Concerning White Crime

Lisa558
If, as a child, I kept hopping down the stairs one one foot, and falling, would my mother have said “it’s because Hitler killed our families generations ago?” No. She would have said “USE BOTH FEET AND YOU’LL BE LESS LIKELY TO FALL.” Admit it or not, blacks have a 72% out of wedlock birthrate, and 60% of children born outside marriage are raised in poverty. Only a minority of children born within marriage are.

Can you explain to me why Iceland (One of the whitest countries you can find) a place where there no black people has the highest rates for father-lesness and unwed birth rate ?

oecd-illegitimacy-rates-2009.png



If you were truly concerned about out of wedlock births, you'd also be just as concerned about white out of wedlock births too.

And by the way (Not that I should even have to say this) the birth rate among unmarried Black women has been dropping since 1992 – meaning that they are acting more responsibly, not less.

birthrate-for-black-and-white-unmarried-women.jpg



The reason the out of wedlock birth rate goes up is because the birth rate among married Black women has been dropping even faster, something that has been going on since the 1950s. So although single Black women have cut back by 1/3 on children, married African American couples have cut back even further, BY OVER 1/2, on how many children they’re having.

Also an out of wedlock birth tells you nothing about whether the mother lives with the father or gets married later, just as a legitimate birth tells you nothing about divorce, separation or incarceration. Single-parent households would be a better measure.

It’s funny to me how they love saying black women are the ones making these out of wedlock babies yet when it comes time to make a show and give out paychecks about babies being born to unwed or teen moms they get white women.
Because in Icelandic society fathers are not an important part of the family, kids are often raised by the mother's INTACT family. Icelandic names run to names like Irenesdottar (I made that up, but the dottar suffix shows the mother's name like in Russia a name will show the father's name. Ivan Ivanovich Stepanovitch for example, teh middle name shows the patronymic.
 
AZrailwhale
Because in Icelandic society fathers are not an important part of the family, kids are often raised by the mother's INTACT family. Icelandic names run to names like Irenesdottar (I made that up, but the dottar suffix shows the mother's name like in Russia a name will show the father's name. Ivan Ivanovich Stepanovitch for example, teh middle name shows the patronymic.


1654875607768.png
 
  • Love
Reactions: IM2
The most criminal group on Earth accusing sum1 else of being criminal.
U.S. data does not lie. Now if you want to talk about the historical atrocities done by "White Men", that is a different conversation and doesn't help the wrong that is happening today. Care to deflect more?
 
U.S. data does not lie. Now if you want to talk about the historical atrocities done by "White Men", that is a different conversation and doesn't help the wrong that is happening today. Care to deflect more?
1654877315293.jpeg

1654877341722.jpeg

1654877371071.png

1654877401376.jpeg


And these are ppl you get the stats from right ?
 
  • Love
Reactions: IM2
So let's deal with per capita this morning.

3,642,932 #white offenders / 235,400,000 #American white population(2020) = 0.0154754970263381 x 100,000= 1,548 white offenders per capita.

2,122,038 #black violent offenders /46,900,000 #American black population(2020) =
0.045246012793177 x 100,000= 4,524 black offenders per capita.

Let's do the math.

100,000-1548=98,452 whites non offenders per capita
100,000-4524= 95,477 black non offenders per capita

Even using per capita shows that the high crime rate you talk about does not exist. Using per capita shows that 95 percent of blacks per capita are not criminal offenders. Now it's just time you guys understood this.

You guys have used per capita as a dodge. Clean up the white community.

Let's do the math using YOUR math:
1,548 white offenders per 100,000
4,524 black offenders per 100,000

Thus blacks commit crimes at 3 TIMES the rate of whites. Which part of this is tripping you up?
Or do you simply refuse to see it?
 
Last edited:
Let's do the math using YOUR math:
1,548 white offenders per 100,000
4,524 black offenders per 100,000

Thus blacks commit crimes at 3 TIMES the rate of whites. Which part of this is tripping you up?
Or do you simply refuse to see it?
None of it. Whites commit more crimes. You don't get to commit more crimes because there are ,ore of you. 95,000 out of 100,000 blacks aren't committing crimes. So which part of THAT is tripping you up because 98,000 whites out of 100,000 are not committing crimes and that's not 3 times less.

This is what YOU refuse to see.
 
U.S. data does not lie. Now if you want to talk about the historical atrocities done by "White Men", that is a different conversation and doesn't help the wrong that is happening today. Care to deflect more?
No, it's the same conversation because whites lead in crime today.
 
Because in Icelandic society fathers are not an important part of the family, kids are often raised by the mother's INTACT family. Icelandic names run to names like Irenesdottar (I made that up, but the dottar suffix shows the mother's name like in Russia a name will show the father's name. Ivan Ivanovich Stepanovitch for example, teh middle name shows the patronymic.
Excuses. You guys talk about Africa as black nations and compare them to America to say things about blacks, so Paul is well correct to show you Iceland and ask the question.
 
None of it. Whites commit more crimes. You don't get to commit more crimes because there are ,ore of you. 95,000 out of 100,000 blacks aren't committing crimes. So which part of THAT is tripping you up because 98,000 whites out of 100,000 are not committing crimes and that's not 3 times less.

This is what YOU refuse to see.
You should see a psychologist to try to understand your fear of, and refusal to accept, the concept of "per capita".
And your math teacher should be required turn in his/her teaching license immediately because he/she failed you completely.
 
You should see a psychologist to try to understand your fear of, and refusal to accept, the concept of "per capita".
And your math teacher should be required turn in his/her teaching license immediately because he/she failed you completely.
No, you should seek help for your refusal to accept what total crimes committed means by choosing to divide 2 numbers, come up with a fraction then cherry-pick a number to multiply that fraction by to try claiming what you do.
 
No, you should seek help for your refusal to accept what total crimes committed means by choosing to divide 2 numbers, come up with a fraction then cherry-pick a number to multiply that fraction by to try claiming what you do.
I am claiming nothing. Again, YOUR NUMBERS:
1,548 white offenders per 100,000
4,524 black offenders per 100,000

Again, 3 TIMES as many black offenders as white offenders. YOUR NUMBERS.
If you can't understand that then maybe I shouldn't have assumed that you ever even had a math teacher because it cannot be any simpler than that.
 
I am claiming nothing. Again, YOUR NUMBERS:
1,548 white offenders per 100,000
4,524 black offenders per 100,000

Again, 3 TIMES as many black offenders as white offenders. YOUR NUMBERS.
If you can't understand that then maybe I shouldn't have assumed that you ever even had a math teacher because it cannot be any simpler than that.
I understand the numbers very well and the numbers show there are:
98,000 white non offenders per 100,000
95,000 black non offenders per 100,000

There are not 3 times more white non offenders than blacks.
 
I am claiming nothing. Again, YOUR NUMBERS:
1,548 white offenders per 100,000
4,524 black offenders per 100,000

Again, 3 TIMES as many black offenders as white offenders. YOUR NUMBERS.
If you can't understand that then maybe I shouldn't have assumed that you ever even had a math teacher because it cannot be any simpler than that.
Why bother? He or it is just another America hating liar, probably not even black.
 
I am claiming nothing. Again, YOUR NUMBERS:
1,548 white offenders per 100,000
4,524 black offenders per 100,000

Again, 3 TIMES as many black offenders as white offenders. YOUR NUMBERS.
If you can't understand that then maybe I shouldn't have assumed that you ever even had a math teacher because it cannot be any simpler than that.
He also is denying that the extreme out-of-wedlock birthrate among blacks is in any way correlated with higher than average poverty levels, even though I’ve posted studies. He just denies that blacks ever do ANYTHING that contributes to their own problems, and insists on blaming whites and racism from generations ago.
 
He also is denying that the extreme out-of-wedlock birthrate among blacks is in any way correlated with higher than average poverty levels, even though I’ve posted studies. He just denies that blacks ever do ANYTHING that contributes to their own problems, and insists on blaming whites and racism from generations ago.
When out of wedlock births are not affecting whites in the same way, I can dismiss your racist claim. I've posted studies and you dismissed them as liberal propaganda. You have denied the impact of racist public policies which is easy to do when you are racist and not affected by such policies. The per capita argument does not show that 3 times more whites are non criminal offenders.

I blame continuing racism and you keep talking about past racism as if it doesn't exist anymore while simultaneously posting racist screeds. It is apparent that you are mentally impaired.
 
I understand the numbers very well and the numbers show there are:
98,000 white non offenders per 100,000
95,000 black non offenders per 100,000

There are not 3 times more white non offenders than blacks.
I didn't say there were now did I?
 
I'm quite sure you have enjoyed the benefits of the sexual revolution, but the white obsession with telling blacks about out of wedlock births has got to go.

Okay, then, let's get rid of SNAP, TANF, WIC, Section 8 and all the other tax giveaways to people who can't control their procreation (and I mean this for people of ALL colors.)

“As late as 1950, only 18% of black households were single parent. From 1890 to 1940, a slightly higher percentage of black adults had married than white adults. In 1938, black illegitimacy was about 11% instead of today’s 75%. In 1925, 85% of black households in New York City were two-parent. Today, the black family is a mere shadow of its past.” -Walter Williams

You are using Walter Williams as a source now?

So the question becomes WHY did this change? Is it because our wonderful government pays people to have kids out of wedlock? Can't tell you how many birth certificates I saw when I was in the service that had "unknown" listed as the father in the 1980's. "Unknown" was a stud.

In 1939 during this time of great black two-parent families, the poverty rate for employed married black couples was 89 percent. In 1959, the poverty rate for that same couple was 54.9 percent. These sky-high rates of poverty occurred during the time “conservatives” rant about. Today due to the " liberal welfare state breaking up the black family by giving them welfare," black poverty is half of what it was in 1959 and more than 1/3 of what it was in those imaginary grand old glorious days of the two-parent black family. In 1970 black family poverty was 32.2 percent.

Uh, there's some problem with this kind of thinking. The overall national poverty rate 45%. 1939 was after all, the tail end of the Great Recession.

1970 was more or less the high point of the American economy, just before our industrial dominance started to be challenged by Germany, Japan and others.
 

Forum List

Back
Top