Black Man Kills Hispanic Woman after she gave him the Money

That you're too lazy and ignorant to do the math necessary to get an accurate opinion.


Black people commit more crime per capita than other groups.

According to the FBI stats you referenced, blacks accounted for 55.9% of all homicide offenders in 2019, with whites accounting for 41.1%, and "Other"/Unknown accounting for 3.0% in cases where the race was known. Among homicide victims in 2019 where the race was known, 54.7% were black or African-American, 42.3% were white, and 3.1% were of other races. The per-capita offending rate for African-Americans was roughly six times higher than that of whites, and the victim rate is a similar figure. Most homicides were intraracial; where the perpetrator's race was known, 81% of white victims were killed by whites and 91% of black or African-American victims were killed by African-Americans.

Source

Black people are targeted by law enforcement and are treated more harshly at every step in the criminal justice process than whites - from being profiled, arrested, charged, convicted and sentenced

Using rich data linking federal cases from arrest through to sentencing, we find that initial case and defendant characteristics, including arrest offense and criminal history, can explain most of the large raw racialdisparity in federal sentences, but significant gaps remain. Across the distribution, blacks receive sentences that are almost 10 percent longer than those of comparable whites arrested for the same crimes. Most of this disparity can be explained by prosecutors’ initial charging decisions,particularly the filing of charges carrying mandatory minimum sentences. Ceteris paribus, the odds of black arrestees facing such a charge are 1.75 times higher than those of white arrestees
 
Last edited:
but make up 36.4% of arrests
And those are just the ones that get caught. The fact is that, in black communities, crime is rampant and underreported. We don't know the exact crime rate in black America but we can surmise that it is staggeringly high!
 
Whoa!

What a hot potato!

I have noticed (correctly, I think) that almost all of the liquor store clerks who are killed even after giving the money to the perp are murdered by young men of the ethnicity under discussion.

Why, oh why, do they have to kill the clerk even after getting the money?

No wonder store clerks are nervous when they see certain young men enter their store.

It is absolutely horrible beyond words. The young lady comes to work. She is then killed for nothing.

What, oh what, is wrong with those perps? Why, oh why, do they not have even a shred of decency?

A few years ago a certain city (I forget which) was proposing a law that would OUTLAW those glass windows for the clerks to work behind. Some members of the City Council felt that such windows were insulting to the community!
In order to be a clerk in a gas station or a liquor store I would insist my boss allowed me to carry a firearm. I would prefer to open carry the firearm which can be legal in Florida.

In addition, § 790.25(3)(n) states that one can openly carry a weapon in his/her home or place of business. However, a guest in your home may not lawfully open carry on your property, even with your permission. Any employee can open carry at their place of business, but of course, the business owner may prohibit this and further may prohibit the possession of firearms on their property.

Back when I lived in Tampa I remember a newspaper and magazine store where the owner carried a S&W Model 642 snub nosed .38 revolver in a holster on his belt. I legally carried the same weapon in a holster in my pants pocket.
 
That you're too lazy and ignorant to do the math necessary to get an accurate opinion.


Black people commit more crime per capita than other groups.

According to the FBI stats you referenced, blacks accounted for 55.9% of all homicide offenders in 2019, with whites accounting for 41.1%, and "Other"/Unknown accounting for 3.0% in cases where the race was known. Among homicide victims in 2019 where the race was known, 54.7% were black or African-American, 42.3% were white, and 3.1% were of other races. The per-capita offending rate for African-Americans was roughly six times higher than that of whites, and the victim rate is a similar figure. Most homicides were intraracial; where the perpetrator's race was known, 81% of white victims were killed by whites and 91% of black or African-American victims were killed by African-Americans.

Source

My numbers come from the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2019, not some person who decided to edit a wikipedia entry. Your post has no merit.

Fuck per capita.
So let me ask you?
Would you feel safer in Tulsa Oklahoma or New York City?

Would you feel safer in Wichita Kansas, or L.A.?

IF your answer is Tulsa and Wichita, then you have shown the fallacy of the white pathologocal clining to per capita.

According to per capita, Tulsa is way more dangerous than New York and Wichita is more dangerous than L.A. But when we tally up the actual numbers, these 2 cities don't come close to New York or L.A. I don't cheerypick one category of crime to make a claim, I use all the crimes. There were 30 categories of crime, whites lead in 28. That includes violent crimes, rspws, assaults, violence against family members, etc. Then we have crimes that are not phsycial but cause as much damage as violent crime sich as fraud, embezzelments, etc. So fuck per capita, you don't grt to excuse the fact that you commit more crime because you have more people.

What Poverty and Crime Statistics Look Like in the United States​

  • People living in households in the US that have an income level below the Federal poverty threshold have more than double the rates of violent victimization compared to individuals in high-income households.
  • Individuals who live in poverty are more likely to report a crime than those who do not live in poverty, but more than half of all crime is believed to go unreported to local law enforcement.
  • When people live in households that are struggling with poverty, they also have a higher rate of violence that involves a firearm at 3.5 per 1,000 people compared to 0.8-2.5 per 1,000 people in middle-to-high income families.
  • For both whites and blacks/African-Americans in the US, the overall pattern of being in poverty with the highest rates of victimization was consistent. For Hispanics and Latinos, violent victimization is relatively equal across all income levels.
  • Hispanics in the US who are living in poverty have nearly half the rates of violent victimization when compared to poor whites. Even poor blacks/African-Americans have a lower rate of violent victimization in poverty compared to whites.
  • Urban poverty increased the risks of violence and crime for US households, but did not change the racial risk factors. Whites are the most at risk in an urban poverty household to experience crime, at a rate of 5.64%. Blacks/African-Americans had the second highest level of risk for experiencing crime in urban poverty at 5.13%.
"And, if you take violent crime from a purely white perspective, more white people are killed by accidental drownings then they are from black on white violent crime."

When comparing the overall crime rates from a poverty point of a view to the incarceration rates that take place, there is clearly a racial disparity in place. More whites commit and experience crime, yet from a youth standpoint, where a majority of poverty-related crime occurs, more blacks/African-Americans are committed.

For this reason, it is easy to see why many discuss US crime rates from a “black on black” perspective. Yet, if a “poor on poor” perspective is taken instead, one fact becomes increasingly clear: minority households that are living in poverty are held to a higher standard than white households living in poverty.

 
A few years ago a certain city (I forget which) was proposing a law that would OUTLAW those glass windows for the clerks to work behind. Some members of the City Council felt that such windows were insulting to the community!
I was living in New York and noticed the 3/4 inch plexiglass and, sometimes that diamond-like flat metal fencing, around the counters of the Chinese take-out shops. I got into a Jewish neighborhood and there were three Chinese shops nearby and they were open counters.

Your post says it all.

Well-meaning liberals just cannot accept the brutal truth.

It's too hurtful for them to accept.

I feel their pain.
From what I see here you racists are the ones who can't face the truth.
 
Black people are targeted by law enforcement

If the proportion of blacks that are arrested didn't closely match the proportion of offenders identified in the National Crime Victimization Survey, I'd tend to agree, but it does.
I don't know enough about the National Crime Victimization Survey to state with certainly what you're looking at, but it's quite possible that you're comparing apples to oranges to pineapples. The NCVS states it only tracks non-violent crimes, arrests are not convictions and if the entity that is tallying the arrests doesn't follow-up with the final disposition then we don't yet have solid information or rather conclusive information.

Are you disputing that black people are targeted by law enforcement?
 
The NCVS states it only tracks non-violent crimes

This is incorrect. See the 2019 Criminal Victimization report.

arrests are not convictions and if the entity that is tallying the arrests doesn't follow-up with the final disposition then we don't yet have solid information or rather conclusive information.

If law enforcement were targeting blacks, you'd expect to see a notable discrepancy between the proportion of black arrests and reported black offenders in the survey.
 
Last edited:
My numbers come from the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2019, not some person who decided to edit a wikipedia entry.

Which is where the numbers in the Wikipedia entry are sourced from.

you don't get to excuse the fact that you commit more crime because you have more people.

Why?
Use the UCR. Then learn that the most accurate representation for a population is as a percentage of the entire population. Not taking a number dividing it by the population the assigning an arbitrary number which is used to speculate the possibility of arrests/crime instead of real occurrences.

Furthermore if we consider these are arrests, given the proven bias in law enforcement the number is actually lower. Then if you use the victimization survey, you see that the majority of the offenders race was not known.

And you don't get excuse the fact that you commit more crime because you have more people. If that's the excuse you make then the reason qqwhy more whites have higher scores on SAT's is because there are more whites and that means more whites are taking the tests. Since that excuse is not applied there, it is not going to be accepted for this.
 
This is criminal behavior, it has nothing to do with race.
Do you agree that black America has a cultural problem of extreme crime, violence, and murder?
Why would you assume that I would agree with something like that?

I didn't assume anything; I simply asked you a question.
And it was a dumb question given the history and present in this country.
 
Use the UCR.

That's precisely what was used.

Then learn that the most accurate representation for a population is as a percentage of the entire population.
That won't tell you the probability of crime or risk associated with a given population. The rate is used to measure the frequency of occurrence within a population during a specific time period.

And you don't get excuse the fact that you commit more crime because you have more people. If that's the excuse you make then the reason why more whites have higher scores on SAT's is because there are more whites and that means more whites are taking the tests.

"In a perfectly equal distribution, the racial breakdown of SAT scores at every point in the distribution would mirror the composition of test-takers as a whole i.e. 51% white, 21% Latino, 14% black, and 14% Asian. But in fact, among top scorers—those scoring between a 750 and 800— 60% are Asian and 33% are white, compared to 5% Latino and 2% black."

 
Use the UCR.

That's precisely what was used.

Then learn that the most accurate representation for a population is as a percentage of the entire population.
That won't tell you the probability of crime or risk associated with a given population. The rate is used to measure the frequency of occurrence within a population during a specific time period.

And you don't get excuse the fact that you commit more crime because you have more people. If that's the excuse you make then the reason why more whites have higher scores on SAT's is because there are more whites and that means more whites are taking the tests.

"In a perfectly equal distribution, the racial breakdown of SAT scores at every point in the distribution would mirror the composition of test-takers as a whole i.e. 51% white, 21% Latino, 14% black, and 14% Asian. But in fact, among top scorers—those scoring between a 750 and 800— 60% are Asian and 33% are white, compared to 5% Latino and 2% black."

Actually it does tell us the probability of crime and risk in a given popluation. 7 out of every 10 crimes in America will be committed by whites if we use the arrest rates as criminal participation.

Wikileaks is not the UCR.

And still more whites take the SATS than blacks and from what we have seen, more whites cheat and so do Asians. Fortunately SAT scores are being phased out since they really are not valid measures of anything.
 
The NCVS states it only tracks non-violent crimes

This is incorrect. See the 2019 Criminal Victimization report.

arrests are not convictions and if the entity that is tallying the arrests doesn't follow-up with the final disposition then we don't yet have solid information or rather conclusive information.

If law enforcement were targeting blacks, you'd expect to see a notable discrepancy between the proportion of black arrests and reported black offenders in the survey.
I haven't had time to look at what you're referencing. If I get an opportunity to do so I'll get back to you.
 
This is criminal behavior, it has nothing to do with race.
Do you agree that black America has a cultural problem of extreme crime, violence, and murder?
Why would you assume that I would agree with something like that?

I didn't assume anything; I simply asked you a question.
Why did you ask me if I agree versus disagree then, particularly after I had just stated that the behavior complained of is criminal behavior, that it's not exclusive to the black race?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top