America Does not have a violence or gun problem. America has a black problem

Okay, lets take a look, here are the 15 states with the highest violent crime rate, in bold are the ones that also have one of the 15 highest black populations, and in red are the ones that rank in the top 15 highest poverty rates

1 Alaska (ranks 35th in its per capita black population, yet has the highest violent crime rate per capita)
2 New Mexico (ranks 40th in its per capita black population, yet has the 2nd highest violent crime rate)
3 Nevada (has second highest poverty rate when adjusted for cost of living)
4 Tennessee
5 Louisiana
6 Arkansas
7 Alabama
8 Missouri
9 Delaware
10 South Carolina
11 Maryland
12 Arizona (ranks 36 in its per capita black population yet has the 12th highest violent crime rate)
13 Michigan
14 Oklahoma
15 California (has highest poverty rate when adjusted for cost of living)

Once again, there are many variables, especially between urban and rural areas, however the strongest known correlation has been poverty.

Clearly inaccurate

Incarcerations and conviction time is also higher when committing the same crime, just like arrests, they do not represent overall crime. Also, per capita the sexual assault rate is higher among Native Americans.

 

A complete annihilation of your poverty excuse:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/random...-rates-are-poorly-explained-by-economics/amp/

But if you’d rather not try to explain all that... just explain this

I’ll ask you again. How does poverty explain the fact that at EVERY income level blacks commit a grossly disproportionate rate of violent crime within that income level compared to their peers?

 

1. The blog you linked, and the source that the blogger uses tell two very different narratives. Basically, the blogger didn't conduct their own research, but rather used other source's research to tell a very different story from the ones who actually conducted the research

2. The emphasis on the sources linked in the blog do not focus on individuals who committed the crime, but rather individuals who are the victims of the crime.These are two drastically different scenarios, your likelihood of committing a crime is something that is driven by your own incentive, the most common incentive for committing a crime being poverty. Your chances of being the victim of a crime however is NOT driven by your own incentive, but has more so to do with real estate. Example, if you're above the poverty line, but still living in a poverty driven area, you are no less likely to be the victim of a crime

3. The analysis that the blogger links is research based in the Chicago area and not the national level, something that the blogger fails to mention. Which is not very smart considering the key focus of the analysis is on real estate disparity.

That is not even close to being true. It is true the median income blacks have a higher chance of being the victim of a violent crime than median income whites, however that is in large part due to the fact that median income blacks still have a higher tendency to live in poorer neighborhoods than median income whites. This does not equate to median income blacks being more likely to commit a crime, the idea that wealthy black people are still more likely to commit a crime is a complete fabrication

Here's a tip for you to use, you probably shouldn't use a blog as the main source of your argument.

 

economics mean nothing to the right wing; they are always right simply Because they are on the right wing.

 

black codes would have never occurred to Anyone with equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation, simply for being unemployed.

 

I got a better tip. Don’t base your argument upon political correctness.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...rom_the_National_Longitudinal_Survey_of_Youth

They try to explain it away as racism. But as I said ... at EVERY income level blacks are more likely to commit crime and be convicted of doing so than their peers.

But how can that be? If poverty is the problem, how does that explain the absurd level of violent crime within each income level that blacks commit? Unless you’re going to argue like these MENSA genius’ that the entire system; the officers, judge, lawyers and their own peers who convicted them are all racist against blacks. They falsified evidence. They perjured themselves. All to put the wrong men in jail just because they didn’t like black people.

 

Could you eliminate all white people from the equation and have an extremely low crime rate?

 

[
suicides/

Jews who came here were treated badly....But they had one advantage over African-Americans and that was their skin color and that’s a big difference....they could assimilate

 

In USA by 1980s, there was not much Anti-Semitism.

In Russia there was significant Anti-Semitism during the late Soviet Era and in 1990s.

 

That link says pretty much exactly what I already told you

1. higher levels of wealth are associated with lower rates of incarceration
2. "racial wealth gaps existed among those who would be incarcerated in the future and also among the previously incarcerated"
3. Blacks receive harsher sentences than white (even when committing the same crime)
4. The source you yourself used makes points that I haven't even brought up

The source also concludes "In the long term as well as short term, having more wealth at the baseline was associated with lower incarceration rates in the future, for all races"


Here's another tip for you to use, don't try to use sources that go AGAINST your argument to make your argument. It's not rational

That is not even close to being true, and not even your own sources agree with you.

 

Oh no sir. The POINT of me using that study is to point out, as the study says, “Data indicate that although higher levels of wealth were associated with lower rates of incarceration, the likelihood of future incarceration still was higher for blacks at every level of wealth compared to the white likelihood, as well as the Hispanic likelihood, which fell below the white likelihood for some levels of wealth.”

Now I don’t give a fat babies behind how these folks attempt to excuse it or explain it away as being racism (which is just patently absurd).

Nobody is arguing poverty does not affect crime rate. Of course poor people are going to be more likely than rich to commit crime because they have incentive to do so.

The POINT is that REGARDLESS OF INCOME LEVEL the black population within that income level commits and is convicted of violent crime at a grossly disproportionate level when compared with their representation in the total population within that income level. Whether we are talking about poor people, middle class or rich. Blacks ALWAYS commit a disproportionately high rate of violent crime.

How does poverty explain that?

 

Do you actually have data that shows that pigmentation is a factor in crime? That one's type of melanin is the factor in crime?
It should be easy to prove.
Going from white skin to darker white skin, to brown skin, to very brown skin. There should be a direct correlation. As the skin darkens, the more crimes that are committed by those.

Which should also mean that as white people go out in the sun and get tanned, they are now becoming more criminal.

 

So what's your source exactly? You do nothing but post sources that go against your argument, and then throw in your own baseless claim about blacks committing disproportionate violent crimes. First you try to claim that the US crime map shows a greater correlation to race than wealth, then when that was proven wrong you simply reverted to repeating the same claim, all in while being unable to provide a source that backs that claim. It's incredibly doltish

 

The source that you just read.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...rom_the_National_Longitudinal_Survey_of_Youth

 

Oh you mean the source that agrees with my argument and not yours, that source?

Good job

 

No it certainly does not. The source states... and I quote: “Data indicate that although higher levels of wealth were associated with lower rates of incarceration, the likelihood of future incarceration still was higher for blacks at every level of wealth compared to the white likelihood, as well as the Hispanic likelihood, which fell below the white likelihood for some levels of wealth.“

Now you and the people from the study try to explain it away by racism. Which is patently absurd. But the fact remains. At EVERY level of income blacks commit a disproportionate level of violent crime. Poverty is not a satisfactory explanation.

 

The source also states

Aside from that, if what you were claiming were true, you would have no problem finding a source to prove it. I mean, you were already proven wrong when you tried to claim the US crime map had a greater correlation to race than wealth, so now your drawing your own conclusions from studies that do not agree with your argument. Good luck with that

 

Bahahah are you serious? The piece you quoted makes one salient point. That blacks and Hispanics receive more severe penalties for the same crime. What they DONT address is the fact that is readily explained (and has been done) that the disparity is a result of three things 1) blacks are more likely to commit a crime with a firearm. 2) blacks are more likely to commit a crime while having a prior record. 3) blacks are far less likely to hire an attorney and much more likely to use a public defender. All of which explain the disparity in conviction rates.

The rest of what you quoted is babbling nonsense about having the same level of wealth but “possibly” and “maybe” having worse access to education and other sources of wealth. But nothing evidential to show that’s actually the case.

Again. I don’t care about their excuses. I care about the DATA they discovered. That being that at EVERY level of income blacks commit a disproportionate level of violent crime.

Neither you nor anyone else has been able to provide a satisfactory explanation for why that occurs. Especially given the fact that their peers are NOT disproportionately represented.

 

Now show us a chart that does not include suicides!

 

Once again, these conclusions that you are drawing are the creation of your own imagination. You have no source of any kind to back up your claims, and the very sources which you yourself provided go against your argument

Deal with it

 

Do you understand the difference between empirical data and theory determine by personal belief?

Because if you do you’re not parsing that study in an honest manner. Their conclusions of racism and people not having access to the same wealth at the same levels of income is nothing more than their personal opinions to explain the discrepancy in the empirical data that they found. They provide NOTHING to back up their theories other than differences in incarceration rates which are easily explained.

Again. If poverty is your excuse and not race then why does the black race, at EVERY income level commit a disproportionate amount of the violent crime?

Evading isn’t going to win the argument.

 

There's a rational inconsistency in you calling the analysis a theory while you yourself assert your own theory into the matter. All the while you have been unable to provide any information yourself to prove your argument. You simply insist that your argument is right, and provide nothing to back it up but your own word. Sorry, but you haven't earned that kind of credibility, you were already proven wrong about the crime map, and you can't even acknowledge it.

 

why can we afford our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror but not equal protection of the law for the Poor.

 

So you'd agree then, as one gets darker skin the more likely they are to commit violent crimes.

Do you actually have data that shows that pigmentation is a factor in crime? That one's type of melanin is the factor in crime?
It should be easy to prove.
Going from white skin to darker white skin, to brown skin, to very brown skin. There should be a direct correlation. As the skin darkens, the more crimes that are committed by those.

Which should also mean that as white people go out in the sun and get tanned, they are now becoming more violent.

 

Simply because the cash and other valuable assets possessed by those in the drug trade can be seized under civil asset forfeiture laws, and sold by government. It is essentially war profiteering given legitimate form.