Anybody following the unrest in Ferguson Missouri?

[The Rogue Tomato]

you can choose your clothes and you can even change them... you can even change your mind when it comes to your personal biases and false assumptions

Except the statistics aren't false assumptions.  They're facts. 

I do have sympathy for people who are lumped into a statistical group through no choice or fault of their own.  But that doesn't change the facts. 

And I'm not talking about being more likely to shoot one person than another.  I'm talking about the statement the author made.  “In our minds, young black men are associated with danger.”  It's not just a figment of our prejudiced imagination.  It's not just in our minds.  It's a fact.  Young black men are more associated with danger.

then... once again... by your own logic.... it;s not just in the minds of most black people in america that whites are associated with racism ...and are more likely to over react and shoot them or their children just for being black..... it;s a fact...according to your own logic...... ..

No, that's not logic, that's a non-sequitur.  If the statistics don't lie about young black men, that doesn't mean white people are racist just because black people think so. 

You want to know if black people are justified in thinking so?  Do a study.  If the study shows most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  If the study shows most white people aren't racist, then that's the fact. 

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I have been very clear. I still am not what you describe above.

Skin color has NEVER meant anything preferential to me. Why does it to you?

I wish I could believe you.

You're having a hard time believing him because you're prejudiced. 

 

[ddgently]

What I am saying is we have deep seated, automatic preferences for white faces and people.

Who do you mean by "we"?

Everyone. Or nearly everyone. Even people of color. Read the research, it's stunning.

 

[ddgently]

Do a study.  If the study shows most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  If the study shows most white people aren't racist, then that's the fact.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204/studies-unconscious-bias-racism-not-always-racists

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/CRDC%20School%20Discipline%20Snapshot.pdf

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/04/the-blackwhite-marijuana-arrest-gap-in-nine-charts/

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1601615

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt=1,23&q=evidence+for+implicit+racial+bias&hl=en&as_vis=1

I could go on.

Commence wriggling, back-peddling, and questioning of the author's motives/political affiliations/skin color.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Do a study.  If the study shows most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  If the study shows most white people aren't racist, then that's the fact.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204/studies-unconscious-bias-racism-not-always-racists

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/CRDC%20School%20Discipline%20Snapshot.pdf

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/04/the-blackwhite-marijuana-arrest-gap-in-nine-charts/

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1601615

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt=1,23&q=evidence+for+implicit+racial+bias&hl=en&as_vis=1

I could go on.

Commence wriggling, back-peddling, and questioning of the author's motives/political affiliations/skin color.

Why wiggle?  I haven't read your links, and I'm not likely to.  But if the fact is that most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  I'm not afraid of the truth.  Are you? 

Do only the facts about white people count?  Or does the fact that young black men are more likely to be dangerous not count because they're black?  And what do you call it when you apply truth to one race but not another? 

 

[ddgently]

Why wiggle?  I haven't read your links, and I'm not likely to.  But if the fact is that most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  I'm not afraid of the truth.  Are you?

No, it's what I've been arguing with Admin, Ransom, and I thought you. It's not just white people though, it's everybody. The majority of people (and in saying this, I will acknowledge that maybe Admin is that rare person who harbors NO implicit bias. Based on his comments in this thread, I highly doubt it) harbor an implicit preference in favor of whites and against non-whites. That's what the research shows.

Do only the facts about white people count?  Or does the fact that young black men are more likely to be dangerous not count because they're black?  And what do you call it when you apply truth to one race but not another?

That's the problem. They're not "more likely to be dangerous." They're more likely to be considered dangerous.

Are you speaking from experience? Are black people routinely beating you up? Maybe it's you, and not them.

 

[ddgently]

So Tomato, even assuming your premise about young black males being more dangerous is true, does that justify the articles I linked earlier (The man shot in a Wal-Mart outside Dayton, Ohio; the Harvard student interning on wall street forced to lay in the street)?

How much unwarranted suspicion directed toward men of color is justified in the pursuit of "safety"?

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Do a study.  If the study shows most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  If the study shows most white people aren't racist, then that's the fact.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204/studies-unconscious-bias-racism-not-always-racists

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/CRDC%20School%20Discipline%20Snapshot.pdf

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/04/the-blackwhite-marijuana-arrest-gap-in-nine-charts/

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1601615

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt=1,23&q=evidence+for+implicit+racial+bias&hl=en&as_vis=1

I could go on.

Commence wriggling, back-peddling, and questioning of the author's motives/political affiliations/skin color.

It's not our fault you are indoctrinated to the liberal dogma.
Figures don't lie but liars do figure....

 

[ddgently]

Do a study.  If the study shows most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  If the study shows most white people aren't racist, then that's the fact.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204/studies-unconscious-bias-racism-not-always-racists

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/CRDC%20School%20Discipline%20Snapshot.pdf

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/04/the-blackwhite-marijuana-arrest-gap-in-nine-charts/

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1601615

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt=1,23&q=evidence+for+implicit+racial+bias&hl=en&as_vis=1

I could go on.

Commence wriggling, back-peddling, and questioning of the author's motives/political affiliations/skin color.

It's not our fault you are indoctrinated to the liberal dogma.
Figures don't lie but liars do figure....

I don't know where you showed up from, but I see you're of the "If I ain't agree with it, label it Librahl, and disregard it."

Good show.

 

[ddgently]

Oh a more charitable note, can you produce scholarly evidence (from a "Conservative" source, whatever that means) that demonstrates a broad lack of racial bias?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

That's the problem. They're not "more likely to be dangerous."

Really?  In what reality?  In your mind? 

Obviously, you didn't watch the Bill Whittle video.  That's okay, I'll duplicate some of the statistics he quoted.  Transcript here:  http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-ferguson-and-real-race-war

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, in 2010, 62,593 blacks were the victims of white violence. During that same year, 320,082 whites were the victims of black violence. That’s five times as many violent attacks, but that number is misleading, since the black and white populations are not the same size. When 38 million black Americans commit five times as many violent crimes on 197 million whites as they receive, what you discover is that black perpetrators violently assault White victims TWENTY-FIVE times more frequently. When it comes to a specific kind of violent crime -- aggravated assault -- the number of black on white crimes is TWO HUNDRED TIMES HIGHER than white on black crimes.

Rapes...

the National Crime Victimization Survey reported approximately 13,000 black-on-white rapes and 39,000 black-on-white robberies – both violent crimes. The statistics show that the number of white on black rapes and violent robberies were so small that they had to be rounded to the nearest whole number, and that whole number was ZERO.

Also...

“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

While most violent crime is indeed intrarracial, 26.7 percent of homicides where the victim is a stranger are interracial. And in 2008, the offending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was seven times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 offenders per 100,000), according to the latest figures from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

Accounting for population differences, whites are simply far more likely to be victims of interracial crime than blacks.

Are any statistics skewed because black people are more likely to be incarcerated than white people? 

In the mid-1990s, the Center for Equal Opportunity analyzed 55,512 felony cases filed in state courts for the 75 largest counties, representing 37 percent of the U.S. population. The weighted data, taken from the BJS, revealed that juries actually acquit blacks at a higher rate than whites for 12 of the 14 types of crime studied — including murder, rape, robbery and assault. The only category that had a higher conviction rate for African-Americans was felony traffic offenses.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/223696071.html

Plus, I shouldn't need to repeat this well-known fact, but I will.  91% of murders where the victim is black were committed by a black person. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Do a study.  If the study shows most white people are racist, then that's the fact.  If the study shows most white people aren't racist, then that's the fact.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204/studies-unconscious-bias-racism-not-always-racists

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/CRDC%20School%20Discipline%20Snapshot.pdf

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/04/the-blackwhite-marijuana-arrest-gap-in-nine-charts/

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1601615

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_sdt=1,23&q=evidence+for+implicit+racial+bias&hl=en&as_vis=1

I could go on.

Commence wriggling, back-peddling, and questioning of the author's motives/political affiliations/skin color.

It's not our fault you are indoctrinated to the liberal dogma.
Figures don't lie but liars do figure....

I don't know where you showed up from, but I see you're of the "If I ain't agree with it, label it Librahl, and disregard it."

Good show.

We're (all white Americans) sexist and homophobic, in addition to being racist...that's how a black man became President and another became Attorney general of the US. I read it in the mainline, liberal press...so it has to be true!

 

[qwerty]

That's the problem. They're not "more likely to be dangerous."

Really?  In what reality?  In your mind? 

Obviously, you didn't watch the Bill Whittle video.  That's okay, I'll duplicate some of the statistics he quoted.  Transcript here:  http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-ferguson-and-real-race-war

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, in 2010, 62,593 blacks were the victims of white violence. During that same year, 320,082 whites were the victims of black violence. That’s five times as many violent attacks, but that number is misleading, since the black and white populations are not the same size. When 38 million black Americans commit five times as many violent crimes on 197 million whites as they receive, what you discover is that black perpetrators violently assault White victims TWENTY-FIVE times more frequently. When it comes to a specific kind of violent crime -- aggravated assault -- the number of black on white crimes is TWO HUNDRED TIMES HIGHER than white on black crimes.

Rapes...

the National Crime Victimization Survey reported approximately 13,000 black-on-white rapes and 39,000 black-on-white robberies – both violent crimes. The statistics show that the number of white on black rapes and violent robberies were so small that they had to be rounded to the nearest whole number, and that whole number was ZERO.

Also...

“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

While most violent crime is indeed intrarracial, 26.7 percent of homicides where the victim is a stranger are interracial. And in 2008, the offending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was seven times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 offenders per 100,000), according to the latest figures from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

Accounting for population differences, whites are simply far more likely to be victims of interracial crime than blacks.

Are any statistics skewed because black people are more likely to be incarcerated than white people? 

In the mid-1990s, the Center for Equal Opportunity analyzed 55,512 felony cases filed in state courts for the 75 largest counties, representing 37 percent of the U.S. population. The weighted data, taken from the BJS, revealed that juries actually acquit blacks at a higher rate than whites for 12 of the 14 types of crime studied — including murder, rape, robbery and assault. The only category that had a higher conviction rate for African-Americans was felony traffic offenses.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/223696071.html

Plus, I shouldn't need to repeat this well-known fact, but I will.  91% of murders where the victim is black were committed by a black person.

Please, don't report facts. They have no effect against those whose head is buried.

 

[ddgently]

That's the problem. They're not "more likely to be dangerous."

Really?  In what reality?  In your mind? 

Obviously, you didn't watch the Bill Whittle video.  That's okay, I'll duplicate some of the statistics he quoted.  Transcript here:  http://www.truthrevolt.org/videos/bill-whittle-ferguson-and-real-race-war

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, in 2010, 62,593 blacks were the victims of white violence. During that same year, 320,082 whites were the victims of black violence. That’s five times as many violent attacks, but that number is misleading, since the black and white populations are not the same size. When 38 million black Americans commit five times as many violent crimes on 197 million whites as they receive, what you discover is that black perpetrators violently assault White victims TWENTY-FIVE times more frequently. When it comes to a specific kind of violent crime -- aggravated assault -- the number of black on white crimes is TWO HUNDRED TIMES HIGHER than white on black crimes.

Rapes...

the National Crime Victimization Survey reported approximately 13,000 black-on-white rapes and 39,000 black-on-white robberies – both violent crimes. The statistics show that the number of white on black rapes and violent robberies were so small that they had to be rounded to the nearest whole number, and that whole number was ZERO.

Also...

“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

While most violent crime is indeed intrarracial, 26.7 percent of homicides where the victim is a stranger are interracial. And in 2008, the offending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was seven times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 offenders per 100,000), according to the latest figures from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

Accounting for population differences, whites are simply far more likely to be victims of interracial crime than blacks.

Are any statistics skewed because black people are more likely to be incarcerated than white people? 

In the mid-1990s, the Center for Equal Opportunity analyzed 55,512 felony cases filed in state courts for the 75 largest counties, representing 37 percent of the U.S. population. The weighted data, taken from the BJS, revealed that juries actually acquit blacks at a higher rate than whites for 12 of the 14 types of crime studied — including murder, rape, robbery and assault. The only category that had a higher conviction rate for African-Americans was felony traffic offenses.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/223696071.html

Plus, I shouldn't need to repeat this well-known fact, but I will.  91% of murders where the victim is black were committed by a black person.

What all this missed, assuming it is all 100% true, is that the rates of intraracial (white-on-white, black-on-black) crime are much higher than black-on-white crime.

So you really should be suspicious of white people, if you want something to be afraid of.

 

[ddgently]

And I return to my question (that you keep ignoring): What is the cost?

Assuming fearing black males will make us safer (it won't) then what should we do about it? Is it worth killing John Crawford III because he's carrying a toy gun in a Wal-Mart? Is it worth making Christopher Smith's son, a Harvard Student and Wall Street intern, lay face down on a filthy Manhattan sidewalk in his best suit?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

What all this missed, assuming it is all 100% true, is that the rates of intraracial (white-on-white, black-on-black) crime are much higher than black-on-white crime.

So you really should be suspicious of white people, if you want something to be afraid of.

You're not very good with numbers, are you?

The latest figures are 84% of white homicide victims murdered by whites, and 93% of black victims murdered by black.  (The figure for black-on-black murder varies from year to year, usually between 91-94%.) 

But those are percentages of murders, which don't tell you anything about how dangerous whites are vs. blacks.  If one white person murdered a white person, then you'd have 100% white-on-white murder.  So by your logic, we should be terrified of white people. 

But that 100% (total of 1 murder) would also mean that for the most part, whites aren't dangerous people. 

So percentage of intraracial murder doesn't tell you much. 

Here's a table from the BJS that does tell you. 

So, 12.9% of the population is responsible for 34.4 per 100,000.  And 82.9% of the population is responsible for 4.5 per 100,000. 

In other words, black people are significantly more likely to be dangerous.  Yes, they're most likely to pose a danger to other black people, but they're still significantly more likely to be dangerous. 

 

[ddgently]

What all this missed, assuming it is all 100% true, is that the rates of intraracial (white-on-white, black-on-black) crime are much higher than black-on-white crime.

So you really should be suspicious of white people, if you want something to be afraid of.

You're not very good with numbers, are you?

The latest figures are 84% of white homicide victims murdered by whites, and 93% of black victims murdered by black.  (The figure for black-on-black murder varies from year to year, usually between 91-94%.) 

But those are percentages of murders, which don't tell you anything about how dangerous whites are vs. blacks.  If one white person murdered a white person, then you'd have 100% white-on-white murder.  So by your logic, we should be terrified of white people. 

But that 100% (total of 1 murder) would also mean that for the most part, whites aren't dangerous people. 

So percentage of intraracial murder doesn't tell you much. 

Here's a table from the BJS that does tell you. 

So, 12.9% of the population is responsible for 34.4 per 100,000.  And 82.9% of the population is responsible for 4.5 per 100,000. 

In other words, black people are significantly more likely to be dangerous.  Yes, they're most likely to pose a danger to other black people, but they're still significantly more likely to be dangerous.

First, thank you for linking to a primary source.

Second, you're white, right? See, your little math trick at the end only works if we're talking totals. We're not. We've been talking about our personal safety as white people.

What you're trying to show with your numbers is that white people are far less likely to be murdered. But if they are murdered, 84% of the time, the murderer is also white.

Let's just agree to disagree, while agreeing that:

You're a racist a**hole
And I'm a liberal sissy

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

First, thank you for linking to a primary source.

Second, you're white, right? See, your little math trick at the end only works if we're talking totals. We're not. We've been talking about our personal safety as white people.

What you're trying to show with your numbers is that white people are far less likely to be murdered. But if they are murdered, 84% of the time, the murderer is also white.

Let's just agree to disagree, while agreeing that:

You're a racist a**hole
And I'm a liberal sissy

You are ignoring facts when it is convenient for your argument.  The above simply talks about murder.  ONLY murder, as if murder is the only issue.  (And even if it WAS the only issue, black people should be terrified of black people, not white people, since the homicide rate is much higher among blacks, and the percentage rate of black-on-black murder is higher, TOO.)

But you forgot this earlier statistic:

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, in 2010, 62,593 blacks were the victims of white violence. During that same year, 320,082 whites were the victims of black violence. That’s five times as many violent attacks, but that number is misleading, since the black and white populations are not the same size. When 38 million black Americans commit five times as many violent crimes on 197 million whites as they receive, what you discover is that black perpetrators violently assault White victims TWENTY-FIVE times more frequently. When it comes to a specific kind of violent crime -- aggravated assault -- the number of black on white crimes is TWO HUNDRED TIMES HIGHER than white on black crimes.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Let's just agree to disagree

By they way, we're not disagreeing, as if this is only a matter of opinion.  It's facts vs. opinion.  On my side, there are facts and statistics.  On your side, there are opinions.  Since your opinion denies the facts, your opinion plus $5 will get you a good cup of coffee. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Let's just agree to disagree

By they way, we're not disagreeing, as if this is only a matter of opinion.  It's facts vs. opinion.  On my side, there are facts and statistics.  On your side, there are opinions.  Since your opinion denies the facts, your opinion plus $5 will get you a good cup of coffee.

I hope dd has a first aid kit, because that had to leave a deep mark....