(July 15, 2016 at 1:58 pm)RobertE Wrote:

(July 13, 2016 at 8:43 pm)paulpablo Wrote: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr...verviewpdf

According to these statistics black people commit more than the percentage of their population by what I would call a significant degree in every crime except driving under the influence and liquor laws, both of which they make up 13% or 12% of the arrests.

Some of the arrests are as high as 48% for murder and 54% for robbery.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/fact...rime/19439

The cities with the highest murder rates are 

1) East st Louis.  Black population 97%
2) Chester PA.    Black population  74.7%
3) St Louis MO  Black population 46.9%
4) Gary IN        Black population 84.8
5) Detroit         Black population 82%

Compared to some demographics from the cities with the lowest crime rates 

1) Irvine CA  Asian population 45%  White 50%
2) Arlington County,   63.8%white  9.9% asian   8.9%black.
3)Gilbert AZ   81% White.   15% Hispanic  3% black   4% asian.
4) Fremont CA   50% Asian   32% White   3% Black
5) Henderson NV   80% White



The argument against this as we've established firmly in this thread is that the cause of this could be down to over policing of black neighborhoods (even though people say the police are also racist for under policing black neighborhoods aswell) and racial profiling and racial stereotypes.

But then if this was so then you'd expect the places listed above as the lowest crime rate places in America to secretly be hell holes, if it's just the case that the police are secretly letting all these Asians and white people get away with murder, rape and robbery.  I don't know because I don't live in any of these 5 towns but they seem to get quite good reviews as being safe places to live.

I could understand if you were to say white people and black people commit the same amount of crime if you control for certain factors like income, education, IQ, upbringing.

I'd like to finish off the post by saying that I don't want to make any harsh, fast, un thoughtful statements based on looking at the FBI statistics and the demographics but there is some sort of pattern that could suggest black people do commit more crime.  
Not saying that it isn't because of poverty or whatever though.

I have a question with regards to the stats that have been put up. Do you have statistics for the number of crimes committed by Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Indian (Indian sub-continent) and Native Indians and Hispanic? It would be good to see the difference because just like black communities, they stick to their own groups. If this is the case, then how come (only guessing....  ) the arrest rates are lower with regards to other groups of ethnic minorities. Suffice to say, this is just not American statistics either, but European too. I would be greatly interested. 

I just googled the statistics. I searched for cities with highest murder rates then googled the demographics of each city.

I didn't actually know what the results would be before I googled them.
I chose cities with high murder rates so no one could say it was just over policed areas and people smoking weed and jay walking accounted for the high crime rate.

(July 15, 2016 at 2:44 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 1:38 pm)Irrational Wrote: It's going to be pretty much the same as what Wikipedia says. I read the article earlier. So if they want to know what definition I stick to, it's in there.

The wikipedia article is very long, includes several different eras several different countries, white privledge as viewed by everything from Marxists to feminists to critiques of white privilege to deny it's existence. So you can't 'just read the what wikipedia says' since it gives different and sometimes contradictory points of view. Which is exactly what most wikipedia articles do and is the whole point of wikipedia.  What it doesn't do is give some magic, handy universal definition. You can't say 'I agree with wikipedia' Wikipedia doesn't agree with itself. It gives an overview of different points of view about it. That's why it's my pet peeve on here. You are basically telling someone else to do your research for you. You'd think that you would at least be able to narrow it down to the section that you agreed with.


By the way, this has nothing to do with my views on white privilege, which I think for sure exists and I wrote a bit about in the thread on white privilege.

It's in the first sentence of the article, CA. Forgive me if I don't have enough time to take someone like A Theist seriously.

(July 15, 2016 at 2:52 pm)Irrational Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 2:44 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: The wikipedia article is very long, includes several different eras several different countries, white privledge as viewed by everything from Marxists to feminists to critiques of white privilege to deny it's existence. So you can't 'just read the what wikipedia says' since it gives different and sometimes contradictory points of view. Which is exactly what most wikipedia articles do and is the whole point of wikipedia.  What it doesn't do is give some magic, handy universal definition. You can't say 'I agree with wikipedia' Wikipedia doesn't agree with itself. It gives an overview of different points of view about it. That's why it's my pet peeve on here. You are basically telling someone else to do your research for you. You'd think that you would at least be able to narrow it down to the section that you agreed with.


By the way, this has nothing to do with my views on white privilege, which I think for sure exists and I wrote a bit about in the thread on white privilege.

It's in the first sentence of the article, CA. Forgive me if I don't have enough time to take someone like A Theist seriously.

Then don't reply to him, and don't be too lazy to cut and paste one sentence, but expect him to read a 100 paragraph wikipedia article? C'mon.

(July 15, 2016 at 2:56 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 2:52 pm)Irrational Wrote: It's in the first sentence of the article, CA. Forgive me if I don't have enough time to take someone like A Theist seriously.

Then don't reply to him, and don't be too lazy to cut and paste one sentence, but expect him to read a 100 paragraph wikipedia article? C'mon.

Where's the fun in that?

(July 15, 2016 at 2:56 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 2:52 pm)Irrational Wrote: It's in the first sentence of the article, CA. Forgive me if I don't have enough time to take someone like A Theist seriously.

Then don't reply to him, and don't be too lazy to cut and paste one sentence, but expect him to read a 100 paragraph wikipedia article? C'mon.

You could say that's..... Irrational!  
*Puts on Sunglasses*

(July 15, 2016 at 2:52 pm)Irrational Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 2:44 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: The wikipedia article is very long, includes several different eras several different countries, white privledge as viewed by everything from Marxists to feminists to critiques of white privilege to deny it's existence. So you can't 'just read the what wikipedia says' since it gives different and sometimes contradictory points of view. Which is exactly what most wikipedia articles do and is the whole point of wikipedia.  What it doesn't do is give some magic, handy universal definition. You can't say 'I agree with wikipedia' Wikipedia doesn't agree with itself. It gives an overview of different points of view about it. That's why it's my pet peeve on here. You are basically telling someone else to do your research for you. You'd think that you would at least be able to narrow it down to the section that you agreed with.


By the way, this has nothing to do with my views on white privilege, which I think for sure exists and I wrote a bit about in the thread on white privilege.

It's in the first sentence of the article, CA. Forgive me if I don't have enough time to take someone like A Theist seriously.

Hmmmm....you educated yourself all about white privilege in Wikipedia, and you can't take me seriously? Lol!

(July 15, 2016 at 2:45 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I just googled the statistics. I searched for cities with highest murder rates then googled the demographics of each city.

I didn't actually know what the results would be before I googled them.
I chose cities with high murder rates so no one could say it was just over policed areas and people smoking weed and jay walking accounted for the high crime rate.

Here you go for a link Paul:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-in...s-database

Have a fantastic evening.

(July 15, 2016 at 4:46 pm)A Theist Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 2:52 pm)Irrational Wrote: It's in the first sentence of the article, CA. Forgive me if I don't have enough time to take someone like A Theist seriously.

Hmmmm....you educated yourself all about white privilege in Wikipedia, and you can't take me seriously? Lol!

Haha, very funny, because Wikipedia isn't at all a useful resource for education </sarcasm>.

But for the record, I've known about white privilege for a number of years now. I only referred to Wikipedia as a quick summary for you to check for how white privilege is generally defined. And you only had to check the first paragraph or two for just the definition.

(July 15, 2016 at 8:09 am)Little lunch Wrote:

(July 14, 2016 at 6:22 pm)BrokenQuill92 Wrote: https://youtu.be/jQ_0bqWKO-k

Did you watch this A theist?
I'd like to hear your what you think and if it changed your mind a little.

(July 15, 2016 at 5:56 pm)Little lunch Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 8:09 am)Little lunch Wrote: Did you watch this A theist?
I'd like to hear your what you think and if it changed your mind a little.

He's probably ignoring it