contrasts to a 4% drop in the crude UCR index rate and 17% drop in the crude NCS index rate. Overall, the age adjustment explains the entire drop (100% +) in the reported or crude index rate in the UCR and about 60% of the drop in the NCS. When examined over a longer period — 1976 to 1988 — the UCR shows rates that, fluctuate but tend to rise overall, whereas the NCS shows fairly stable or slightly declining rates.

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

Your Reagan example is faulty since the crime problem is a local issue for the most part and Reagan didn't govern on the local level. If you can't understand that difference, it's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

If you think crime is a local issue for the most part, why do judge Blacks by crimes committed on a national level? Give me a state by sate analysis and I might agree to some degree with your premise. I think in that case you would find that in some places Whites commit more local crimes than Blacks at all levels.

By your logic, if middle class White people continue to leave Detroit, eventually the majority of Whites left behind will be criminals and derelicts. Ironically , that means the smaller the White population the greater criminal statistical impact they will make. Detroit's White minority population could soon have a much higher rate of crime than the majority Black population due to proportionality!

 

[JQPublic1]

It's the 6th most dangerous city and you contend that means it's run well? About the only thing it's being run is into the ground. Been there lately.

The conversation was between Meathead and me. We were discussing the list he posted citing the ten most SEGREGATED cities. Off the top of my head I brought to his attention the fact that Atlanta, a black run city, was NOT on that list. In contrasting Atlanta and Detroit I noted that Atlanta was nowhere near as badly managed . Further, Atlanta is managed better than some White run cities.

My source indicates Atlanta is 9th on the list of Most Dangerous Cities in the USA. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency does not equate to poor management or governance. It is nothing like Detroit or White run failing cities like Stockton, CA. do you understand now?

Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together.

Stop trying to modify my position to give substance to your strawman. I never said Atlanta was well managed I just said it was better managed than many white run cities. If you cannot see the difference between Atlanta and Detroit or White run Stockton California, there's no benefit in continuing our conversation . BTW, your insistence that," Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together," would mean your champion of governance, Ronald Reagan, was a failure. After all, the crime rate for the entire country under his tenure was even higher than it is today.

In this article we apply age-standardization methods to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Crime Survey (NCS) to determine whether the drop in the nation's Crime Rate from 1980 to 1988 (the Reagan period) is due to changes in the age structure of the population.

Our major findings are that the age-adjusted Crime Index increases 7% in the UCR but declines 7% in the NCS. This contrasts to a 4% drop in the crude UCR index rate and 17% drop in the crude NCS index rate. Overall, the age adjustment explains the entire drop (100% +) in the reported or crude index rate in the UCR and about 60% of the drop in the NCS. When examined over a longer period — 1976 to 1988 — the UCR shows rates that, fluctuate but tend to rise overall, whereas the NCS shows fairly stable or slightly declining rates.

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

Your Reagan example is faulty since the crime problem is a local issue for the most part and Reagan didn't govern on the local level. If you can't understand that difference, it's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

Yeah, he was governor of California. But even as president he is known for cracking down on crime locally or otherwise. He failed! Didn't you click the link?

Remember this?:

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Yo are also wrong about Black males not supporting their kids...in fact they are more likely to support their kids than White and Hispanic fathers are.

 

[MaryL]

Blacks live in the twilight zone. High crime, less expectation of quality of life, death and squalor and evil. I don't need to be preached to by anyone. Yes, whites should flee from that if they have any self respect. Racism is something blacks use to manipulate white guilt. I don't buy it anymore, because blacks are just as hateful and bigoted as whites. They Lie. They exaggerate. After almost 200 years after slavery was ended, they have only themselves to blame for their failure to thrive.

 

[JQPublic1]

t's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

A bastard, biblically speaking is a child that does not know it's father. Most Black children know who their fathers are. But the truth be told, many white kids are born to married mothers who bore kids out of extramarital affairs.

Sticking with the standard biblical definition of bastard, I'd say that your assumptions have gotten the better of you again. I'd say it is safe to say most Black children know their fathers when you considering the chart I posted and the fact that 76% of Black fathers pay their court ordered child support!

 

[JQPublic1]

Blacks live in the twilight zone. High crime, less expectation of quality of life, death and squalor and evil. I don't need to be preached to by anyone. Yes, whites should flee from that if they have any self respect. Racism is something blacks use to manipulate white guilt. I don't buy it anymore, because blacks are just as hateful and bigoted as whites. They Lie. They exaggerate. After almost 200 years after slavery was ended, they have only themselves to blame for their failure to thrive.

That is YOUR worldview of Blacks but it doesn't have any basis in reality. Most Blacks are Christian , law abiding citizens who go to work every day, attend church on Sundays and mow their lawns. Some stop by Mc Donald's to have breakfast, sip coffee and read the morning newspaper. They shop at all the White owned stores and pay taxes just like you. They go to sleep at night worrying about some thug or cop shooting their kid because of stereotypes like those YOU are so good at projecting. Your last sentence is really a sign of ignorance. Blacks have only themselves to blame for their SUCCESSES, which far outnumber their failures.
Most Blacks are NOT poor or suffering in the least. Where did you get that notion? This is the REAL FACE of failure to thrive is a white one: Most poor people in America are White.

 

[MaryL]

Blacks live in the twilight zone. High crime, less expectation of quality of life, death and squalor and evil. I don't need to be preached to by anyone. Yes, whites should flee from that if they have any self respect. Racism is something blacks use to manipulate white guilt. I don't buy it anymore, because blacks are just as hateful and bigoted as whites. They Lie. They exaggerate. After almost 200 years after slavery was ended, they have only themselves to blame for their failure to thrive.

That is YOUR worldview of Blacks but it doesn't have any basis in reality. Most Blacks are Christian , law abiding citizens who go to work every day, attend church on Sundays and mow their lawns. Some stop by Mc Donald's to have breakfast, sip coffee and read the morning newspaper. They shop at all the White owned stores and pay taxes just like you. They go to sleep at night worrying about some thug or cop shooting their kid because of stereotypes like those YOU are so good at projecting. Your last sentence is really a sign of ignorance. Blacks have only themselves to blame for their SUCCESSES, which far outnumber their failures.
Most Blacks are NOT poor or suffering in the least. Where did you get that notion? This is the REAL FACE of failure to thrive is a white one: Most poor people in America are White. I am not catering to popular opinion, just my experience. Blacks DO tend to be violent criminals. Blacks tend to blame racism when it's their own fault and a lot of whites NOW tend to act as enablers to black weakness out of some misplaced guilt. Get over it, all of you.

 

[MaryL]

I am tired of enabling this black-white guilt trip. Blacks are responsible for their fate, not racism. Let's get past this phony game right now. Racism is just become an excuse.

 

[JQPublic1]

I am not catering to popular opinion, just my experience. Blacks DO tend to be violent criminals. Blacks tend to blame racism when it's their own fault and a lot of whites NOW tend to act as enablers to black weakness out of some misplaced guilt. Get over it, all of you.

Your experience? You call sitting on a couch waching the evening news an experience?...OMG! it is a wonder you are still alive. You've really been cooking that fairy tale a long time haven't you. Black people are scratching their heads wondering what the heck you are talking about. Are you a social scientist or an anthropologist? If not, your wild assertions are just part of the mass hysteria concerning blacks that is becoming standard fare in Right Wing American ethos.I've seen that before:

 

[JQPublic1]

I am tired of enabling this black-white guilt trip. Blacks are responsible for their fate, not racism. Let's get past this phony game right now. Racism is just become an excuse.

Racism does still exist in America but most Blacks do not waste time thinking about that. Most are too busy making money to facilitate that trillion dollars a year they spend in White owned businesses. You keep trying to manufacture something that doesn't exist. For you a black skin = poverty, misery, and violence. That is NOT the case by far!

 

[Asclepias]

I am tired of enabling this black-white guilt trip. Blacks are responsible for their fate, not racism. Let's get past this phony game right now. Racism is just become an excuse.

Racism isnt an excuse but it is a reason. Its funny to me that poor whites like you have this weird opinion of Blacks that are more successful than you are.

 

[DriftingSand]

The odds are against that happening. Check the FBI crime statistics and you'll see for yourself. Or ... remain blind to the facts. Your choice.

If your idea of White Fight is as a tactic to avoid crime, perhaps it is YOU who should be reviewing the FBI statistical data. Look at the numbers again. Your wife is far more likely to be attacked, raped or killed by a white person than a black one. And that goes for YOU too!

I'm not saying that whites are saints. Drugs, booze, mental disorders, etc. are contributors to criminal behavior regardless of race. What I'm saying is that it's been my personal experience that the crimes that have been perpetrated upon me or my property have been at the hands of non-whites and I'm also saying that blacks are a much smaller population group than whites but commit more violent crimes on average than whites do. Sorry but that's simply a fact. Just look at America's prison population and the numbers speak for themselves.

I guess you are an exception and represent an anomaly of the FBI statistics which clearly show that a White person is more likely to be victimized by a another White than a Black person.

If that's actually the case then consider two important points:

1) The population of whites is much higher than the population of blacks so you're not actually comparing apples to apples.
2) Since white flight is a reality then it comes as no surprise that whites would be committing crimes against whites since only whites are in the neighborhood.

Simple logic.

Now ... we must still agree that blacks commit more violent crimes (overall) than whites even though their population levels are much lower.

I am glad you brought up that apples to apples argument. Lets get real.
The crime rates in cities with populations over 20,000 are NOT the same across the board, Agreed? In some cities there are more Blacks than whites and in some cities there are more Blacks than Whites. In some cities Whites commit more crimes than blacks in raw numbers as well as proportionally. Your national statistic doesnt mean a thingfor two reasons:

1. Most Blacks are not criminals and

2. those statistics are based on ARRESTS, not actual crimes. Ill throw a 3rd reason in just for GP:

3. Reporting agencies have an incentive to inflate Black crime statistics. White conservatives are known to be devious and self serving bas-turds...so why would any objective person believe those statistics to be true.

In cities where the population is predominantly black there are more violent crimes on a day to day basis than in cities where fewer blacks reside.

Detroit, MI is 84% black (the blackest city in America) and is also one of the most violent cities in America:
List of U.S. cities with large African-American populations - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US News
This site says Detroit is the MOST violent city:
10 Most Dangerous Cities In America

St. Louis, MO is about 50% black and 43% white but is the most violent city in America:
Saint Louis MO Population by Race and Ethnicity - CLRSearch
The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US News

The trend is pretty much the same throughout America. The higher the black population the greater the crime rate and within each of those cities the crime rate is higher where the black population is the most concentrated. I think most Americans (regardless of race) recognize these facts. That's why "white flight," "Asian flight," and "Hispanic flight" are realities. When's the last time you heard of a nice, middle class, Japanese family moving to the middle of Detroit?

 

[DriftingSand]

I am not catering to popular opinion, just my experience. Blacks DO tend to be violent criminals. Blacks tend to blame racism when it's their own fault and a lot of whites NOW tend to act as enablers to black weakness out of some misplaced guilt. Get over it, all of you.

Your experience? You call sitting on a couch waching the evening news an experience?...OMG! it is a wonder you are still alive. You've really been cooking that fairy tale a long time haven't you. Black people are scratching their heads wondering what the heck you are talking about. Are you a social scientist or an anthropologist? If not, your wild assertions are just part of the mass hysteria concerning blacks that is becoming standard fare in Right Wing American ethos.I've seen that before:

I don't know why this girl would want to don such a tattoo but I don't see her committing a violent act upon anyone.

 

[JQPublic1]

I am not catering to popular opinion, just my experience. Blacks DO tend to be violent criminals. Blacks tend to blame racism when it's their own fault and a lot of whites NOW tend to act as enablers to black weakness out of some misplaced guilt. Get over it, all of you.

Your experience? You call sitting on a couch waching the evening news an experience?...OMG! it is a wonder you are still alive. You've really been cooking that fairy tale a long time haven't you. Black people are scratching their heads wondering what the heck you are talking about. Are you a social scientist or an anthropologist? If not, your wild assertions are just part of the mass hysteria concerning blacks that is becoming standard fare in Right Wing American ethos.I've seen that before:

I don't know why this girl would want to don such a tattoo but I don't see her committing a violent act upon anyone.

Why do you assume it is a girl? It could be a convict sunning himself in the prison courtyard!

 

[Conservative65]

t's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

A bastard, biblically speaking is a child that does not know it's father. Most Black children know who their fathers are. But the truth be told, many white kids are born to married mothers who bore kids out of extramarital affairs.

Sticking with the standard biblical definition of bastard, I'd say that your assumptions have gotten the better of you again. I'd say it is safe to say most Black children know their fathers when you considering the chart I posted and the fact that 76% of Black fathers pay their court ordered child support!

A bastard is one born to unmarried parents. Anything stated after correcting your incorrect definition does not matter.

 

[Conservative65]

It's the 6th most dangerous city and you contend that means it's run well? About the only thing it's being run is into the ground. Been there lately.

The conversation was between Meathead and me. We were discussing the list he posted citing the ten most SEGREGATED cities. Off the top of my head I brought to his attention the fact that Atlanta, a black run city, was NOT on that list. In contrasting Atlanta and Detroit I noted that Atlanta was nowhere near as badly managed . Further, Atlanta is managed better than some White run cities.

My source indicates Atlanta is 9th on the list of Most Dangerous Cities in the USA. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency does not equate to poor management or governance. It is nothing like Detroit or White run failing cities like Stockton, CA. do you understand now?

Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together.

Stop trying to modify my position to give substance to your strawman. I never said Atlanta was well managed I just said it was better managed than many white run cities. If you cannot see the difference between Atlanta and Detroit or White run Stockton California, there's no benefit in continuing our conversation . BTW, your insistence that," Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together," would mean your champion of governance, Ronald Reagan, was a failure. After all, the crime rate for the entire country under his tenure was even higher than it is today.

In this article we apply age-standardization methods to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Crime Survey (NCS) to determine whether the drop in the nation's Crime Rate from 1980 to 1988 (the Reagan period) is due to changes in the age structure of the population.

Our major findings are that the age-adjusted Crime Index increases 7% in the UCR but declines 7% in the NCS. This contrasts to a 4% drop in the crude UCR index rate and 17% drop in the crude NCS index rate. Overall, the age adjustment explains the entire drop (100% +) in the reported or crude index rate in the UCR and about 60% of the drop in the NCS. When examined over a longer period — 1976 to 1988 — the UCR shows rates that, fluctuate but tend to rise overall, whereas the NCS shows fairly stable or slightly declining rates.

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

Your Reagan example is faulty since the crime problem is a local issue for the most part and Reagan didn't govern on the local level. If you can't understand that difference, it's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

Yeah, he was governor of California. But even as president he is known for cracking down on crime locally or otherwise. He failed! Didn't you click the link?

Remember this?:

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Yo are also wrong about Black males not supporting their kids...in fact they are more likely to support their kids than White and Hispanic fathers are.

The only failure is you BOY.

 

[Conservative65]

It's the 6th most dangerous city and you contend that means it's run well? About the only thing it's being run is into the ground. Been there lately.

The conversation was between Meathead and me. We were discussing the list he posted citing the ten most SEGREGATED cities. Off the top of my head I brought to his attention the fact that Atlanta, a black run city, was NOT on that list. In contrasting Atlanta and Detroit I noted that Atlanta was nowhere near as badly managed . Further, Atlanta is managed better than some White run cities.

My source indicates Atlanta is 9th on the list of Most Dangerous Cities in the USA. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency does not equate to poor management or governance. It is nothing like Detroit or White run failing cities like Stockton, CA. do you understand now?

Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together.

Stop trying to modify my position to give substance to your strawman. I never said Atlanta was well managed I just said it was better managed than many white run cities. If you cannot see the difference between Atlanta and Detroit or White run Stockton California, there's no benefit in continuing our conversation . BTW, your insistence that," Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together," would mean your champion of governance, Ronald Reagan, was a failure. After all, the crime rate for the entire country under his tenure was even higher than it is today.

In this article we apply age-standardization methods to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Crime Survey (NCS) to determine whether the drop in the nation's Crime Rate from 1980 to 1988 (the Reagan period) is due to changes in the age structure of the population.

Our major findings are that the age-adjusted Crime Index increases 7% in the UCR but declines 7% in the NCS. This contrasts to a 4% drop in the crude UCR index rate and 17% drop in the crude NCS index rate. Overall, the age adjustment explains the entire drop (100% +) in the reported or crude index rate in the UCR and about 60% of the drop in the NCS. When examined over a longer period — 1976 to 1988 — the UCR shows rates that, fluctuate but tend to rise overall, whereas the NCS shows fairly stable or slightly declining rates.

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

Your Reagan example is faulty since the crime problem is a local issue for the most part and Reagan didn't govern on the local level. If you can't understand that difference, it's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

If you think crime is a local issue for the most part, why do judge Blacks by crimes committed on a national level? Give me a state by sate analysis and I might agree to some degree with your premise. I think in that case you would find that in some places Whites commit more local crimes than Blacks at all levels.

By your logic, if middle class White people continue to leave Detroit, eventually the majority of Whites left behind will be criminals and derelicts. Ironically , that means the smaller the White population the greater criminal statistical impact they will make. Detroit's White minority population could soon have a much higher rate of crime than the majority Black population due to proportionality!

In ALL places, whites outnumber blacks by percentage. If you are basing your answer on simple numbers, while whites may using them commit more, whites make up 5 1/2 x the population as blacks. I can guarantee you that white crime isn't 5 1/2 x that of blacks anywhere.

 

[JQPublic1]

t's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

A bastard, biblically speaking is a child that does not know it's father. Most Black children know who their fathers are. But the truth be told, many white kids are born to married mothers who bore kids out of extramarital affairs.

Sticking with the standard biblical definition of bastard, I'd say that your assumptions have gotten the better of you again. I'd say it is safe to say most Black children know their fathers when you considering the chart I posted and the fact that 76% of Black fathers pay their court ordered child support!

A bastard is one born to unmarried parents. Anything stated after correcting your incorrect definition does not matter.

Its not my definition... I did not make it up! I will say that while the definition I chose may seem to contradict yours, it is NOT incorrect. It is but ONE of several definitions. You chose the harshest.

KJV Dictionary Definition: bastard[/B]

bastard

B'ASTARD, n. A natural child; a child begotten and born out of wedlock; an illegitimate or spurious child. By the civil and canon laws, a bastard becomes a legitimate child, by the intermarriage of the parents, at any future time. But by the laws of this country, as by those of England, a child, to be legitimate, must at least be born after the lawful marriage.

The preceding definition at least gives hope to those born out of wedlock who choose to embrace Christianity.
The Bastard curse can be broken, according to the article, if the parents marry at ANY FUTURE TIME. Note the legitimacy in those cases is ordained by canon and civil law. The subtle disclaimer comes with the last sentence where, in this country births occurring only after marriage are sanctioned as legitimate.

Another source includes the one I used among myriad others. I'll be honest and let the readers, NOT YOU, decide which definition they want to accept. After all, there are plenty of Whites and Blacks, bastards or not, who may be interested.

bastard

(Noun)

A child that does not know his or her father.

 

[JQPublic1]

The conversation was between Meathead and me. We were discussing the list he posted citing the ten most SEGREGATED cities. Off the top of my head I brought to his attention the fact that Atlanta, a black run city, was NOT on that list. In contrasting Atlanta and Detroit I noted that Atlanta was nowhere near as badly managed . Further, Atlanta is managed better than some White run cities.

My source indicates Atlanta is 9th on the list of Most Dangerous Cities in the USA. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency does not equate to poor management or governance. It is nothing like Detroit or White run failing cities like Stockton, CA. do you understand now?

Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together.

Stop trying to modify my position to give substance to your strawman. I never said Atlanta was well managed I just said it was better managed than many white run cities. If you cannot see the difference between Atlanta and Detroit or White run Stockton California, there's no benefit in continuing our conversation . BTW, your insistence that," Something managed so well doesn't have the 9th most dangerous ranking. They go together," would mean your champion of governance, Ronald Reagan, was a failure. After all, the crime rate for the entire country under his tenure was even higher than it is today.

In this article we apply age-standardization methods to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the National Crime Survey (NCS) to determine whether the drop in the nation's Crime Rate from 1980 to 1988 (the Reagan period) is due to changes in the age structure of the population.

Our major findings are that the age-adjusted Crime Index increases 7% in the UCR but declines 7% in the NCS. This contrasts to a 4% drop in the crude UCR index rate and 17% drop in the crude NCS index rate. Overall, the age adjustment explains the entire drop (100% +) in the reported or crude index rate in the UCR and about 60% of the drop in the NCS. When examined over a longer period — 1976 to 1988 — the UCR shows rates that, fluctuate but tend to rise overall, whereas the NCS shows fairly stable or slightly declining rates.

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

Your Reagan example is faulty since the crime problem is a local issue for the most part and Reagan didn't govern on the local level. If you can't understand that difference, it's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

Yeah, he was governor of California. But even as president he is known for cracking down on crime locally or otherwise. He failed! Didn't you click the link?

Remember this?:

The crime-fighting stance of the Reagan years which emphasized stricter enforcement and greater sanction threat (aimed mainly at street crime and drug trafficking) dramatically increased rates of imprisonment. But no discernible reduction in crime rates occurred, suggesting that no law enforcement strategy can be confidently recommended as a remedy to the nation's crime problem.

Yo are also wrong about Black males not supporting their kids...in fact they are more likely to support their kids than White and Hispanic fathers are.

The only failure is you BOY.

GIRL, stop lying and get a life! Cant dispute the data in my chart can ya?

 

[JQPublic1]

If your idea of White Fight is as a tactic to avoid crime, perhaps it is YOU who should be reviewing the FBI statistical data. Look at the numbers again. Your wife is far more likely to be attacked, raped or killed by a white person than a black one. And that goes for YOU too!

I'm not saying that whites are saints. Drugs, booze, mental disorders, etc. are contributors to criminal behavior regardless of race. What I'm saying is that it's been my personal experience that the crimes that have been perpetrated upon me or my property have been at the hands of non-whites and I'm also saying that blacks are a much smaller population group than whites but commit more violent crimes on average than whites do. Sorry but that's simply a fact. Just look at America's prison population and the numbers speak for themselves.

I guess you are an exception and represent an anomaly of the FBI statistics which clearly show that a White person is more likely to be victimized by a another White than a Black person.

If that's actually the case then consider two important points:

1) The population of whites is much higher than the population of blacks so you're not actually comparing apples to apples.
2) Since white flight is a reality then it comes as no surprise that whites would be committing crimes against whites since only whites are in the neighborhood.

Simple logic.

Now ... we must still agree that blacks commit more violent crimes (overall) than whites even though their population levels are much lower.

I am glad you brought up that apples to apples argument. Lets get real.
The crime rates in cities with populations over 20,000 are NOT the same across the board, Agreed? In some cities there are more Blacks than whites and in some cities there are more Blacks than Whites. In some cities Whites commit more crimes than blacks in raw numbers as well as proportionally. Your national statistic doesnt mean a thingfor two reasons:

1. Most Blacks are not criminals and

2. those statistics are based on ARRESTS, not actual crimes. Ill throw a 3rd reason in just for GP:

3. Reporting agencies have an incentive to inflate Black crime statistics. White conservatives are known to be devious and self serving bas-turds...so why would any objective person believe those statistics to be true.

In cities where the population is predominantly black there are more violent crimes on a day to day basis than in cities where fewer blacks reside.

Detroit, MI is 84% black (the blackest city in America) and is also one of the most violent cities in America:
List of U.S. cities with large African-American populations - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US Newsts
This site says Detroit is the MOST violent city:
10 Most Dangerous Cities In America

St. Louis, MO is about 50% black and 43% white but is the most violent city in America:
Saint Louis MO Population by Race and Ethnicity - CLRSearch
The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US News

The trend is pretty much the same throughout America. The higher the black population the greater the crime rate and within each of those cities the crime rate is higher where the black population is the most concentrated. I think most Americans (regardless of race) recognize these facts. That's why "white flight," "Asian flight," and "Hispanic flight" are realities. When's the last time you heard of a nice, middle class, Japanese family moving to the middle of Detroit?

When the news talks about gang-related deaths, they treat it as an almost exclusively Black problem. However, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, for the period of 1980 to 2008, a majority (53.3 percent) of gang homicides were committed by White offenders, and the majority of gang homicide victims (56.5 percent) were White.

When was the last time you’ve seen on the news, discussions about a White-gang problem?
Crimes committed by White people are explained as deviations of the individual but have nothing to do with race, but crimes committed by Blacks or Latino’s are somehow attributed to race. Gang-bangers from South Chicago have somehow become a symbol that Black men are to be feared, but you don’t get the same fear that one could attach to the brutal murders committed by Neo-Nazi skinheads.

According to statistics from the Justice Department, White men are more likely to kill than any other racial group. When it comes to how and why people kill, Black men do, in fact, outnumber Whites in gun-related homicides, but especially drug-related offenses. However, White men top the list in most all other categories.
When the Bureau of Justice Statistics collected homicidal rates from 1980 to 2008, they found that compared to Blacks, Whites were more likely to kill children, the elderly, family members, and their significant others. They commit more sex-related crimes, gang related crimes, and are more likely to kill at their places of employment.

So why does America still perpetuate the lie of Black criminality?
Is it because one in 15 Black men are in prison? That may not explain it. The racial biases in the War on Drugs contribute to the high incarceration rates. Studies show that Blacks are no more likely than Whites to use or sell drugs. Blacks actually only make up 14 percent of regular drug users. Yet Blacks are more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and receive longer sentences than Whites.
Should we blame gangster rap with the gun-toting rappers? If so, why can’t we blame a White man with a pistol being used to symbolize Second Amendment rights?

 

[Conservative65]

t's not wonder the black bastard birth rate is over 70%. Want to stop crime, stop the males of your kind from impregnating young girls then running off and not supporting their own damn kids.

A bastard, biblically speaking is a child that does not know it's father. Most Black children know who their fathers are. But the truth be told, many white kids are born to married mothers who bore kids out of extramarital affairs.

Sticking with the standard biblical definition of bastard, I'd say that your assumptions have gotten the better of you again. I'd say it is safe to say most Black children know their fathers when you considering the chart I posted and the fact that 76% of Black fathers pay their court ordered child support!

A bastard is one born to unmarried parents. Anything stated after correcting your incorrect definition does not matter.

Its not my definition... I did not make it up! I will say that while the definition I chose may seem to contradict yours, it is NOT incorrect. It is but ONE of several definitions. You chose the harshest.

KJV Dictionary Definition: bastard[/B]

bastard

B'ASTARD, n. A natural child; a child begotten and born out of wedlock; an illegitimate or spurious child. By the civil and canon laws, a bastard becomes a legitimate child, by the intermarriage of the parents, at any future time. But by the laws of this country, as by those of England, a child, to be legitimate, must at least be born after the lawful marriage.

The preceding definition at least gives hope to those born out of wedlock who choose to embrace Christianity.
The Bastard curse can be broken, according to the article, if the parents marry at ANY FUTURE TIME. Note the legitimacy in those cases is ordained by canon and civil law. The subtle disclaimer comes with the last sentence where, in this country births occurring only after marriage are sanctioned as legitimate.

Another source includes the one I used among myriad others. I'll be honest and let the readers, NOT YOU, decide which definition they want to accept. After all, there are plenty of Whites and Blacks, bastards or not, who may be interested.

bastard

(Noun)

A child that does not know his or her father.

Bastard - a child born out of wedlock.

You posted the definition and it says out of wedlock then say one that doesn't know the father. There are plenty of bastards that know their baby daddy that are still bastards because their parents aren't married.

You don't even understand the definition YOU posted.