The_Hammer
Member
- Mar 17, 2008
- 139
- 15
- 16
What about this Hammer? Suppose all this crap is just made up huh?
Like I said. Direct sources or directly quoted. Hell the article doesn't even site where I can check those stats.
From here;
Race of offenders
committing hate crimes
White Black Other
Race 30.5% 89.1% 59.3%
First off you need to cite the table or if it isn't a table, the page and paragraph number so I don't have to wade through trying to find your stat.
Do you know how to read a table moron? That table mentions the reason why the hate crime was committed, not the percentage of offenders. If you'll go down the table you'll realize the number you pulled was the number of hate crimes committed by blacks in which the victim believed race to be a factor. If you'll note at the bottom of the table it says.
Notes: Detail does not add to 100% because
some victims reported multiple motivations.
jreeves said:When hate victims reported that the
persons committing the crime were
black, 9 in 10 victims said they thought
the offenders motive for the crime was
their race; in 2 in 10, they thought it
was ethnicity. For victims reporting
white offenders, about 3 in 10 victims
attributed the crime to race, 3 in 10 to
the characteristics of associates of the
victim, 3 in 10 to their ethnicity, and
3 in 10 to their sexual orientation.
1) The thoughts of victims, as far as legal statistics count, don't matter. The reason that this source is considered legit is because the crimes mentioned here have been proven in court to be hate crimes. The motivation is proven in court, to be for what ever reason it is.
2) Okay assuming victim idea does matter what does this prove? That black people only dislike people and commit hate crimes based on race and ethnicity. In the same token you could say that whites just hate more because they commit crimes based on race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and association. Basically that blacks are more tolerant of more things and hyper focus on, whereas whites will hate you for what ever you are. It has no bearing on the number of crimes committed, however and is thus, unimportant.
3) Your argument said that blacks overwhelmingly hate whites and commit hate crimes against them. You can not combine data. You are assuming that of that 89.1% that most of the victims where white. That data only proves that (yet again) that blacks committed hate crimes based on race. The victims who thought race was the factor could have been of any other race. Unless there is a table showing direct correlation you can not infer. There isn't enough data.
jreeves said:One other thing, your the one in the beginning was trying to equate hate crimes, as lynchings, don't you remember?
Way to misquote me fucktard. I'm sorry, I was not equating hate crimes to lynchings and I read my posts concerning them.
I said:
1) That lynchings were primarily racially motivated (and thus hate crimes)
2) Anyone who is killed by vigilantes is the victim of lynching. If you'd like I can post a link to my post (btw that's the second one I posted the same idea twice just for you bud) for you.