CDZ Are we allowed to discuss black on white crime here?

[YoursTruly]

You cannot logically skew the likelihood of being murdered by black or white based on the total population. It should be based on the historical actual numbers of murders only. I have highlighted the FBI estimated figures below for recorded for one-on-one murders in 2018.

Your number for the likelihood of a white being killed by another white person rather than by a black person is pretty close to what these numbers show. 2677/514 = 5.208

Your number for the likelihood of a black person being killed by a white being greater than that of a white person being killed by a black is incorrect. 234/514 = 0.455



Whites murdered by whites = 2677
Whites murdered by blacks = 514

Blacks murdered by blacks = 2600
Blacks murdered by whites = 234

Also, a black person was (in 2018) was over 10 times more likely to be murdered by another black person than to be murdered by a white person. 2600/234 = 11.111

With the rate of murders increasing by the minute in liberal cities, I expect all of these numbers to change. I expect black on black killings to increase substantially.

What Are the Real Stats on Black vs. White Violence and Police Shootings?

For accurate numbers look to the FBI and not viral memes.

factcheck.thedispatch.com

Very good post. Just think about this. with blacks being only about 13% of the population, with these stats:
Whites murdered by blacks = 514
Blacks murdered by whites = 234

At only 13% of the population, they still kill twice as many whites than white kill them. But according to the progressives, whites are the problem.

What we have here is a situation where progressives are blind to the facts, because they're brainwashed into thinking that black thugs are a product of a system created by white, to keep blacks oppressed. Regardless of the fact that blacks have more avenues out of poverty and away from the welfare system, than whites do.
But let's forget all that. And focus on the "content of character" thing that's supposed to be the way things are.
What was the content of George Floyds character. Or Duante Wrights. Or all those other black thugs that killed each other or whites? That's something the progressives don't want to talk about. As I can see from the replies from your post.

 

[YoursTruly]

It would happen less with equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation under our form of Capitalism.

There is equal protection of laws for unemployment compensation. Do you honestly think that whites get more unemployment compensation than blacks?

 

[danielpalos]

There is equal protection of laws for unemployment compensation. Do you honestly think that whites get more unemployment compensation than blacks?

I am referring to privileges and immunities created by law. Legislators have no authority to enact legislation that abridges our privileges and immunities. Employment is at the will of either party in an at-will employment State. No policies public may abridge that privilege and that immunity, from any fantasy enacted by the legislature.

 

[Soupnazi630]

It would happen less with equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation under our form of Capitalism.

We have equal protection of the law

 

[danielpalos]

We have equal protection of the law

No, we don't. You simply don't understand the concepts.

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

Legislators have no authority to enact policies public that abridge those privileges and immunities already created by Law.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[YoursTruly]

I am referring to privileges and immunities created by law. Legislators have no authority to enact legislation that abridges our privileges and immunities. Employment is at the will of either party in an at-will employment State. No policies public may abridge that privilege and that immunity, from any fantasy enacted by the legislature.

There's this thing called "affirmative action" that gives tax incentives to employers who hire minorities. And also forces employers to hire minorities. Of course, it's not absolute. Not every employer abides by this. Which IMO, is a good thing. Because affirmative action is racist and disavows business owners of their right to hire who they want to.
But any large business, especially one with government contracts, do hire minorities because of the law. Remember, blacks only make up 13% of the entire population. A HUGE amount of that 13% are not even trying to get employment, get to college or even keep their nose clean.

Like I've said before, imagine if all the blacks decided to not commit crimes, not do or sell drugs. If they all stopped murdering, molesting, robbing and committing all the crimes they're committing. If they decided to take advantage of all the resources available to them, just because they're black. Think about that for a second.
If that were to happen, even the most die hard racist wouldn't would've a thing bad to say about them. If the black thugs all started acting like Christopher Gray, instead of George Floyd, their reputation would be that of a success story, instead of what it is today.
P.S. Why do more blacks know George Floyd, and not Christopher Gray?

Christopher Gray :
Christopher Gray's rags-to-riches story is one that I can relate to. As a high school junior raised by a single mom growing up in Birmingham, Alabama, Gray knew that he only had two options to get to college: get a student loan or try winning a scholarship.

Gray refused to be one of the 71 percent of college students in America that graduate with an enormous amount of debt, so despite having limited access to a computer, Gray meticulously searched online for seven long months for scholarship programs that would pay his way through college.

His perseverance paid off. He was awarded a total of $1.3 million worth of scholarships from different organizations, that include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Coca-Cola Scholars Foundation. So, not only was he able to fund his degree in Finance and Entrepreneurship at Drexel University, but also his living expenses.

His quest to find an alternative way to fund his college education opened his eyes to how difficult it is for students to find scholarships, even with the help of the Internet. Together with two other scholars, Gray founded Scholly — a mobile app that provides a fast and easy way to find scholarships to help fund their college education.

 

[sartre play]

Does anyone really have a preference about what color sex or political party the person who has beat stole from or killed you comes from?

 

[YoursTruly]

No, we don't. You simply don't understand the concepts.

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

This is how it should be. The government should have no say so in who or why an employer hires or fires anyone. It's none of the governments business or authority to have that much control over the people or the businesses that keeps the economy going.
When you consider the amount of black owned business, businesses that don't care about ones race or gender and those companies that are required to hire minorities, then there's no reason for anyone of any color or gender to not be employed.
Especially now that so many jobs are available again.
If one chooses to stay in an area where there are no or few jobs, that's on them. It is their choice.

Legislators have no authority to enact policies public that abridge those privileges and immunities already created by Law.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

But they did just that with "affirmative action."

 

[YoursTruly]

Does anyone really have a preference about what color sex or political party the person who has beat stole from or killed you comes from?

I'd rather be beaten, stolen from by a rich transgender asian. Winning a civil suit might be a little easier.