The most violent state in America

[IM2]

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

There's no "justification" for violent crime involved. I'm merely pointing out that you, once again, seem to have a problem accepting the difference between total crime and crime rate.

Let's say you find a town that has a population of 100 women and 20 men and look at the crime stats. Of 70 violent crimes committed, 50 are by women and 20 are by men. Based on the logic you are using, that means that women in the town are more violent than men. However, based on the rate of crime committed, the men are clearly more violent than the women: there is 1 violent crime for every man in the town, while there is 1 violent crime for every 2 women. The men would be committing crimes at a higher rate.

If you want to talk about who commits the most crimes, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people. Specifically, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people who are part of whatever groups you are talking about. In the case of your OP, you would need to know who committed the crimes and their race, then compare that to the populations of those races in the state. If 40% of violent crimes are committed by a group that makes up 20% of the population, they will have a higher crime rate than a group that is 50% of the population and commits 50% of the crime.

I'm honestly unsure of whether you understand what you are doing or not. Ratios and rates are a fairly simple concept.

I'm confident your "documentation that proves" whites are the most violent race is, at best, evidence. Considering how you misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent the statistics involved, I wonder how much of your supposed proof would even qualify as evidence.

I am not going to deny the history of oppression and atrocities committed by whites in this country. Your attempt to simplify violence as race-based is as foolish as those whites who try to do the same thing regarding minorities.

Montrovant, you argue about rates talking about the number of people then use percentages to try justifying your argument. If you wan tot get amore accurate picture you take the numbers of those of each race committing a crime against the number of people of that race. So then if there are 40 million blacks and 4,000 murders each one done by a different black person ir comes out to 1/10,000th of a percent. That tells you the likelihood of being killed someone black, .Mote blacks die as sult of hog bppd pressure and car wrecks.

.I've done the math Montrovant. You don't seem to understand this. Nor do most of the rest of the whites here relative to my consistently telling you that I have spent 32 years of my life studying these things, In 2015 if we exclude racial bias and assume each arrest was on a different black person, 5 percent of the black population were arrested for crimes 95 percent of all blacks are law abiding non criminal citizens. To make claims that blacks are 13 percent of the population but make up 26 percent of the arrests like that's the national problem when you make up 70 percent is dishonest. And when you measure everything that causes crimes which do not exist in many white communities, then you cannot see justification for any argument that say whites are expected to have the most total crime because they are the largest group of people..

What on Earth are you babbling about?

I've said from the beginning that race should not be looked at as a cause of crime. You are the one who has tried to portray race as a major factor in crimes being committed, not me. I've merely pointed out that looking only at total numbers of crimes committed, without also showing the ratio of crimes committed compared to population, is a bad indicator. You jump around from race being the issue, to social and economic circumstances, and back again.

You didn't even provide evidence of the number of violent crimes in Louisiana and Alaska committed by whites in your OP. You simply showed evidence that they are states with the highest violent crime rates, then showed some population percentages. Those numbers are meaningless without knowing who actually committed the crimes in question, yet you tried to use them to claim that whites are more violent than others.

I don't care how many years you've spent studying. If your study involves ignoring important information in order to try to fit statistics into a preconceived agenda, that study is pretty worthless. If you think that showing that a state has a high violent crime rate, and then showing that the state has a 65% white population, is enough to prove that whites are committing violent crime at a higher rate than other races, the math you are using is fuzzy, at best.

.I think that if you can use crime rate as an excuse to deny the total numbers of crimes committed, then you need to shut the fuck up. Because whites commit more than double the crime blacks do in the United States. You want to make claims based on crime rates when the rate of crime is whites are 2 times more likely to commit a crime than anyone else. Understand this, I am not the one who has made race the primary claim of criminality. Whites have done this for as long as his has been a nation. And no matter how much you want to claim that I should not be done, Police departments use this as basis for harassment and stops of blacks , and it is also the rationale used when they decide to end someones life who is black based on the belief that blacks are violent so then they enter the situation already with the fear of potential violence that might happen to them by that black person even If such is not on that black persons mind. Until that stops, whites need to be educated on the facts.

Ratios can be made out of anything, .Nationally if you want to make things into ratios to determine rates whites commit 7 out of every 10 crimes, blacks 2.6. The ratio of crime for that is whites 2.69:1 compared to blacks.. But there is nothing wrong with that to those like you, because you are 5 times the population so then for you to see a problem you must commit more than 5 times the crime. That's stupid and for anyone to keep on arguing the 13 percent excuse is stupid.

I posted up the information about Alaska because I knew someone like you would enter trying what you are doing. Alaska is 4 percent black .so to think that 4 percent are the ones committing the highest rate of violent crime is insane. You have not entered one thread to argue with whites about there using race as basis for crime You are only here now because the finger is pointed at whites and in usual fashion certain types of white people can't stand to have people measure them with the same standards they do for everyone else.

 

[IM2]

Lets see whites use the per capita argument, the 13 percent excuse and the we are 5 times the population line to deny their problem with violence and crimes. OK let's play your game. Let us now multiply the black community by 5.

Since whites have 5 times the population and we want to make that an issue let’s start multiplying by 5. Blacks have over 2 million businesses right now, let’s multiply that by 5 and then see what the outcome will be. Now there are 10 million black owned businesses and more jobs in the black community.. Let’s reduce our unemployment rate by 5 to 2.6 percent. Blacks live at a 24 percent rate of poverty lets reduce that times 5 to make it 4.5 percent. Funny how you guys can only multiply when it comes to crimes. Lets keep multiplying folks.

The black economy now grows to 6.5 trillion instead of the 1.3 trillion we have now, We all have 5 times the amount of money we can spend and have earned. What happens them? All kinds of community development that’s what. Now property values increase in the black community and because of that we have more money in our schools. So now let’s multiply the number of blacks who go to college by 5 there are now 8.5 million blacks in college. This increase in population and jobs. It lowers the unemployment rate so you have fewer blacks on government assistance because they have stable employment. Youth crime is reduced because you have facilities and jobs available for them in their immediate communities.

So then what happens to crime then if we do this, it reduces itself by 5 from 26 percent to 5.2 percent. Why? because the factors that create crime are reduced, so then crime reduces itself

But you see the white community has all these things already and still commits 70 percent of all crime in America. You want to multiply things by 5 instead pf looking at the fact you have a problem. But if you multiply things by 5 to make the populations the same the same things do not exist for blacks. We would have more economic opportunity. We would have equal representation relative to numbers of police, lawyers, judges and political representatives. You white people fail to understand this. But you keep arguing his ridiculous per capita multiply by 5 idiocy.

Per capita statistics are not idiocy. Trying to ignore them is.

Of course things would be different if the black population were larger, if there were fewer blacks unemployed, etc. etc. Economic status is almost certainly a far more important driver of criminal activity than race. That is why calling blacks more violent, or more criminal, is just as wrong-headed as doing the same for whites, or any other racial group.

Your projections are pretty arbitrary, however.

Per capita stats are idiocy in this instance because they do not take into account the changes that occur with increase of population that equalize things. In this case, the only thing most whites here and in similar forums see is that if blacks had the same population as whites that crime would increase. nothing else. My projections being arbitrary, I don't think so.. My opinion says that with increased number of jobs fewer people are unemployed, with equal populations we are equally represented, with 5 times the number of people we make 5 times the amount of money all of these things really are not arbitrary.

You are stupid to think I am doing to whites what they have done to blacks I am simply pointing out that whites do commit crimes and it is BECAUSE OF THE PERCEPTONS WHITES CREATED. Unfortunately in the real world we are being killed by police because of these very same perceptions.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

There's no "justification" for violent crime involved. I'm merely pointing out that you, once again, seem to have a problem accepting the difference between total crime and crime rate.

Let's say you find a town that has a population of 100 women and 20 men and look at the crime stats. Of 70 violent crimes committed, 50 are by women and 20 are by men. Based on the logic you are using, that means that women in the town are more violent than men. However, based on the rate of crime committed, the men are clearly more violent than the women: there is 1 violent crime for every man in the town, while there is 1 violent crime for every 2 women. The men would be committing crimes at a higher rate.

If you want to talk about who commits the most crimes, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people. Specifically, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people who are part of whatever groups you are talking about. In the case of your OP, you would need to know who committed the crimes and their race, then compare that to the populations of those races in the state. If 40% of violent crimes are committed by a group that makes up 20% of the population, they will have a higher crime rate than a group that is 50% of the population and commits 50% of the crime.

I'm honestly unsure of whether you understand what you are doing or not. Ratios and rates are a fairly simple concept.

I'm confident your "documentation that proves" whites are the most violent race is, at best, evidence. Considering how you misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent the statistics involved, I wonder how much of your supposed proof would even qualify as evidence.

I am not going to deny the history of oppression and atrocities committed by whites in this country. Your attempt to simplify violence as race-based is as foolish as those whites who try to do the same thing regarding minorities.

Montrovant, you argue about rates talking about the number of people then use percentages to try justifying your argument. If you wan tot get amore accurate picture you take the numbers of those of each race committing a crime against the number of people of that race. So then if there are 40 million blacks and 4,000 murders each one done by a different black person ir comes out to 1/10,000th of a percent. That tells you the likelihood of being killed someone black, .Mote blacks die as sult of hog bppd pressure and car wrecks.

.I've done the math Montrovant. You don't seem to understand this. Nor do most of the rest of the whites here relative to my consistently telling you that I have spent 32 years of my life studying these things, In 2015 if we exclude racial bias and assume each arrest was on a different black person, 5 percent of the black population were arrested for crimes 95 percent of all blacks are law abiding non criminal citizens. To make claims that blacks are 13 percent of the population but make up 26 percent of the arrests like that's the national problem when you make up 70 percent is dishonest. And when you measure everything that causes crimes which do not exist in many white communities, then you cannot see justification for any argument that say whites are expected to have the most total crime because they are the largest group of people..

What on Earth are you babbling about?

I've said from the beginning that race should not be looked at as a cause of crime. You are the one who has tried to portray race as a major factor in crimes being committed, not me. I've merely pointed out that looking only at total numbers of crimes committed, without also showing the ratio of crimes committed compared to population, is a bad indicator. You jump around from race being the issue, to social and economic circumstances, and back again.

You didn't even provide evidence of the number of violent crimes in Louisiana and Alaska committed by whites in your OP. You simply showed evidence that they are states with the highest violent crime rates, then showed some population percentages. Those numbers are meaningless without knowing who actually committed the crimes in question, yet you tried to use them to claim that whites are more violent than others.

I don't care how many years you've spent studying. If your study involves ignoring important information in order to try to fit statistics into a preconceived agenda, that study is pretty worthless. If you think that showing that a state has a high violent crime rate, and then showing that the state has a 65% white population, is enough to prove that whites are committing violent crime at a higher rate than other races, the math you are using is fuzzy, at best.

.I think that if you can use crime rate as an excuse to deny the total numbers of crimes committed, then you need to shut the fuck up. Because whites commit more than double the crime blacks do in the United States. You want to make claims based on crime rates when the rate of crime is whites are 2 times more likely to commit a crime than anyone else. Understand this, I am not the one who has made race the primary claim of criminality. Whites have done this for as long as his has been a nation. And no matter how much you want to claim that I should not be done, Police departments use this as basis for harassment and stops of blacks , and it is also the rationale used when they decide to end someones life who is black based on the belief that blacks are violent so then they enter the situation already with the fear of potential violence that might happen to them by that black person even If such is not on that black persons mind. Until that stops, whites need to be educated on the facts.

Ratios can be made out of anything, .Nationally if you want to make things into ratios to determine rates whites commit 7 out of every 10 crimes, blacks 2.6. The ratio of crime for that is whites 2.69:1 compared to blacks.. But there is nothing wrong with that to those like you, because you are 5 times the population so then for you to see a problem you must commit more than 5 times the crime. That's stupid and for anyone to keep on arguing the 13 percent excuse is stupid.

I posted up the information about Alaska because I knew someone like you would enter trying what you are doing. Alaska is 4 percent black .so to think that 4 percent are the ones committing the highest rate of violent crime is insane. You have not entered one thread to argue with whites about there using race as basis for crime You are only here now because the finger is pointed at whites and in usual fashion certain types of white people can't stand to have people measure them with the same standards they do for everyone else.

Whites should commit 5 times as many crimes based on percentage your own numbers prove you are wrong, there are 70 percent white 13 percent black in this country.

 

[IM2]

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

There's no "justification" for violent crime involved. I'm merely pointing out that you, once again, seem to have a problem accepting the difference between total crime and crime rate.

Let's say you find a town that has a population of 100 women and 20 men and look at the crime stats. Of 70 violent crimes committed, 50 are by women and 20 are by men. Based on the logic you are using, that means that women in the town are more violent than men. However, based on the rate of crime committed, the men are clearly more violent than the women: there is 1 violent crime for every man in the town, while there is 1 violent crime for every 2 women. The men would be committing crimes at a higher rate.

If you want to talk about who commits the most crimes, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people. Specifically, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people who are part of whatever groups you are talking about. In the case of your OP, you would need to know who committed the crimes and their race, then compare that to the populations of those races in the state. If 40% of violent crimes are committed by a group that makes up 20% of the population, they will have a higher crime rate than a group that is 50% of the population and commits 50% of the crime.

I'm honestly unsure of whether you understand what you are doing or not. Ratios and rates are a fairly simple concept.

I'm confident your "documentation that proves" whites are the most violent race is, at best, evidence. Considering how you misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent the statistics involved, I wonder how much of your supposed proof would even qualify as evidence.

I am not going to deny the history of oppression and atrocities committed by whites in this country. Your attempt to simplify violence as race-based is as foolish as those whites who try to do the same thing regarding minorities.

Montrovant, you argue about rates talking about the number of people then use percentages to try justifying your argument. If you wan tot get amore accurate picture you take the numbers of those of each race committing a crime against the number of people of that race. So then if there are 40 million blacks and 4,000 murders each one done by a different black person ir comes out to 1/10,000th of a percent. That tells you the likelihood of being killed someone black, .Mote blacks die as sult of hog bppd pressure and car wrecks.

.I've done the math Montrovant. You don't seem to understand this. Nor do most of the rest of the whites here relative to my consistently telling you that I have spent 32 years of my life studying these things, In 2015 if we exclude racial bias and assume each arrest was on a different black person, 5 percent of the black population were arrested for crimes 95 percent of all blacks are law abiding non criminal citizens. To make claims that blacks are 13 percent of the population but make up 26 percent of the arrests like that's the national problem when you make up 70 percent is dishonest. And when you measure everything that causes crimes which do not exist in many white communities, then you cannot see justification for any argument that say whites are expected to have the most total crime because they are the largest group of people..

What on Earth are you babbling about?

I've said from the beginning that race should not be looked at as a cause of crime. You are the one who has tried to portray race as a major factor in crimes being committed, not me. I've merely pointed out that looking only at total numbers of crimes committed, without also showing the ratio of crimes committed compared to population, is a bad indicator. You jump around from race being the issue, to social and economic circumstances, and back again.

You didn't even provide evidence of the number of violent crimes in Louisiana and Alaska committed by whites in your OP. You simply showed evidence that they are states with the highest violent crime rates, then showed some population percentages. Those numbers are meaningless without knowing who actually committed the crimes in question, yet you tried to use them to claim that whites are more violent than others.

I don't care how many years you've spent studying. If your study involves ignoring important information in order to try to fit statistics into a preconceived agenda, that study is pretty worthless. If you think that showing that a state has a high violent crime rate, and then showing that the state has a 65% white population, is enough to prove that whites are committing violent crime at a higher rate than other races, the math you are using is fuzzy, at best.

.I think that if you can use crime rate as an excuse to deny the total numbers of crimes committed, then you need to shut the fuck up. Because whites commit more than double the crime blacks do in the United States. You want to make claims based on crime rates when the rate of crime is whites are 2 times more likely to commit a crime than anyone else. Understand this, I am not the one who has made race the primary claim of criminality. Whites have done this for as long as his has been a nation. And no matter how much you want to claim that I should not be done, Police departments use this as basis for harassment and stops of blacks , and it is also the rationale used when they decide to end someones life who is black based on the belief that blacks are violent so then they enter the situation already with the fear of potential violence that might happen to them by that black person even If such is not on that black persons mind. Until that stops, whites need to be educated on the facts.

Ratios can be made out of anything, .Nationally if you want to make things into ratios to determine rates whites commit 7 out of every 10 crimes, blacks 2.6. The ratio of crime for that is whites 2.69:1 compared to blacks.. But there is nothing wrong with that to those like you, because you are 5 times the population so then for you to see a problem you must commit more than 5 times the crime. That's stupid and for anyone to keep on arguing the 13 percent excuse is stupid.

I posted up the information about Alaska because I knew someone like you would enter trying what you are doing. Alaska is 4 percent black .so to think that 4 percent are the ones committing the highest rate of violent crime is insane. You have not entered one thread to argue with whites about there using race as basis for crime You are only here now because the finger is pointed at whites and in usual fashion certain types of white people can't stand to have people measure them with the same standards they do for everyone else.

Whites should commit 5 times as many crimes based on percentage your own numbers prove you are wrong, there are 70 percent white 13 percent black in this country.

So? Whites commit almost 3 times the number of crimes as blacks. You have a severe crime problem in the white community.

 

[Montrovant]

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

There's no "justification" for violent crime involved. I'm merely pointing out that you, once again, seem to have a problem accepting the difference between total crime and crime rate.

Let's say you find a town that has a population of 100 women and 20 men and look at the crime stats. Of 70 violent crimes committed, 50 are by women and 20 are by men. Based on the logic you are using, that means that women in the town are more violent than men. However, based on the rate of crime committed, the men are clearly more violent than the women: there is 1 violent crime for every man in the town, while there is 1 violent crime for every 2 women. The men would be committing crimes at a higher rate.

If you want to talk about who commits the most crimes, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people. Specifically, you have to look at the number of crimes compared to the number of people who are part of whatever groups you are talking about. In the case of your OP, you would need to know who committed the crimes and their race, then compare that to the populations of those races in the state. If 40% of violent crimes are committed by a group that makes up 20% of the population, they will have a higher crime rate than a group that is 50% of the population and commits 50% of the crime.

I'm honestly unsure of whether you understand what you are doing or not. Ratios and rates are a fairly simple concept.

I'm confident your "documentation that proves" whites are the most violent race is, at best, evidence. Considering how you misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent the statistics involved, I wonder how much of your supposed proof would even qualify as evidence.

I am not going to deny the history of oppression and atrocities committed by whites in this country. Your attempt to simplify violence as race-based is as foolish as those whites who try to do the same thing regarding minorities.

Montrovant, you argue about rates talking about the number of people then use percentages to try justifying your argument. If you wan tot get amore accurate picture you take the numbers of those of each race committing a crime against the number of people of that race. So then if there are 40 million blacks and 4,000 murders each one done by a different black person ir comes out to 1/10,000th of a percent. That tells you the likelihood of being killed someone black, .Mote blacks die as sult of hog bppd pressure and car wrecks.

.I've done the math Montrovant. You don't seem to understand this. Nor do most of the rest of the whites here relative to my consistently telling you that I have spent 32 years of my life studying these things, In 2015 if we exclude racial bias and assume each arrest was on a different black person, 5 percent of the black population were arrested for crimes 95 percent of all blacks are law abiding non criminal citizens. To make claims that blacks are 13 percent of the population but make up 26 percent of the arrests like that's the national problem when you make up 70 percent is dishonest. And when you measure everything that causes crimes which do not exist in many white communities, then you cannot see justification for any argument that say whites are expected to have the most total crime because they are the largest group of people..

What on Earth are you babbling about?

I've said from the beginning that race should not be looked at as a cause of crime. You are the one who has tried to portray race as a major factor in crimes being committed, not me. I've merely pointed out that looking only at total numbers of crimes committed, without also showing the ratio of crimes committed compared to population, is a bad indicator. You jump around from race being the issue, to social and economic circumstances, and back again.

You didn't even provide evidence of the number of violent crimes in Louisiana and Alaska committed by whites in your OP. You simply showed evidence that they are states with the highest violent crime rates, then showed some population percentages. Those numbers are meaningless without knowing who actually committed the crimes in question, yet you tried to use them to claim that whites are more violent than others.

I don't care how many years you've spent studying. If your study involves ignoring important information in order to try to fit statistics into a preconceived agenda, that study is pretty worthless. If you think that showing that a state has a high violent crime rate, and then showing that the state has a 65% white population, is enough to prove that whites are committing violent crime at a higher rate than other races, the math you are using is fuzzy, at best.

.I think that if you can use crime rate as an excuse to deny the total numbers of crimes committed, then you need to shut the fuck up. Because whites commit more than double the crime blacks do in the United States. You want to make claims based on crime rates when the rate of crime is whites are 2 times more likely to commit a crime than anyone else. Understand this, I am not the one who has made race the primary claim of criminality. Whites have done this for as long as his has been a nation. And no matter how much you want to claim that I should not be done, Police departments use this as basis for harassment and stops of blacks , and it is also the rationale used when they decide to end someones life who is black based on the belief that blacks are violent so then they enter the situation already with the fear of potential violence that might happen to them by that black person even If such is not on that black persons mind. Until that stops, whites need to be educated on the facts.

Ratios can be made out of anything, .Nationally if you want to make things into ratios to determine rates whites commit 7 out of every 10 crimes, blacks 2.6. The ratio of crime for that is whites 2.69:1 compared to blacks.. But there is nothing wrong with that to those like you, because you are 5 times the population so then for you to see a problem you must commit more than 5 times the crime. That's stupid and for anyone to keep on arguing the 13 percent excuse is stupid.

I posted up the information about Alaska because I knew someone like you would enter trying what you are doing. Alaska is 4 percent black .so to think that 4 percent are the ones committing the highest rate of violent crime is insane. You have not entered one thread to argue with whites about there using race as basis for crime You are only here now because the finger is pointed at whites and in usual fashion certain types of white people can't stand to have people measure them with the same standards they do for everyone else.

Again, you don't understand the numbers you are talking about. 4 percent of a population can absolutely have the highest rate of violent crime. That may not be the case in Alaska, I haven't seen any numbers about who actually commits the violent crimes there as far as race, but the fact that blacks make up a low percentage of the population doesn't mean their rate of committing crime must also be low. It could be that blacks in Alaska commit 1 violent crime per 100 members of the population, or that blacks in Alaska commit 1 violent crime per 100000 members of the population. That is what crime rate is about: how many crimes are committed per X number of people.

So, yes, whites commit more crimes than other races. I've never even attempted to deny that. That doesn't mean whites have a higher crime rate.

I would image that in many towns, cities, or counties, whites DO have the higher crime rate. That isn't the case nationally, however.

I don't enter a lot of race-based threads. This board has a number of long-term white supremacist types. I've done a bit of arguing with them in the past, but for the most part, I ignore them. Their idiotic bigotry doesn't often deserve a response. People like Tank or Steve McGarrett are caricatures, blaming every wrong on blacks, or Jews, or whichever minority happens to be in their sights at a given point in time. There are others who are less aggressive with their bigotry, plenty of them. I have no problem with saying that anti-black racism is based in fear, or ignorance, or a desire to feel superior. I have no problem saying that anti-black racism still occurs today, not only individually, but systemically, although to a far lesser extent than in the past, thankfully. I believe that the history of oppression and racism against blacks in this country absolutely has played a part in many of the troubles faced by black people today. On the other hand, I don't think that "blaming whitey" does any good in solving those issues, but that seems to be your focus.

You also have no idea of my race. I'm pretty sure you've never asked me and I've never told you.

Oh, and on a statistical note, some crime and population stats do not include Hispanic or Latin as a race, only an ethnicity. In percentages of the population, for example, whites are listed as 77.5% of the population in 2014 by the Census Bureau, but non-Hispanic whites are 62.2%. I've only seen whites with the non-Hispanic category.

You are not educating anyone on facts here. You are only opining on what conclusion should be drawn from the facts. And all too often, you are doing so while leaving out or ignoring facts.

 

[bgrouse]

So where is the most violent state in the country?

Louisiana ranks as the most violent state in the country. This is largely due to the state’s nation-leading homicide rate, which at 10.3 murders and incidents of nonnegligent manslaughter per 100,000 people is more than double the national murder rate. Approximately 80% of homicides in the state are carried out with handguns, one of the larger shares of any state. Firearms also account for about two-thirds of all suicides in the state, the third largest share nationwide..

Louisiana’s incarceration rate is also nation-leading, with 1,049 people imprisoned in the state for every 100,000 residents. Louisiana is one of only two states, along with Oklahoma, to have an incarceration rate in excess of 1,000 per 100,000 people.

America's most and least violent states

This state is 65 percent white.


What state has the highest rate of violent crime?

Alaska’s violent crime rate of 730 incidents per 100,000 people is the highest of any state and is nearly double the national rate. The FBI Uniform Crime rate includes rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and murder as violent crimes, and the state ranks worst in the country in both aggravated assault and rape. Particularly egregious, the state’s rape rate of 122 reported incidents per 100,000 people is more than triple the U.S. figure.

America's most and least violent states

This state is 67 percent white, 4 percent black.

Check yourselves white folks.

Let's take a closer look at your statistics. Louisiana and Alaska may be mostly white, but that's hardly unusual. A search shows that the USA is mostly white and the vast majority of states are more than 50% white. Out of the 51 states/territories (51 because of D.C.), Louisiana and Alaska actually rate as some of the LEAST white, coming in at #14 and #15 out of 51 as being LEAST white.

Anyway, violent crime is actually not a very common occurrence and it usually takes a few crappy communities to "ruin" the statistic for the entire state, especially in states with low populations, like Alaska, which has less than half a million whites (and less than a million total population). So let's take an even closer look.

A quick search shows that Alaska has by far the highest Native American population out of all of the states, meaning they can really make waves statistically. They're always present in low numbers in the USA. It's really the lack of whites that make the natives such a high percentage there. From NYTimes:

EMMONAK, Alaska — She was 19, a young Alaska Native woman in this icebound fishing village of 800 in the Yukon River delta, when an intruder broke into her home and raped her. The man left. Shaking, the woman called the tribal police, a force of three. It was late at night. No one answered. She left a message on the department’s voice mail system. Her call was never returned. She was left to recover on her own.

“I drank a lot,” she said this spring, three years later. “You get to a certain point, it hits a wall.”

Reasons for the high rate of sexual assaults among American Indians are poorly understood, but explanations include a breakdown in the family structure, a lack of discussion about sexual violence and alcohol abuse.

Louisiana, from an ACLU article:

Louisiana also disproportionately incarcerates African-Americans, with more than 60% of the Louisiana prisoners being African-American.

They're both liberal sources, so I doubt they're going to go out of their way to make minorities look bad.

The bottom line is that violent crime does not happen very often. It only takes a few communities to ruin statistics. In this case, they are minority communities making the statistical waves.

 

[Coyote]

You seem to have real trouble with population percentages and ratios, IM2. You need to show not just the percentage of whites in these states, but the percentage of the crimes committed which are committed by whites, if you want to make a point about who is committing crimes. You've had issues with accepting the difference between total number of crimes committed and crime rate in the past.

Of course, no matter the percentages, it is a false and dangerous idea to assume that race is the important factor where crimes statistics are concerned.

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

 

[danielpalos]

Geez. When 4% of the population is committing most of the crimes, I'd have to say we have a racial problem.

Thanks a fucking lot, Obama.

Special pleading is all the right wing has.

Care to cite crime statistics?

 

[JGalt]

You seem to have real trouble with population percentages and ratios, IM2. You need to show not just the percentage of whites in these states, but the percentage of the crimes committed which are committed by whites, if you want to make a point about who is committing crimes. You've had issues with accepting the difference between total number of crimes committed and crime rate in the past.

Of course, no matter the percentages, it is a false and dangerous idea to assume that race is the important factor where crimes statistics are concerned.

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

....and yet, women had over 50 million of their unborn babies murdered in this country since the 1970's. That's quite a body count when you realize that Hitler only murdered 6 million people.

 

[bgrouse]

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Let's keep pretending that blacks and whites only differ in skin color.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You seem to have real trouble with population percentages and ratios, IM2. You need to show not just the percentage of whites in these states, but the percentage of the crimes committed which are committed by whites, if you want to make a point about who is committing crimes. You've had issues with accepting the difference between total number of crimes committed and crime rate in the past.

Of course, no matter the percentages, it is a false and dangerous idea to assume that race is the important factor where crimes statistics are concerned.

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Read the damn FBI statistics they are clear which group has a problem.

 

[Coyote]

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Let's keep pretending that blacks and whites only differ in skin color.

well let me know when you find the "violence" gene and correlate it with the "black" gene. Until then I suspect that differences have more to do with individual cultures, economic circumstances and such.

 

[Coyote]

You seem to have real trouble with population percentages and ratios, IM2. You need to show not just the percentage of whites in these states, but the percentage of the crimes committed which are committed by whites, if you want to make a point about who is committing crimes. You've had issues with accepting the difference between total number of crimes committed and crime rate in the past.

Of course, no matter the percentages, it is a false and dangerous idea to assume that race is the important factor where crimes statistics are concerned.

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Read the damn FBI statistics they are clear which group has a problem.

Men.

 

[Montrovant]

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Let's keep pretending that blacks and whites only differ in skin color.

No one claimed that skin color is the only difference. Hair is another obvious, yet superficial difference.

I don't believe I've seen any strong evidence of any biological differences between blacks and whites which would predispose blacks to violence, though.

 

[eagle1462010]

Most violent State in America..............the Liberal State of Mind.............

 

[IM2]

You seem to have real trouble with population percentages and ratios, IM2. You need to show not just the percentage of whites in these states, but the percentage of the crimes committed which are committed by whites, if you want to make a point about who is committing crimes. You've had issues with accepting the difference between total number of crimes committed and crime rate in the past.

Of course, no matter the percentages, it is a false and dangerous idea to assume that race is the important factor where crimes statistics are concerned.

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Read the damn FBI statistics they are clear which group has a problem.

I have. Sine 1994. The same story every year. Whites commit at least double the crime as we do.

 

[bgrouse]

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Let's keep pretending that blacks and whites only differ in skin color.

No one claimed that skin color is the only difference. Hair is another obvious, yet superficial difference.

I don't believe I've seen any strong evidence of any biological differences between blacks and whites which would predispose blacks to violence, though.

So what about the bell curve?

Liberals have tried for decades to get blacks to equal whites, but it's just not working. Black countries with no whites around to blame are shitholes. Looks like the problem is the liberals don't want to accept what's right in front of them: genetics.

 

[Coyote]

Montrovant it doesn't matter what I show you bitches will deny the f act that whites have been and continue to be the most violent racial group in this country.

You make your last comment to me and your punk ass has said none of this to the whites who continue doing exactly that. So go to hell.

.

What whites who continue doing what?

Whites may commit the most violent crimes of any racial group in the country, but whites are also the largest racial group in the country, so that would be expected. However, you ignore the rate of crimes committed, which would be a much stronger indication of "the most violent racial group in this country."

And, as I said, pointing to race as the important factor where crime is concerned is not a good idea in the first place.

You are just as bad as the anti-black racists that end up in your threads when it comes to cherry-picking information.

You cannot justify committing the most violent crimes by saying you have the most people. I don't cherry pick anything, you just can't deal with the fact that whites are the most violent race in this country. I have at least 241 years of documentation that proves it. This is what whites don't seem to get.

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Read the damn FBI statistics they are clear which group has a problem.

I have. Sine 1994. The same story every year. Whites commit at least double the crime as we do.

Why do think crime has anything to do with race?

 

[bgrouse]

I have. Sine 1994. The same story every year. Whites commit at least double the crime as we do.

Does your analysis by chance give any thought to ratios or per capita statistics?

 

[Coyote]

Violence has nothing to do with race....testosterone maybe...

Let's keep pretending that blacks and whites only differ in skin color.

No one claimed that skin color is the only difference. Hair is another obvious, yet superficial difference.

I don't believe I've seen any strong evidence of any biological differences between blacks and whites which would predispose blacks to violence, though.

So what about the bell curve?

Liberals have tried for decades to get blacks to equal whites, but it's just not working. Black countries with no whites around to blame are shitholes. Looks like the problem is the liberals don't want to accept what's right in front of them: genetics.

You think something as complex as human behavior comes down to just genetics?