52 shot, 10 killed in gang-fueled weekend violence in Chicago

why is that? what are you implying? that blacks are more violent?

 

Let me explain this to you people one last time (gods, please let them understand this time).

A person can say that violent black Americans are violent, and not be racist. A person can say that SOME black Americans are violent, and not be racist.

A person who says that black Americans are more violent IS being racist.

Why? Because judging the entirety of a race by the actions of small percentage of that race WITHOUT DISTINCTION IS the very essence of racism. Over 90% of black Americans will never be involved in a violent crime. So when you say that black Americans are more violent, without any distinction as to which black Americans you are talking about, then it IS a racist statement. And yes, the same goes for descriptions of white Americans.

Why is this so difficult for some to understand?

 

so when statistics show the rate of violence amongst blacks is higher then any other race what conclusion should one draw from those statistics?
that blacks aren't more violent then other race when statistics show different or should we just ignore that truth and burry our head in the sand like you

now saying the cause of blacks being more violent is their race is racist

I don't believe what cause the higher rate of violence amongst blacks is the race its self but their culture their environment
you raise a black kid in a none violent culture where thugs aren't glorified and violence isnt taught and condoned to solve ones problems that kid wouldn't grow up to be violent

 

no, I would never believe such a thing as I am not a racist.

Russia is almost all white, therefore most crime there is white-on-white.

duhhh

 

when statistics show that violence committed by blacks to every race not just against other blacks is at a much higher rate then any other race what conclusion should one draw? that blacks aren't more violent then any other race contradicting those statistics? and that you are a racist for not contradicting those statistics?

 

Oh, FFS.

Drug-related gang violence isn't major news because it's drug-related gang violence. It's been with us for decades.

Doesn't mean it isn't a problem. And it IS news locally in Chicago, as it should be. But something that isn't new isn't particularly newsworthy outside of the affected area.

Now let me point out some errors in the facts/claims/assumptions being made in this thread:

1. This isn't a "mass shooting" because it was multiple separate incidents, including two incidents of domestic violence.

2. You guys are trying to make Chicago a poster child for "liberal-run city with large minority population." Except that it's clearly an outlier. As the article notes, Chicago's homicide count is higher than New York and Los Angeles COMBINED -- two cities that are both FAR larger than Chicago, liberal-run, and have a large minority population. The problem is clearly neither "liberal control" nor "large minority population".

3. Chicago's homicide rate actually peaked in 2016 and has been declining since.

Carry on.

 

80% of crime against whites are committed by whites. If you are a white person, why are you so worried about black on black crime? Your biggest threat and concern should be other white people. It's a question worth asking.

 

so that's the point of this thread? to argue that blacks are more violent than everyone else?

funny, I thought Conservatives believed we should judge everyone as unique individuals.

 

Because cities are not isolated eco-systems.

 

you are only looking at skin color, and ignoring everything else, like socio-economic conditions and single-parent households.

I understand, its the standard Conservative POV. Focus on race and ignore all other factors.

 

And once again, you guys just don't ****ing get it. If 90% of black Americans ARE NOT INVOLVED in violent crime, yet YOU claim that black culture is violent, THAT is the very essence of racism. YOU are judging the entirety of a race and it's culture by the actions of a small percentage. Why is that so hard to understand.

It would be like me saying that white Americans shouldn't be able to be involved in monetary exchange because statistics show that white Americans are more likely to be involved in security fraud than any other race and that it's white culture that causes this problem.

 

If blacks and whites had the same population in the USA and the same socio-economic status and same single-parent households, crime rates would be similar if not identical.

 

Er, they are, especially once you control for things like median income and the like. His point was that when you have a large population of one race, most crime in that area will involve that race. It's a tautology.

 

hence the absurdity of the OP

its like whining that most crime in Uganda is black-on-black

 

I heard most crime in Japan is Japanese-on-Japanese.

racism!!!!!!!!

 

Bullshit. Black-on-white crime is rare, especially compared to white-on-white crime.

It's simple math. Blacks are just 15% of the population, and 90% of black crime is black-on-black. Leaving just a tiny share for black-on-white.

 

Then try Baltimore, Detroit, St.Louis and New Orleans.

 

You are still ignoring the fact that our two largest cities -- New York and Los Angeles -- are liberal-run, have large minority populations, and have very low homicide rates.

So clearly the issue with the cities you name is neither "liberal-run" nor "large minority populations".

I mean, just to take Detroit as an example. I wonder if anything might have happened to Detroit's economy in the last decade or so that might lead to high poverty and unemployment rates, which correlate with higher crime?

 

You keep using Russia as your comparison to Chicago.

Can you come of with a big city in the US which is mostly white, for comparison, to support your claim?

You have absolutely nothing to support this claim. Nothing.

 

The liberal mayor allowed the rioting which lead to the CVS being burned and looted, the same people that voted her in.

 

Unless it was Democrats like Omar or Tlaib, they hate Jews almost as much as the Klan hates blacks. There simply is no accounting for Democrats and their ability to hate, support hate, and propagate it from one group to the next...

 

what needs to be asked and answered is why are blacks more violent but how can that be asked and answered when you deny they are and call everyone a racist that brings it up

 

in the latest statistic black on white murder was a little over 500 same year there only was 230 white on black murders
blacks killed over twice as many whites as whites that killed blacks

500 is much more then are killed each year during mass shootings you liberals obsess over so don't even try to belittle that amount

now will remind you these are murders its not violence in general which I'm sure is in the tens of thousands if not more

 

and what's the statistics of other races that aren't involved in violent crimes? what percentage whites aren't involved in violent crimes what's it for Hispanics and Asians
willing to bet it much higher then for blacks
question that needs to be asked and answered is why but you cant ask because you get called a racist if you do

and to answer your question why more whites are involved in white collar crimes because there is a hell of a lot more whites with those types of jobs
now explain why blacks commit more violent crimes ?

 

Wouldn't matter. If you are judging any group on the actions of a small percentage of that group, than that is a racist or bigoted view of said group. You just don't seem to understand that basic tenant of what is racism.