why is it that African Americans never seem to be charged with hate crimes?

[obbn]

Hello everyone,

Once again it seems that crimes based on race committed by blacks against whites are being discounted as hate crimes. The most recent here:


http://www.540wfla.com/cc-common/new...ticle=10077815

In this news story the police in Alabama refuse to classify the beating of a white man by a black group a hate crime, even though during the beating one of the assailants shouted "this is justice for Treyvon"

Are we to expect Jesse Jackson and All Sharpton to run to this victim's bedside with TV cameras in tow demanding justice? Or are those two blind to racism if it is committed by members of their own race? The reason I ask this question is I can't seem to recall an African American being chartered with a hate crime or if they were it making national news. There seems to be a sick double standard here, if we expect racism to die in this country, then EVERYONE has to be treated equal. Am I the only one noticing this?

Oh, just because I ask the question doesn't make me a racist. If anyone has their fingers itching to start tapping at their keyboard to call me one, save your energy and go get bent. I hate racism as much as the next person, but if we are going to take a stand against it, we have to take a stand against all of it. Not just the feel good PC kind. And let's try to have a civil and respectful conversation. Thanks

[black rabbit]

You're wrong.

[black rabbit]

You were also wrong in 2010.

And 2008.

[Mijin]

You say "once again" but do you have examples other than this one to imply it's endemic?

Because this case is still in the early stages and we don't know the full details yet.

While one witness claimed to hear the "justice for Treyvon" thing, another witness claims Owens threatened the children with two knives and said a number of racial slurs himself.

[black rabbit]

Also:

Originally Posted by The FBI

Of the 6,008 known offenders, 58.6 percent were white and 18.4 percent were black. For 12.0 percent, the race was unknown, and the remaining known offenders were of other races.

African Americans make up 12% of the population of the US.

[obbn]

I never claimed that it has never happened, I said I can't recall any and certainly none that have made national news for days and weeks.

[black rabbit]

Originally Posted by obbn

I never claimed that it has never happened, I said I can't recall any and certainly none that have made national news for days and weeks.

Then what's the point of this thread?

Fact is, African Americans are charged with hate crimes, at a greater rate relative to population demographics than white people. You just haven't been paying attention.

[Jas09]

And yet when shown that in fact blacks are charged with hate crimes at a higher rate than one would expect based on their population you still stick to your claim?

[Krokodil]

NM

[DrFidelius]

Originally Posted by obbn

I never claimed that it has never happened, I said I can't recall any and certainly none that have made national news for days and weeks.

By now you should recognize that "ma[king] national news" does not map directly to what is really happening in the country.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by obbn

I never claimed that it has never happened, I said I can't recall any and certainly none that have made national news for days and weeks.

Your thread title was a bit more declarative than that.

[Bryan Ekers]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Your thread title was a bit more declarative than that.

Well, he said "seem". If the OP is relying on such superficial observation methods, it's true that it can seem that something isn't happening.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

"Oops," says the OP, "It looks like I was wrong. Thanks for dispelling my ignorance!"

That's what the OP in my fantasy world says when so conclusively proven incorrect.

[Frostillicus]

Just like the OP, I lie awake at night thinking about the gross unfairness of this misconception.

[Bryan Ekers]

I only see cats at night. Why are they all grey?

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by black rabbit

Then what's the point of this thread?

He was just asking questions.

[IntelliQ]

It's not that blacks arent charged with hate crimes, it's simply that many news stations will not report black on white crime unless there's a public outcry large enough to force their butts to move on it.

For example, the Trayvon case turns up tons of results on CBS and NBC / MSNBC. Google it.
However those same news outlets when doing a google search (and searching their sites) for "Matthew Owens" turns up ZERO articles.

(Matthew Owens was the white guy beaten by some blacks the other day and someone shouted "This is for Trayvon" or something similar)

It does appear the local media outlets do cover these things, but dont look for the big Alphabet news to keep you informed unless it fits their politically correct narrative.

[Sailboat]

Originally Posted by black rabbit

Then what's the point of this thread?

Fact is, African Americans are charged with hate crimes, at a greater rate relative to population demographics than white people. You just haven't been paying attention.

Wow, you've shown the OP to be precisely, specifically wrong in every way. I don't suppose we have long to wait for his voice to be raised in defense of the reverse proposition!

[Bryan Ekers]

Heck, we didn't have to wait long at all for somebody to blame the liberal media.

[IntelliQ]

Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers

Heck, we didn't have to wait long at all for somebody to blame the liberal media.

Didnt take long to do a simple search and report the findings.

Btw, Fox News covered them both.

[Mosier]

The first few replies in this thread was some seriously fancy ignorance fightin'.

[Kimmy_Gibbler]

Originally Posted by IntelliQ

It's not that blacks arent charged with hate crimes, it's simply that many news stations will not report black on white crime unless there's a public outcry large enough to force their butts to move on it.

Did anyone die in the Owens incident? Did the police decline initially (and for a good deal aftetward) to arrest the acknowledged perpetrators on the spot, as they did in the Zimmerman-Martin incident (even though arrest of shooters causing a death of an unarmed pedestrian is typical)? In what way do you suppose these incidents are alike and therefore deserving of equivalent media coverage?

[miss elizabeth]

Originally Posted by Kimmy_Gibbler

Did anyone die in the Owens incident? Did the police decline initially (and for a good deal aftetward) to arrest the acknowledged perpetrators on the spot, as they did in the Zimmerman-Martin incident (even though arrest of shooters causing a death of an unarmed pedestrian is typical)? In what way do you suppose these incidents are alike and therefore deserving of equivalent media coverage?

You are obviously a sheeple brainwashed by the liberal media.

[IntelliQ]

Originally Posted by Kimmy_Gibbler

Did anyone die in the Owens incident? Did the police decline initially (and for a good deal aftetward) to arrest the acknowledged perpetrators on the spot, as they did in the Zimmerman-Martin incident (even though arrest of shooters causing a death of an unarmed pedestrian is typical)? In what way do you suppose these incidents are alike and therefore deserving of equivalent media coverage?

I stated the obvious, you're free to google same exact results.
It doesnt matter if someone died, a mob of 20 blacks - and one white victim beaten into critical condition is newsworthy especially when one of the mob shouts "that's for trayvon" (or whatever burst of wisdom it was).

Fox news covered both: +1
Alphabet news seriously screwed up the one which they covered: -1

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by IntelliQ

It's not that blacks arent charged with hate crimes, it's simply that many news stations will not report black on white crime unless there's a public outcry large enough to force their butts to move on it.

For example, the Trayvon case turns up tons of results on CBS and NBC / MSNBC. Google it.
However those same news outlets when doing a google search (and searching their sites) for "Matthew Owens" turns up ZERO articles.

(Matthew Owens was the white guy beaten by some blacks the other day and someone shouted "This is for Trayvon" or something similar)

It does appear the local media outlets do cover these things, but dont look for the big Alphabet news to keep you informed unless it fits their politically correct narrative.

Strain yourself here and think about what you're saying.

The news media don't try and report every serious crime that occurs in the nation. They report things which are seen as being newsworthy because they are different and unusual.

So if they're reporting white-on-black crimes, they're essentially saying white-on-black crimes are out of the ordinary. And by the same standard, when they don't report black-on-white crimes, they're tacitly saying they regard these crimes as routine.

This is the same principle that explains why the disappearance of a white child is major news and the disappearance of a black child gets put on a milk carton.

Now do you want to take a shot at how that fits in with your claim of there being a "politically correct narrative"?

[IntelliQ]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Strain yourself here and think about what you're saying.

The news media don't try and report every serious crime that occurs in the nation. They report things which are seen as being newsworthy because they are different and unusual.

So if they're reporting white-on-black crimes, they're essentially saying white-on-black crimes are out of the ordinary. And by the same standard, when they don't report black-on-white crimes, they're tacitly saying they regard these crimes as routine.

This is the same principle that explains why the disappearance of a white child is major news and the disappearance of a black child gets put on a milk carton.

Now do you want to take a shot at how that fits in with your claim of there being a "politically correct narrative"?

They're not saying that.

Cute missing kid coverage is a different issue. Nice try at derailing though..

White on black gets reported by everyone.
Black on white gets covered locally but not nationally unless there is pressure to cover it.

The current situation is the perfect example (among many).

[grude]

To be fair to the OP if you watch mass media they don't cover them, name one case that got national attention..............I'll wait.........

EDIT:My point being why is the media creating a fictional reality so divorced from the true state of the nation?

[Lamia]

Originally Posted by IntelliQ

For example, the Trayvon case turns up tons of results on CBS and NBC / MSNBC. Google it.
However those same news outlets when doing a google search (and searching their sites) for "Matthew Owens" turns up ZERO articles.

A search on "Matthew Owens" (in quotes) on MSNBC.com actually turns up 4 articles.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by grude

....EDIT:My point being why is the media creating a fictional reality so divorced from the true state of the nation?

Mostly, the do it because if they told you the truth, you'd change the channel.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by IntelliQ

They're not saying that.

Cute missing kid coverage is a different issue. Nice try at derailing though..

White on black gets reported by everyone.
Black on white gets covered locally but not nationally unless there is pressure to cover it.

The current situation is the perfect example (among many).

Which is exactly what I said. And I then explained why it means the opposite of what you said it means. But apparently you chose not to strain yourself.

[wheresmymind]

Originally Posted by IntelliQ

They're not saying that.

Cute missing kid coverage is a different issue. Nice try at derailing though..

White on black gets reported by everyone.
Black on white gets covered locally but not nationally unless there is pressure to cover it.

The current situation is the perfect example (among many).

The FBI statistics pointed out by black rabbit indicate that in 2010 there were over 3,000 white-on-black hate crimes. You say "among many," but how many big hate crime stories from 2010 do you remember? If white on black hate crimes are reported by "everyone," why aren't we deluged with these cases constantly? Even if they only reported on the most sensational, most heinous 1% of white on black hate crimes, there'd be dozens every year.

And why did the Zimmerman-Martin case get picked up in the first place (Zimmerman being Hispanic and all)? Because there are other issues in play here besides the race of the accused.

[Ibn Warraq]

Black on white crimes never get coverage?


Somebody name a white on black crime that got remotely the coverage that the O.J. Simpson trial got.

[grude]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Black on white crimes never get coverage?


Somebody name a white on black crime that got remotely the coverage that the O.J. Simpson trial got.

How was that a hate crime, or racially motivated? Pretty sure it was a good ol' murderous ex crime.

[Bryan Ekers]

Originally Posted by grude

How was that a hate crime, or racially motivated? Pretty sure it was a good ol' murderous ex crime.

With a bit of classic eliminate-the-witness thrown in for spice.

[scamartistry]

to be fair...question to the people claiming that the media does not have some kind of a PC agenda:

Would it or would it not be a nationwide headline story if 20 white people attacked a single black person?

of course it would.

[Mijin]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

to be fair...question to the people claiming that the media does not have some kind of a PC agenda:

Would it or would it not be a nationwide headline story if 20 white people attacked a single black person?

of course it would.

I don't think that's indicative of a PC agenda so much as an agenda to report on what they think the audience may find interesting. "Guy shoots teenager dead, isn't even arrested", is a story. "Big group beats the hell out of some guy after he threatens kids with knives and racial insults" is less so.

Oh, you didn't know about the knives? It's interesting how differently this story is being reported by the news agencies. Now that shows a political agenda.

[scamartistry]

Originally Posted by Mijin

I don't think that's indicative of a PC agenda so much as an agenda to report on what they think the audience may find interesting. "Guy shoots teenager dead, isn't even arrested", is a story. "Big group beats the hell out of some guy after he threatens kids with knives and racial insults" is less so.

Oh, you didn't know about the knives? It's interesting how differently this story is being reported by the news agencies. Now that shows a political agenda.

You are right - I Did not know about a the knife and the slurs, and yes it does bring some "nuance" to the story. My point remains though, media do have an agenda and a certain narrative, my own pet theory is that media prefers the underdog perspective. In the black and white world of media news (no pun) white people are regarded as superior by definition, therefore crime towards that group of people are not as sexy/selling/whatever.

[Mijin]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

In the black and white world of media news (no pun) white people are regarded as superior by definition, therefore crime towards that group of people are not as sexy/selling/whatever.

I would agree in general that there are many biases in news reporting. Sometimes it's pushing an agenda, but more often it's telling the public what they want to hear, no matter how irrational that may be.

In this case though, I'm not convinced the two situations are analogous and it's only latent racism that has made one story more well-known than the other.

[Happy Lendervedder]

Detroit Tigers black outfielder Delmon Young faces a hate-crime charge in NYC after an early-morning assault.

[steronz]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

You are right - I Did not know about a the knife and the slurs, and yes it does bring some "nuance" to the story. My point remains though, media do have an agenda and a certain narrative, my own pet theory is that media prefers the underdog perspective. In the black and white world of media news (no pun) white people are regarded as superior by definition, therefore crime towards that group of people are not as sexy/selling/whatever.

You can replace "media" with "humanity."

As to your second point, I don't know how you can admit that the media tacitly thinks that white people are regarded as superior, and at the same time think that they have an anti-white agenda.

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

to be fair...question to the people claiming that the media does not have some kind of a PC agenda:

Would it or would it not be a nationwide headline story if 20 white people attacked a single black person?

of course it would.

Considering what a national outcry was caused by the killing of Yankel Rosenbaum by a black mob and the beating of Reginald Denny during the Rodney King riots, I think you're being extremely naive in suggesting the media wouldn't care.

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by The FBI
Of the 6,008 known offenders, 58.6 percent were white and 18.4 percent were black. For 12.0 percent, the race was unknown, and the remaining known offenders were of other races.

Originally Posted by obbn

I never claimed that it has never happened, I said I can't recall any and certainly none that have made national news for days and weeks.

Then you should be pitting yourself for being woefully ignorant of the actual facts.

[brickbacon]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

You are right - I Did not know about a the knife and the slurs, and yes it does bring some "nuance" to the story. My point remains though, media do have an agenda and a certain narrative, my own pet theory is that media prefers the underdog perspective. In the black and white world of media news (no pun) white people are regarded as superior by definition, therefore crime towards that group of people are not as sexy/selling/whatever.

Maybe, but I think when the media reports on hate crimes you need to consider the underlying logic of hate crime legislation. That being that the crime is one that extends beyond just the individual being hurt. It is often a means of intimidating and terrorizing a larger group or people. It's a crime against the community. As unacceptable as it is when a minority attacks a member of the majority, the reality is it doesn't usually have the same chilling effect as it does when the reverse happens. This is generally true for a few reasons:

1. There is generally not a long, recent history of discrimination and systemic prejudice against the majority. There is no history of Hispanics, for example, attacking White people, and making laws to criminalize being White.

2. Members of the majority generally don't have to live, work with, or work for members of the minority. Most Black people, for geographic and socioeconomic reasons, don't have the luxury to avoid White people if they want to. If for some reason, Blacks were in fear of their lives as a result of intimidation coming from a local group of White people, they generally don't have a choice to not interact with Whites without great hardship.

3. For numerical reasons, minority violence towards the majority, in aggregate, doesn't represent a clear and present danger to the majority's existence or way of life. White people were never rounded up and put in camps, or targeted for wholesale extermination.

4. Media hesitance to report on minority crimes also comes from the common tendency of the viewers to treat minority crimes as irrational; as maniacal and hysterical actions that are the result of one's race and background. Media members are generally responsible enough to not fan these flames. They know harping on a Black guy robbing an old lady will have negative consequences for all Black guys in that area, whereas a White guy doing the same will not have that effect. Just as Timothy McVeigh, and a plethora of White school shooters don't make people fear White kids, or separatists in the same way many now fear Arabs and Muslims because of terrorism here. they recognize they have the ability to shine a light on things, and that they need to use that spotlight in a responsible way.

When the media reports these things, they usually implicitly consider these things. Regardless of how you feel about the propriety of it, when most Black parents heard about Trayvon Martin, they immediately feared for their own children. It affects them on a personal level regardless of how likely it is something might happen. Even if hate didn't inspire George Zimmerman, his actions put the fear of God into any Black parent with teenagers. The same cannot (generally) be said for Whites. When you read about a Black guy beating a White guy several states away from where you are, are you fearful?

Fair or not, when minorities see other minorities as victims of hate crimes, it feels more like a personal attack. Race and ethnicity, as a minority, are inextricably tied to identity in America. Most people in the majority don't have those same ties. I know few White people who have strong opinions on being White, and all that that entails. For most of them, it's just never been as issue. Most minorities I know cannot say the same. That alone makes things like Trayvon Martin's shooting more newsworthy as the number of interested parties is often far greater, and they are impacted on a far deeper and personal level. It may not be fair to the White guy who is a victim of a hate crime, but it's not some PC liberal agenda to pretend minorities are better than others.

[scamartistry]

"4. Media hesitance to report on minority crimes also comes from the common tendency of the viewers to treat minority crimes as irrational; as maniacal and hysterical actions that are the result of one's race and background. Media members are generally responsible enough to not fan these flames. They know harping on a Black guy robbing an old lady will have negative consequences for all Black guys in that area, whereas a White guy doing the same will not have that effect. Just as Timothy McVeigh, and a plethora of White school shooters don't make people fear White kids, or separatists in the same way many now fear Arabs and Muslims because of terrorism here. they recognize they have the ability to shine a light on things, and that they need to use that spotlight in a responsible way."

Insightful post. I agree, media often do have an agenda, Im not sure I agree with you fully on the reason but clearly the agenda is there. According to you the reason in paternalistic: black people can't handle the truth sometime.

I prefer news to be news; as in as far as possible portraying what is going on in the world. I do not think that minorities need to be patted on the head and be held from certain sensitive news. Actually I find that idea disgusting and (yes I will use that word) racist.

[Miller]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

Insightful post. I agree, media often do have an agenda, Im not sure I agree with you fully on the reason but clearly the agenda is there. According to you the reason in paternalistic: black people can't handle the truth sometime.

Wow. That's not even remotely close to what he said.

[brickbacon]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

Insightful post. I agree, media often do have an agenda, Im not sure I agree with you fully on the reason but clearly the agenda is there. According to you the reason in paternalistic: black people can't handle the truth sometime.

I prefer news to be news; as in as far as possible portraying what is going on in the world. I do not think that minorities need to be patted on the head and be held from certain sensitive news. Actually I find that idea disgusting and (yes I will use that word) racist.

I think you misunderstood me, or perhaps I wasn't clear. Whenever a reporter comes across any story, they need to consider the ramifications of their reporting on the larger populace. Consider a situation where you find videos of soldiers desecrating the Koran and/or dead bodies. Do you publish the pictures? It's a balance between the public's right to know, whether the story is newsworthy, and if there are any negative consequences to reporting it. In the case of pictures of soldiers, they are often held back, or not reported on because doing so would endanger the lives of all soldiers in the field regardless of how they behave. What about if you find proof that a popular celebrity is in the closet. Is it fair to out them?

That same balancing act applies to all stories. If a headline read, "Black mugger robs unsuspecting rich White people", it would likely make things more difficult for every Black guy in that neighborhood. A responsible reporter must acknowledge that even a factual account of events can often incite a widespread, and disproportionate backlash against undeserving people. That has to be a consideration in matters like this. Most people already have an conscious or unconscious bias against minorities. Writing stories that you know will serve to perpetuate those detrimental biases can be dangerous. You can probably say that that is fairly paternalistic, but I think the sentiment comes more from wanting to control their work, and how it's used. Not because they think minorities are too sensitive, or because of some liberal PC agenda.

Despite your profession that you want news to be news, I don't really believe you. Like most people, you want news to be factual accounts of things you care about. Once you introduce all of those biases, you have to acknowledge you are not really asking for news to be news, you want it to be stories that can inform your opinions on things, and can allow you to make prudent decisions in your life. The fact that hate crimes against Whites may get short shrift in the national news cycle, generally has no more bearing on your life than a typhoon in India. That's my point. When a gay kid gets dragged to death, the gay community cares on a visceral level. To an individual, the act reinforces the, often valid, belief that homosexual can be a liability for them. If a White guy gets beaten up for being White, other White people may care, but they don't start worrying that being White will work against them.

Reporting is not just regurgitating facts, your need to parse them in a way that accurately reflects the situation, and the world as you see it. The world, as it currently exists, is not one where one's Whiteness is a consideration in most circumstances. Shining a spotlight on the few situations where it is doesn't serve to accurately reflect how the world really is.

[scamartistry]

Originally Posted by brickbacon

When most Black parents heard about Trayvon Martin, they immediately feared for their own children. It affects them on a personal level regardless of how likely it is something might happen. Even if hate didn't inspire George Zimmerman, his actions put the fear of God into any Black parent with teenagers.
.

The paragraph I meant to quote. Is this french for black people think like children?

[orcenio]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

The paragraph I meant to quote. Is this french for black people think like children?

Gee, scamartistry what do you mean?

[brickbacon]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

The paragraph I meant to quote. Is this french for black people think like children?

I am going to assume you asked this question in good faith. That said, I don't think such reactions mean Black people think like children. I think it means that the very real, yet almost unbelievable lengths people have gone to as a result of, and in the name of racism and bigotry has given many minorities as different appreciation for what is possible. It doesn't seem possible that the government would use people as lab rats to test diseases. It doesn't seem possible that the government would sterilize people. It doesn't seem possible that they would lock everyone who looks like you up in an internment camp. It doesn't seem possible that the NYPD would shoot you 41 times as you reach for your wallet. It doesn't seem possible that that same PD would sodomize you with a plunger. It doesn't seem possible that half the country would go out of their way to change their state constitution to prevent you from getting married. The list goes on and on.

All those things, in the abstract, may not be very likely to happen to any individual, but they do happen often enough to people who happen to look like you, that minorities are justifiably more cognizant of the possibility that their lives could be irreparably affected by it.

[IntelliQ]

Originally Posted by scamartistry

to be fair...question to the people claiming that the media does not have some kind of a PC agenda:

Would it or would it not be a nationwide headline story if 20 white people attacked a single black person?

of course it would.

Of course it would be, The usual crowd only needs one half-white suspect, not 20.