Well, (a) is what’s being demanded by the race activists because (b) is the irrational fear articulated by the race activists.
I don’t see either of your options as either possible or reasonable.
I do not agree.
Poverty levels do not explain the disproportionate murder rates between the races (especially in the age range I mentioned). The Kaiser Family Foundation puts the poverty rates for the races at 9% for Whites, 20% for Hispanics and 22% for Blacks.
Using the CDC’s WISQUARS Fatal Injury Reports for 2015:
White non-Hispanic males 15-24 experienced 481 murders in a total population of 12,578,159 for a raw per-cap rate of 3.82/100K.
Hispanic males 15-24 experienced 809 murders in a total population of 4,912,223 for a raw per-cap rate of 16.47/100K (4.3X Whites)
Black males 15-24 experienced 2,790 murders in a total population of 3,726,552 for a raw per-cap rate of 74.87/100K (19.6X Whites, 4.55X Hispanics).
Sorry, the Black murder rate difference at 19.6X the White rate can not be explained away as being caused by the difference in the poverty rate @ 2.44X.
I’m sure there is an explanation, but poverty ain’t it.
Of course black on black crime is discussed and discussed constantly. Where? In the black communities themselves. Is it their fault that the media, both conservative and liberal, usually ignore their protests and demonstrations against the drug runners and gangs surrounding them? These gangstas are their children. Their children are dying at a frightening rate, slaughtering each other in the streets. Discuss it? These poor folk are living it daily. Don’t you think they want to discuss it with people that could actually help do something about it, politicians and journalists? But those politicians and journalists are more interested in the evil police killing blacks stories. And OK, they should be interested in those stories and they should be investigated thoroughly. But it wouldn’t hurt them to pay a little attention too to the murder of young blacks by other young blacks. These young black men should be going to college and pursuing careers instead of dying like animals in the gutters. That could be achieved if politicians of both persuasions spent just a little more of their time helping these communities instead of attacking or defending the police. Someone should remind them of LBJ’s words that it is possible to fart and chew gum at the same time
Well many others do agee
from [Why We Never Talk About Black-on-Black Crime: An Answer to White America’s Most Pressing Question](Why We Never Talk About Black-on-Black Crime: An Answer to White America’s Most Pressing Question)
None of your ‘proofs’ even speak to what I am arguing and I find the misrepresentations in your source reprehensible.
First off, I do not dispute that poor people commit more crime; I argue that you are wrong attributing to poverty, the wide disparity in the murder rate between the races.
Your source says as much, “persons in poor households at or below the federal poverty level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households”. To me, “double the rate” does not equate with the difference shown in the murder rates.
If we look at the simple stats for 2015 divided on race, including both sexes and all ages we see:
All non-Hispanic Whites experienced 5,222 murders in a total population of 201,242,281 for a raw per-cap rate of 2.59/100K.
All Blacks experienced 9,173 murders in a total population of 44,863,196 for a raw per-cap rate of 20.45/100K
Can a 2.44X difference in the poverty rate between Whites and Blacks and/or a 2X difference between rich and poor in victimization, really explain a 7.89X difference in the murder rate?
Now for the stupid stuff from your source . . .
No, it isn’t a fact at all. The link to the FBI is a chart that only includes data when the race of the victim or perpetrator is known. Just looking at the numbers we know this isn’t the total number of crimes so, the only conclusion we can draw is that there’s better reporting by police when the perp is White.
Nobody disputes that 90%+/- of murder is intraracial . . . Just looking at the number of murder victims by race and applying the 90% “rule” shows that since most murders are of Blacks, most murderers must also be Black – and by a very, very wide margin.
This is ridiculous.
The Washington Post’s Police Shooting database shows 94 unarmed people were killed by police in 2015. Estimates of sworn, active duty police officers come in around 765,000. So, 94 / 7.65 = 12.15/100K raw rate – for every 100,000 police officers, 12 unarmed people are shot.
Setting aside “violent crime of any kind” and just looking at the murder of Blacks, there were 9,173 murders of Blacks in 2015. 90% of 9173 is 8256 Black perps and let’s be generous and pull out another 10% for female murderers, 8256 - 826 = 7430 Black murders by Black male offenders. Again, the Black population is 44,863,196 so, 7430 / 448.63196 = 16.56/100K Black male murderers.
16 > 12
Of course there are murder perps who have multiple bodies on them but given we still need to wrap in murders of other races and rape, kidnapping, carjacking, robbery, attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated assault etc, etc, etc, (because the criteria is, “violent crime of any kind”, and it is evident what your source presents as “fact” is actually absolute, unmitigated BS.
.
That would not be the most logical conclusion. In fact, it’s not even in the top twenty.
You dont like that cite? Lets go to the UK and the Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime. the black population of Edinburgh is approx 1% so race isn’t a factor:
How about ancient greece?
And which “populations” did you cherrypick these stats from?
There are approx
220 million whites and hispanics
39 million blacks
and . .
Which means that any time you come across a black person they are 99.99% probably not a murderer!
So to answer your question:
YES!
Huh? I didn’t like a lie being presented as “fact”.
I don’t know what you are replying to, what you quoted was directed to a specific statement.
I have said that I do not dispute that poor people commit more crimes, why you keep posting making the same point is puzzling.
None of what you have posted has explained the 7.9X disparity in the murder rate between the races.
I chose those age categories because my original post in this thread was about police interactions with young Blacks and the disproportionate level of criminal violence in that group compared to any other.
Unless otherwise noted I use the CDC’s numbers for 2015 for my figuring, as split out in their WISQARS mortality app:
Total US population: 321,418,820
Non-Hispanic Whites: 201,242,281 (62.6%)
Hispanics: 56,592,793 (17.6%)
Blacks: 44,863,196 (13.9%)
But that does not speak to the distribution according to population which is where the disparity I keep mentioning (and you keep ignoring) is noted.
Your link “and” shows this in the actual arrests:
Black or African Americans 4,379 = 52.2%
White Americans (including Hispanic Americans) 3,799 = 45.3%
Blacks comprise 13.9% of the population, Whites and Hispanics comprise 80.2% of the population.
In all honesty, I’m not concerned with females and older people of any race. How about my original question about Black males 15-24?
Well, one segment of the population has demonstrated a level of violent criminality that is exceptionally disproportionate to its actual representation in the population. As Jesse Jackson lamented, “There is nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”
And back to your “fact” that I said was “absolute, unmitigated BS”:
[INDENT]“It is a fact (at least for 2016 and 2015) that a black man was less likely to commit a violent crime of any kind than a police officer was to kill an unarmed person.”[/INDENT]
I showed the rate of a police officer shooting an unarmed person to be 12/100K.
“94 unarmed people were killed by police in 2015. Estimates of sworn, active duty police officers come in around 765,000. So, 94 / 7.65 = 12.15/100K raw rate – for every 100,000 police officers, 12 unarmed people are shot.”
Turns out, the FBI has a stat for arrests for violent crime broken out for race. Table 43A for 2015 page shows 140,543 Blacks were arrested for violent crimes. Table 42 for 2015 shows that for violent crime arrests (Murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault), the average breakdown by sex for 2015 was 87% male.
I’ll be overly conservative and knock of 20% and say it is 67% male; 140,543 X .67 = 94,164 violent crime arrests for Black males in 2015.
94164 / 448.63 = 210 arrests per 100,000 Black males.
So, I’m revising my earlier statement just working off murders.
The “fact” that “a black man was less likely to commit a violent crime of any kind than a police officer was to kill an unarmed person” is wrong (and I’m being generous here) by 1700% – 12 < 210.
So, as I said, ridiculous, absolute unmitigated BS!
.
Because you keep making the same error.
Poor people are more likely to commit violent crimes, not black people.
If cops should be wary of anyone, it’s poor young males, and you can’t tell if someone is poor by their skin color.
Just because blacks are arrested and convicted of crimes at a higher rate than whites doesn’t necessarily mean they actually commit crimes at a higher rate
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kim-farbota/black-crime-rates-your-st_b_8078586.html
Finally:
So of ALL Americans, approx 2.7% of adults are cirminals of any kind, and approx 10% of those are for violent crimes, which makes it 0.27%. So Even if we play your little game and say that blacks commit crimes at 5x the rate of whites, that still only get us to 1.35% of the population. If half of those are male, we’re up to 2.7%, and if 1/3 of those are age 18 - 24, we’re up to 8.1% of black males age 18-24 are violent criminals.
So 91.8% of the of the adult black male population is not a violent criminal and should not be treated as such.
Who is asking to treat armed and violent criminals as non-threatening? 
The protests are about non-armed, non-threatening people being shot by law enforcement, as we’ve seen in several recent videos.
It’s weird to me that I even need to type this out, but the desire by some to misconstrue what is a very simple message seems to know no bounds.
Unless you can prove an error in my math my premise is correct, that young Black men are far an away more violent than any cohort in the population.
If the entire nation were murdered at the same rate as Black men aged 15-24 (74.87/100K), there would be over 240,000 murders a year.
2,790 Black men aged 15-24 were murdered in 2015, if they experienced the same homicide rate as the general non-Hispanic White rate (2.59/100K), only 97 would have died.
According to your link:
“The highest homicide levels are found in the Americas and Africa region, with the lowest homicide levels generally in countries in Europe” and in the Americas citizens of African descent commit a disproportionate percentage of homicides , perhaps the problem is with Africans not Income Inequality.
There is no genetic basis for race and your claim depends on it. Race is simply not a biological differentiator.
http://physanth.org/about/position-statements/biological-aspects-race/
Race is purely a social construct; that does not mean that the effects of the social construct are not very real. Money is also a social construct, and effects everything that we do.
If you have even a shred of evidence to back up your claim, please provide it.
But it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be a problem with Africans outside of the social realities, restrictions and culture we have built around the myth of race.
How does that argue against poverty being the main cause?
If we’re looking at a continental level, Africa and South America are comparitively poor continents, where you can still find some countries so impoverished and lawless that they’re even used as examples for comparing the US homicide rate.
Then if we’re looking internally at the US, yes, I would expect all else being equal that the children of slaves, who only achieved full civil rights a couple generations ago, in a country with some of the worse income inequality and social mobility in the developed world, to have a much higher poverty rate still, and they do.
I am sure, you have a cite for the oppressed Murderers doing it out of a sense of moral outrage that, there is no other justice to be had.
No, but if black people are disproportionately likely to be poor, and poor people are disproportionately likely to commit violent crimes, black people are disproportionately likely to commit violent crime.
Well what metric would you propose we use? How should we go about determining this? My go-to analysis on this issue is this SSC article, which goes on a pretty deep dive into the statistics and studies available, and comes back with:
There seems to be a strong racial bias in capital punishment and a moderate racial bias in sentence length and decision to jail.
There is ambiguity over the level of racial bias, depending on whose studies you want to believe and how strictly you define “racial bias”, in police stops, police shootings in certain jurisdictions, and arrests for minor drug offenses.
There seems to be little or no racial bias in arrests for serious violent crime, police shootings in most jurisdictions, prosecutions, or convictions.
Bolding mine. Looking at total prison population is actually pretty problematic based on these studies. But looking at arrest and conviction? There’s not nearly as much evidence supporting the claim of racial bias in those areas. In fact, the data shows the reverse:
Conviction rates of blacks have generally found to be less than than conviction rates of whites (Burke and Turk 1975, Petersilia 1983, Wilbanks 1987). I don’t know why so many of these studies are from the 70s and 80s, but a more recent Bureau of Justice Statistics finds that 66% of accused blacks get prosecuted compared to 69% of accused whites; 75% of prosecuted blacks get convicted compared to 78% of prosecuted whites.
[…]
The optimistic interpretation is that there definitely isn’t any sign of bias against black people here. The pessimistic interpretation is that this would be consistent with more frivolous cases involving black people coming to the courts (ie police arrest blacks at the drop of a hat, and prosecutors and juries end up with a bunch of stupid cases without any evidence that they throw out).
…But that caveat sorta falls flat, because earlier in the analysis, we’ve already established that arrest rates didn’t appear racially biased. This is not the right place to apply the “racism fucks with the data” argument.
actually this means that black crime is even higher than the numbers show
black crime is super super high compared to other races if u study it
i have many years
for ex black areas have 13 times the murder rate of a white area
And why isn’t anyone studying white-on-basic-grammar violence?
Looking back, I think understanding poverty as the main driver of crime gained the majority view in the UK in the early 1980s - more and more evidence came to light and it all seems perfectly obvious now. You’d think all those thousands of people transported to the colonies 150 years earlier for petty theft and whatnot might have triggered some investigation, but seemingly not.
If that was level 1, then - imo - level 2 is addressing the consequences of generational one-parent families, often a multi-generational household without any reliable/positive male influence ever. This can be devastating, especially for boys. It’s particularly tricky because it means state involvement and a lot of funding - you arr basically assisting families on how to better parent. Has to be done sensitively.
It’s impossible to state how fundamental this need is - it is difficult to conceive of never having experienced a conventional family.