Why is the US the most criminally violent ''First World'' nation of all?

And African Americans are what percentage of the US population?

Yes, refusing to prosecute criminals in general, and blacks in particular. That's happening. That's reality.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...0-felony-cases-including-Jussie-Smollett.html
REVEALED: Top Chicago prosecutor Kim Foxx's office has dismissed more than 25,000 felony cases - including murders, shootings, sexual assaults and Jussie Smollett's 'hoax' attack

• Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx dropped charges against 29.9% of felony defendants during her first three years in office, the Chicago Tribune found
• Foxx's case dismissal rate is more than 35% higher than that of her predecessor
• The state's attorney told the Tribune that its analysis gave an 'incomplete picture of her commitment to keeping the public safe'
• She said she's dropped cases against low-level, nonviolent offenders so prosecutors can focus on violent crimes
• But data showed Foxx's office has dismissed cases involving murder, shootings, sex crimes and serious drug offenses at a much higher rate than her predecessor
• Foxx gained notoriety last year when her office dropped felony charges against Jussie Smollett, the actor accused of staging a racist, anti-gay attack on himself

That is nonsense. That is not reality. Stop bringing up nonsense, and focus on reality.

 

The discussion was about the wealth gap, not education and poverty.

The discussion was about the wealth gap, I wanted to know how it relates to violent crime-I've not heard that argument before.

Because...The discussion was about the wealth gap, not your theories.

 

11

No, white males commit the most crime. Now watch the goal post move !!!

 

Look up "per capita".

I'll wait.

 

Lol, like I said. Watch the goal post move !!!

 

Just curious, do you really not understand per capita?

 

Please explain. What goalpost was moved?

 

Your self control is commendable.

 

I never mentioned, per capita. You moved the goal post to that. When discussing over all crime you don't use per capita. It's just a deflection strategy for those that don't want to accept any of the responsibility.

 

Yes I understand. It means roughly 50% of crime is committed by someone other than blacks but no one really cares about them.

 

Because when you consider the size of the population that commits the other 50% of the crime, it becomes clear that there isn't much of a problem.

But when you consider the very small demographic that's committing the other half of the crime, it becomes clear that there's a very serious culture of criminality at play.

It goes beyond that too. The 50% of "white crime" is more spread out across the nation, and not concentrated in small urban pockets where the effects of the violence and criminality are devastating to local communities.

There's also the random, predatory and "innocent bystander" aspects of black crime and violence. White(with Hispanics lumped in) crime tends to be the sort that involves relatives and associates of the criminal offender, and that's unlike black crime and violence that tends to prey on strangers and random innocent bystanders, and that's the sort of crime and violence that is much more injurious to society at large.

But I'm sure you'll just blurt out "goalposts!" and pretend like that negates all the harsh realities I've just presented.

 

So you are telling me about half of the crime in the US is committed by black people, who are %13 of the population? It seems that should be significant somehow...

 

That's not entirely true.

According to BJS, white poverty and black poverty crime are similar.

Highlights:

• 
  For the period 2008-12-
• 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 (16.9 per 1,000).
• Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8-2.5 per 1,000).
• The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels.
• Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).
• Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000).
• Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000).
  https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm/conte...i/content/data/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5137
  

 

See how you make excuses for the white crime?

 

Demographics. It's right next to that big circle.

 

What percent of the Black population has ever committed murder ? Since you like throwing out percentages ?

 

Isn't it still believe we all evolved from the same beginnings? Or created from the same Human. Depending on one's belief in the beginning.
If so, doesn't that mean there's only1 race, the human race?

 

I am addressed the income gap not that the poor were even poorer relative to the rich being richer, everything is relative in life. Not sure why you are reframing the question that was asked by Lil' Mike that I posted a response to other than it's some attempt to create some mythical thing that you dispelled something or anything? On that note I generally avoid disingenuous posters' posts as they are likely trolling for any reaction that feeds that deep need. Feel free to consider this post rhetorical if that ability is available.

 

Highlights:

• 
  For the period 2008-12-
• 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 (16.9 per 1,000).
• Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8-2.5 per 1,000).
• The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels.
• Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).
• Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000).
• Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000).

Press Release
https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm/conte...i/content/data/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5137
...

Over the years you've never showed a correlation between melanin and crime. Never.

 

Masculinity has never been a bad thing, Toxic masculinity, as manifested in bullying, violence and self-destructiveness is not the same.

 

No, it's not the guns. And it's not the melanin one has in their skin either.

 

Anything can be toxic

 

Oh my god. In a specific 4 year window they’re similar. Thumbs up. You proved it all wrong. /golfclap

You understand that’s not the rule right?

 

Correct, and correct.

It's the African American culture of criminality.

 

What leads you to believe that I'm being in any way disingenuous?

Give examples. Be specific.