• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why did race relations deteriorate so much in the last decade? And how do we fix it?

TheMikado

Banned
Again, I don't want to argue in his stead because he is your foil on this strand and not I but things like larceny, theft, burglary, etc., aren't violent crimes, those are property crimes.

Unstandable but I gave the breakdown and bolded the violent crime and even have a total violent and property crime bolded at the end. It’s to show the different and that there is no total measure of crimes with explains the disparity in incarceration rates. It was to prevent a counter argument that the number difference could have come from the non violent crimes of theft which were not posted. I probably should not have posted so many numbers but it was for transparency sake.

Ultimately, violent crimes by white people accounted for nearly doubly that of black people, however incarceration rates differ by about 20%. White and black people are the only sampled races with a large disparity between total crimes and incarceration rates and white people are the only race where the incarceration rate is lower then their percent of crimes committed.
 
Last edited:

Dunki

Member
Thank you for the counter argument because it makes our actual arguments sharper. Continuing with the FBI link which I listed earlier.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43

I will list in order the percentage of crime in order from worse offenses to least. I am only listing violent crimes as proposed:

Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter White: 45.3 Black 52.3
Rape White: 66.2 Black 31.2
Robbery
White : 41.9 Black 56.4
Aggravated assault White: 62.9 Black 33.9
Burglary
White 67.5 Black: 30.4
Larceny-theft White 68.3 Black: 28.7
Motor vehicle theft White 66.7 Black: 30.5
Arson White 74.1 Black: 23.0
Total Violent crime White 58.4 Black: 38.7
Total Property crime White 68.2 Black: 29.0
Other assaults White 65.1 Black: 32.2


By every measure with the exception of murder/manslaughter white the number of violent crimes committed by white people fair outstrips the number of violent crimes by black people. Crimes by white people are nearly twice as many as those by black people and shows the incarceration rate by any of these measures is not proportional.
So if I read these correctly these are the percentages of all crimes right? I wonder how the percentage rate would be based on the population. Example: 12% of the poulation identifies as Afro American right? So if these 12% are responsible for lets say 52.3 percentage of all murders than this is a pretty significant number to be honest.

If I did misunderstood these stats and the percentages are based on the actual population and not actual crimes then please forget it.
 
Last edited:
Why are you guys reinventing the wheel on race bias in policing (arrests, searches, citations, etc) when everyone has already done it for you? There's so much data, what more do you want? Are articles, books, conferences and more, is that not enough?

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bias

This is like a drop in the ocean. Maybe people should earn about how their perceptions actually line up. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016...nequality-blacks-and-whites-are-worlds-apart/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TheMikado

Banned
So if I read these correctly these are the percentages of all crimes right? I wonder how the percentage rate would be based on the population. Example: 12% of the poulation identifies as Afro American right? So if these 12% are responsible for lets say 52.3 percentage of all murders than this is a pretty significant number to be honest.

If I did misunderstood these stats and the percentages are based on the actual population and not actual crimes then please forget it.

Yes you are reading this correctly. The black american crime rate is still very high for the black population. Black Americans comprise approximately 14% yet make up 28% of the FBI total crime statistics. However their incarceration population rate is 38% again statistically higher than the either their general population or their crime rate and is not proportional.

For contrast White US population is 62.7%, their crime rate is 68.9% and their incarceration rate is 58.9%. By contrast Asian Americans represent a 5.6% of the population, a crime rate of 1.2% and an incarceration representation of 1.5%.

There are a number of take-aways. The black crime rate is very high when compared against other races. This is true of the data, however the incarceration rate is not proportional to the crime. In the case of Asian Americans where they have a crime rate statistically very low when compared to their population, they still managed to have an incarceration population rate higher than their crime rate. The only ethnic group which has a lower incarceration rate than their crime rate are white Americans and the only group with a significant negative difference in both population, crime rate, and incarceration rates are black americans.

Now what often happens is that one side will use only part of this data to attempt to "discredit" the other data.
It is true black Americans have higher crime rates than other races.
It is also true the rates which black americans are incarcerated or policed is NOT proportional to their crime rate.

Essentially the system should be blind, but what we find are racial differences which cannot be explained by simply "black people commit more crimes" or "the system is racist". The fact is both can be true and need to be discussed simultaneously through open discussion.
 

Moneal

Member
Yes you are reading this correctly. The black american crime rate is still very high for the black population. Black Americans comprise approximately 14% yet make up 28% of the FBI total crime statistics. However their incarceration population rate is 38% again statistically higher than the either their general population or their crime rate and is not proportional.

For contrast White US population is 62.7%, their crime rate is 68.9% and their incarceration rate is 58.9%. By contrast Asian Americans represent a 5.6% of the population, a crime rate of 1.2% and an incarceration representation of 1.5%.

There are a number of take-aways. The black crime rate is very high when compared against other races. This is true of the data, however the incarceration rate is not proportional to the crime. In the case of Asian Americans where they have a crime rate statistically very low when compared to their population, they still managed to have an incarceration population rate higher than their crime rate. The only ethnic group which has a lower incarceration rate than their crime rate are white Americans and the only group with a significant negative difference in both population, crime rate, and incarceration rates are black americans.

Now what often happens is that one side will use only part of this data to attempt to "discredit" the other data.
It is true black Americans have higher crime rates than other races.
It is also true the rates which black americans are incarcerated or policed is NOT proportional to their crime rate.

Essentially the system should be blind, but what we find are racial differences which cannot be explained by simply "black people commit more crimes" or "the system is racist". The fact is both can be true and need to be discussed simultaneously through open discussion.

I would argue that income/class affects incarceration rates more than race. i know one study showed per-incarceration income average at 19k. that's well below the median average income. Blacks have a much higher poverty rate than whites, which could explain the disproportionate rate of incarceration. Having access to a competent lawyer is key in our justice system. Whether its pleading out or going through a trial. I mean 57% of men incarcerated had incomes before incarceration below 22.5k. that number is 72% for women. I haven't found a study with arrests and income to compare these numbers against. But this on its own to me shows that low income has a correlation to incarceration.
 

Nightstick10

Neo Member
Essentially the system should be blind, but what we find are racial differences which cannot be explained by simply "black people commit more crimes" or "the system is racist". The fact is both can be true and need to be discussed simultaneously through open discussion.

I rarely see the following proposed solution discussed, well, anywhere, so I thought I might bring it up here for discussion.

To what extent, if any, do you think raising the pay and perceived prestige level of public defenders to equal that of attorney generals/district attorney generals would have on the railroading of indigent defendants into shit plea bargains?

I can and do accept that police officers are prejudiced versus blacks, but I have a harder time believing prosecuting attorneys (as I know some) are as outright insidious. They may target essentially defenseless indigent defendants to pad their win/loss record, but do you think a more effective public defender could serve as an incentive for more district attorneys to exercise prosecutorial discretion?
 
Last edited:

Nightstick10

Neo Member
Ultimately, violent crimes by white people accounted for nearly doubly that of black people, however incarceration rates differ by about 20%. White and black people are the only sampled races with a large disparity between total crimes and incarceration rates and white people are the only race where the incarceration rate is lower then their percent of crimes committed.

Wait, there is a major flaw with that source; it is not including Hispanic population crime rates. If the Hispanic population crime rates are combined with the white population crime rates in these tables, it is not going to convince people like the guy to who you originally replied.
 

Sàmban

Banned
So the racial bias in Ferguson, can be attributed to more black people being pulled over, even when it happens nation-wide. How convenient when men can be pulled over more than women, and we can easily write it off with "men deserve it". When black people are pulled over more, it's obviously racism. There can be no other explanation. Seeing nothing wrong with making those kinds of statements is the whole problem

How in the world could more black people be pulled over vs white people? We completely ignore statistics like:



https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime

Waiting for the usual "this source sucks". Data proves time and time again that black people fare off worse in nearly every measurable category. Whether it is graduation rates, two-parent households, poverty, etc, all things that lead to crime, let alone the crime.

To you, it would make more sense if traffic stops were equal to each person's racial representation. Rudimentary lessons like in this case, cause and effect, go out the window every time we discuss race. There is no other explanation why there are more police stops for black people other than racism, right? So the police have backed off a bit because they were told they were being racist. What was the result? More crime.

If we agree on nothing else, I believe all wish for a better life for the people of Ferguson. If you don't believe its people can't be the largest driving force behind that, then there is something seriously wrong.

Before I respond to this, I want to point out that you have essentially ignored what I was calling you out on, and you have now moved to a separate (albeit related) issue.

I was actually criticizing your tendency to post garbage sources without taking the time to do some background research on the credibility of the things in your source. I did a complete breakdown of why your source was garbage and how they completely bastardized the data to come up to a ridiculous conclusion. You have not responded to this and you completely ignored all the criticism I levied against you. You will not learn anything if you keep doing that.

Now, on to your second issue. I actually DO agree with you that black people get pulled over for reasons beyond just racism (i.e maybe they commit more crime and/or are in higher crime neighborhoods). I also do also agree with you that black people are demonstrably worse off than whites in many statistics as you listed: crime rates, graduation rates, health, etc. There is plenty of data to support this, and anybody saying otherwise is living a lie.

My question to you is WHY do you think this is the case? Is it because black people are just a bunch of ignorant, aggressive animals or something?

Because in my opinion, it has to do with two things:
1. Poverty and reduced upwards mobility through generations of racism and wealth destruction (literally; google black wallstreet)
2. "Maladaptive" cultural developments that are a direct result of #1 (when your parents are poor because their parents were poor because their parents had their wealth destroyed or were refused the opportunity to acquire wealth, you are less likely to go to a good school and get a good education and are more likely to think "gansta shit" is cool which makes you more likely to have a bad interaction with police; the police sees this often and becomes more prejudiced/racist > it's all an incredibly complicated feedback loop)

Some white people think #2 is the most significant problem or even the only problem in some cases. These white people are ignorant about the effects of racism. Racism is much bigger and more complicated than some white cop stopping you at the light because you are black. Problem #1 is the best bang for your buck as fixing it will drastically reduce everything else. PUTTING YOUR HEAD INTO THE SAND ON THESE ISSUES WILL NOT FIX ANYTHING.

Why do you think there is an opiod epidemic in the US that disproportionately affects middle class or poor whites? Did the skin color of white people suddenly make them more likely to abuse prescription drugs? No. The lowerclass and middleclass is getting fucked in this country and the opiod epidemic is just a symptom. Now if we started disproportionately arresting white people for abusing opioids and labeling them junkies, that wouldn't solve the problem. That (i.e. ignoring the problem and going after symptoms) is what has been happening with black people and that is why they perform so much worse on all the metrics you listed.
 
Last edited:

Nightstick10

Neo Member
I would argue that income/class affects incarceration rates more than race. i know one study showed per-incarceration income average at 19k. that's well below the median average income. Blacks have a much higher poverty rate than whites, which could explain the disproportionate rate of incarceration. Having access to a competent lawyer is key in our justice system. Whether its pleading out or going through a trial. I mean 57% of men incarcerated had incomes before incarceration below 22.5k. that number is 72% for women. I haven't found a study with arrests and income to compare these numbers against. But this on its own to me shows that low income has a correlation to incarceration.

It's not even just income/class from my observation, it is like the entire system is rigged. Public defenders get a bad rep when they are all pretty competent in my experience. They just get paid shit and have huge caseloads and no time to really sit down with their caseloads at that. They get handed a stack of 50 cases every morning, most of whom they are meeting for the first time, and have to do the best they can with a shitty top sheet summary.

Quintupling the number of public defenders might have a dramatic effect.
 
Last edited:

bigedole

Member
Yes you are reading this correctly. The black american crime rate is still very high for the black population. Black Americans comprise approximately 14% yet make up 28% of the FBI total crime statistics. However their incarceration population rate is 38% again statistically higher than the either their general population or their crime rate and is not proportional.

For contrast White US population is 62.7%, their crime rate is 68.9% and their incarceration rate is 58.9%. By contrast Asian Americans represent a 5.6% of the population, a crime rate of 1.2% and an incarceration representation of 1.5%.

There are a number of take-aways. The black crime rate is very high when compared against other races. This is true of the data, however the incarceration rate is not proportional to the crime. In the case of Asian Americans where they have a crime rate statistically very low when compared to their population, they still managed to have an incarceration population rate higher than their crime rate. The only ethnic group which has a lower incarceration rate than their crime rate are white Americans and the only group with a significant negative difference in both population, crime rate, and incarceration rates are black americans.

Now what often happens is that one side will use only part of this data to attempt to "discredit" the other data.
It is true black Americans have higher crime rates than other races.
It is also true the rates which black americans are incarcerated or policed is NOT proportional to their crime rate.

Essentially the system should be blind, but what we find are racial differences which cannot be explained by simply "black people commit more crimes" or "the system is racist". The fact is both can be true and need to be discussed simultaneously through open discussion.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but looking at the numbers you're offering, the incarceration rate seems to track pretty closely to the violent crime rate, no? A lot of non-violent crime does not involve jail sentences...
 

TheMikado

Banned
I would argue that income/class affects incarceration rates more than race. i know one study showed per-incarceration income average at 19k. that's well below the median average income. Blacks have a much higher poverty rate than whites, which could explain the disproportionate rate of incarceration. Having access to a competent lawyer is key in our justice system. Whether its pleading out or going through a trial. I mean 57% of men incarcerated had incomes before incarceration below 22.5k. that number is 72% for women. I haven't found a study with arrests and income to compare these numbers against. But this on its own to me shows that low income has a correlation to incarceration.

This would be something to consider and I agree to an extent, however we also see Asian americans have incarceration rates which exceed their crime rate.
Who also have more average wealth. The only demographic who has a lower incarceration rate relative to their crime rate are white americans.

Income-by-race.jpg
 

TheMikado

Banned
I rarely see the following proposed solution discussed, well, anywhere, so I thought I might bring it up here for discussion.

To what extent, if any, do you think raising the pay and perceived prestige level of public defenders to equal that of attorney generals/district attorney generals would have on the railroading of indigent defendants into shit plea bargains?

I can and do accept that police officers are prejudiced versus blacks, but I have a harder time believing prosecuting attorneys (as I know some) are as outright insidious. They may target essentially defenseless indigent defendants to pad their win/loss record, but do you think a more effective public defender could serve as an incentive for more district attorneys to exercise prosecutorial discretion?

Having interned for the community legal services of Philadelphia the most I can say in discussion with this is that generally most public defenders, judges, etc. Know each other and have good working relationships. That said it really is more of networking aspect and much of the actual legal preceding appeared to by for show. I'm not sure how much can be done about this as the legal systems seem to have an inherently political aspect to it. I will say legal system tend to stay withing the legal framework but what leeway they are given seems to come down to the politics of the day. I really don't have an answer for this.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Wait, there is a major flaw with that source; it is not including Hispanic population crime rates. If the Hispanic population crime rates are combined with the white population crime rates in these tables, it is not going to convince people like the guy to who you originally replied.

I'm sure the methodology is not perfect but both sources for incarcerations and crimes are from government websites and appear to use the same measurements for race, so at least it appears what ever methodology they are using it is consistent enough for comparison reasons.
 

Nightstick10

Neo Member
Some white people think #2 is the most significant problem or even the only problem in some cases. These white people are ignorant about the effects of racism. Racism is much bigger and more complicated than some white cop stopping you at the light because you are black. Problem #1 is the best bang for your buck as fixing it will drastically reduce everything else. PUTTING YOUR HEAD INTO THE SAND ON THESE ISSUES WILL NOT FIX ANYTHING.

I want to make a textured comment on this, however. From my observation and experience, many people think #2 is the only problem because it is the only problem that may have directly impacted them. If a Chinese immigrant who barely speaks English got his pharmacy store burnt down and looted in the aftermath of Ferguson, for example, his immediate reaction and intellectual interest is NOT going to be dissecting the maladaptive cultural traits that may or may not have originated from slavery (I personally think these traits trace their lineage directly from Hoover's obsession with "Marxist negroes" and the aftermath of his obsession moreso than slavery.) All he is going to see is that blacks (or whoever it was) burned down his store and his life is fucked and he is going to be furious, and I don't think it's fair to blame him for how he views the situation.

If some white guy got robbed at gunpoint by a black guy, he could give two shits about the history of racism. His most immediate concerns would be to make sure the perpetrator got caught, that he got his stuff back, and that this never happens to him again.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Correct me if I'm wrong, but looking at the numbers you're offering, the incarceration rate seems to track pretty closely to the violent crime rate, no? A lot of non-violent crime does not involve jail sentences...

That is correct and it is my fault due to the mix and mash of dated studies. I used the real-time prisoner chart which is a mistake. This is a good summary to show the changing demographic:

"Jail inmate demographics The nation’s jail inmates continue to be predominantly white men. At yearend 2013, about 86% of inmates in local jails were male, which was a decline from 89% in 1999. Meanwhile, the female local jail population increased 48% between 1999 and 2013, from 68,100 to 100,940. At yearend 2013, white inmates made up an estimated 47% of the total jail population, which was an increase from 41% in 1999. Black inmates declined from 42% in 1999 to 34% in 2013, and the proportion of Hispanic inmates (16%) remained stable. The juvenile population in adult jails accounted for less than 1% (4,420) of the total inmate population at yearend 2013, which was down from a peak of 1.6% in 1999 (9,458)." https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cjpc9913_sum.pdf


Here is a blurb from study which tracks population trends from 1999 to 2013
Here is the 1999 rates. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/1999
And here is the 2013 incarceration rates. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p13.pdf

Further studies go on to break down populations:
Estimated percent of sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction, by offense and sex, race, and Hispanic origin, December 31, 2012
Total inmates for violent crime: 53.8% by race 49.3%-White, 58.3%-Black.

There are unfortunately no reports like this for 2017 in order to track the current incarceration rates, however mathematically it is impossible that the higher violent crime rate of 38% for black americans bridges the gap in the total crime rate from 24% to 38% of the prison population when only about 50% of inmates are imprisoned for violent crime.

I apologize for the confusion and not providing a full picture, but to recap:

The total crime rate for black Americans is 24%. The violent crime rate is 38% as well as the incarceration rate, but less than 60% of those incarcerated are for violent crimes. In addition black americans have both a lower crime violent crime, lower total crime rate, and substantially lower crime rate by nearly half of non violent crimes. Statistically and mathematically it is impossible to make up the difference proportionally and directly though the violent crime population.
 

Composer

Member
OP is out of his mind. We live in a era where cops are gunning down people of color left and right, a President that continually views minorities as evil, and Nazi's are marching. And its Obama's fault? What a joke. Take a look in the mirror; you're so damn delusional. Race relations deteriorated because the underlying system has been oppressing people of color and killing them on the streets. And, when people spoke up, it was more offensive than the dead body. Ridiculous. And Trump is one beer pong game way for being a racist frat bro.
 

Beard of the Forest

The No. 1 cause of forest fires is trees.
It's funny to think of the early late 90's to early 2000's as a relatively harmonious period of race relations...but it just seemed like things got worse in the last 10 years. I remember back then Hollywood was dominated by black actors like Will Smith, Denzel, and Chris Tucker. The media wasn't talking about race all the time and politicians weren't as obsessed over race issues. It almost felt at times that America has truly achieved a post-racial society. Then things just all fell apart. I think it began with Hurricane Katrina and the awful FEMA response to it and Kanye calling Bush a racist. Then Obama was elected and anyone who criticized him was called a racist. In fact Obama seemed to revel in this and used it to his advantage. Then there was the shooting of Trayvon Martin...followed by even more police shootings...with Obama putting blame on the police officers which I felt did not help at all and just made people angrier...then there were the Baltimore riots and finally the 5 cops getting gunned down in Texas...at that point I was thinking that a race war was inevitable....

And the election of Trump just made everything worse. His tough stance of immigration drew accusations of racism. And the Democrats continue to pander to the "social justice" wing of their party...now we are at a point where white supremacists rally in the streets while people on social media call for the eradication of white people.....how the heck did things get so bad? And how the hell do we fix it? Or is it a hopeless situation? My feeling is that a lot of blame rests with social media and now that it's such a big part of society...we may never be able to restore things to what it was before.

So.... you're blaming Obama for the racism in America and's nothing to do with cops shooting minorities indiscriminately? Kind of sounds like you are. Racism has always been prevalent in America and I imagine it will continue to be so for some time to come. The only thing that's changed is that now the victims have been given a voice through social media. Now all the travesties that would have normally been swept under a rug are on display for everyone to see. How can race relations be "repaired"? That's assuming they were ever acceptable in the first place, but not treating people differently than yourself like dirt would be a good start.

OP is out of his mind. We live in a era where cops are gunning down people of color left and right, a President that continually views minorities as evil, and Nazi's are marching. And its Obama's fault? What a joke. Take a look in the mirror; you're so damn delusional. Race relations deteriorated because the underlying system has been oppressing people of color and killing them on the streets. And, when people spoke up, it was more offensive than the dead body. Ridiculous. And Trump is one beer pong game way for being a racist frat bro.

As for you, you can make these points without being quite as venomous. When a person feels attacked in an argument and becomes defensive, you lose any chance you had of actually reaching them with your opinion and possibly changing their's. "President that continually views minorities as evil", unless you're the President himself it's kind of hard to know how he views people. Perhaps you could cite some examples of him showcasing his views on minorities to help reinforce this opinion. "Trump is one beer pong game way for being a racist frat bro", this sentiment is in a similar vein. Perhaps you could find us some info on Trump's love for playing beer pong at frat parties. I'm sure someone must have seen his frat boy card with all but one hole punched in it, etc.
 

Dunki

Member
Yes you are reading this correctly. The black american crime rate is still very high for the black population. Black Americans comprise approximately 14% yet make up 28% of the FBI total crime statistics. However their incarceration population rate is 38% again statistically higher than the either their general population or their crime rate and is not proportional.

For contrast White US population is 62.7%, their crime rate is 68.9% and their incarceration rate is 58.9%. By contrast Asian Americans represent a 5.6% of the population, a crime rate of 1.2% and an incarceration representation of 1.5%.

There are a number of take-aways. The black crime rate is very high when compared against other races. This is true of the data, however the incarceration rate is not proportional to the crime. In the case of Asian Americans where they have a crime rate statistically very low when compared to their population, they still managed to have an incarceration population rate higher than their crime rate. The only ethnic group which has a lower incarceration rate than their crime rate are white Americans and the only group with a significant negative difference in both population, crime rate, and incarceration rates are black americans.

Now what often happens is that one side will use only part of this data to attempt to "discredit" the other data.
It is true black Americans have higher crime rates than other races.
It is also true the rates which black americans are incarcerated or policed is NOT proportional to their crime rate.

Essentially the system should be blind, but what we find are racial differences which cannot be explained by simply "black people commit more crimes" or "the system is racist". The fact is both can be true and need to be discussed simultaneously through open discussion.
Do not get me wrong here but if I were a police officer and I knew that black people commit in general more crimes given their percentages I would be way more careful and probably also biased which of course is bad as a cop but also kind of understandable in a human view. The same with black people racting to all the incarceration rates would act biased and more hostile to the police.

I highly think even though there are racist cops out there that this is not the majority and media of course tries to escalate it to get more views, clicks reaction. I firmly beleive that we should give black peoplel who often live in poor neighborhoods a future. Invest in education, try to establish companies in these regions etc but fot that also to happen the police need to cut down the crime rate in these areas. It is a very difficult topic in my opinion and much more compliated than cops killing black people because their are racist like some make it out to be
 

pramod

Banned
BTW I wasn't really blaming Obama, but just saying he didn't really help make race relations any better. Sure, going on TV and interjecting things like "my son could have been Trayvon" before the case was even ruled on in court (where his shooter was acquitted btw) makes his base happy, but it doesn't really resolve anything or make things any calmer. It only got both sides more stirred up.

I mean I didn't even think the Trayvon shooting was a race issue at first (wasn't the guy who shot him Hispanic?), it was only after Obama made that comment that it became a race thing. I mean even CNN criticized Obama about this.
https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/15/opinion/thernstrom-trayvon-martin-obama/index.html
 
Last edited:

TheMikado

Banned
Do not get me wrong here but if I were a police officer and I knew that black people commit in general more crimes given their percentages I would be way more careful and probably also biased which of course is bad as a cop but also kind of understandable in a human view. The same with black people racting to all the incarceration rates would act biased and more hostile to the police.

I highly think even though there are racist cops out there that this is not the majority and media of course tries to escalate it to get more views, clicks reaction. I firmly beleive that we should give black peoplel who often live in poor neighborhoods a future. Invest in education, try to establish companies in these regions etc but fot that also to happen the police need to cut down the crime rate in these areas. It is a very difficult topic in my opinion and much more compliated than cops killing black people because their are racist like some make it out to be

While I understand the sentiment, the fact is racial profiling is both illegal and unconstitutional. America and it's ideals are designed to protect against discrimination of the individual. It protects all American's civil liberties and is part of what actually makes our country great.
Programs such as "Stop & Frisk"
Or Japanese Internment camps are the result of such profiling and fortunately our constitution guards against such practices.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It has been decided by the supreme court that "probable cause" does not include ethnicity and for good reason. It is a factor that an individual has no control over and the idea of making an individual a suspect simply for being born is a violation of the core of American values. Generally speaking, any such bias in law enforcement or the justice system are inherently illegal, unconstitutional, and un-American. America isn't a great country because our ideals are easy to achieve. We are a great country because we possess these ideals and protects to begin with and our goal should always be to strive to the preservation of them as it greats opportunity, freedom, and forward motion in society.

I also do not believe the majority of police are racist, however the overall system does skew to the detriment of the poor, those not well connected, or deemed lower in status of society. At the end of the day human beings still run the system and with so many moving parts there is always opportunity for bias to creep in. However there is an inherent issue with saying "invest in education" or any number of other claims to absolve this.

From a historical sense black communities have typically been red-lined into race specific neighborhoods. From a social context this achieved the goal of segregation, however as we think of this in a generational sense, freed slaves were forced to settle into predominantly black neighborhoods. Freed slaves were often freed with little if any wealth at all, many had no education or ability to read and write. As such economically, black americans even after slavery were locked into a life of perpetual poverty. Even if they managed to gain an education, and purchase a home, they were often in poorer neighborhood with little to no public services. With low wages there was little tax to build schools or hospitals. More of freed slave education: https://www.ncpedia.org/education/freed-peoples
The fight against "separate but equal" was entirely about this. By separating along racial lines it doomed a race with no wealth or education to the same conditions with little opportunity for vertical climb.

Fast forward to present day, a large percentage of black americans still live in similar neighborhoods or regions where their free great great grandparents lived. And while some migration did occur, black americans were often forced to relocate into black designated neighborhoods. Now often we hear about how Asian Americans faced similar odds however this is not entirely true and many reported during the age of segregation many asian americans were allowed to use white only services. There's more thorough information here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...started-praising-them/?utm_term=.c961dc7fe0b5

Anyway, continuing with the issue of education and investment. You have these neighborhoods with law aggregate wealth, lower tax income, and in addition the issue of "white flight". Which from an economic standpoint removes the wealthy average families from a community resulting in reduced tax revenue. Thus the investment in education cannot simply come from within the community due to the reduced wealth. Where do the funds for investment in communities come from? Well now we have the debates on reduced taxes, "entitlements" etc. Which are designed as protections for all Americans regardless of wealth. While I understand the unsustainable aspect of it, the fact remains that the alternative is to simply not invest. We further have issues such as private school vouchers (which I personally support) however they also drain the public schools of needed tax revenue from those wealthy enough to pay taxes. There is no cheap, easy, or fast fix to this in a world where everyone has different needs. Its easy to say "throw money" at the problem whether it is in the form of public defenders or education or any other services.

However when it comes time to vote the middle class and upper class which is most affected by the tax regulations always leans to reducing their personal taxes at the expense of those services. And that is understandable, however it only worsens the issue in the long run. The only way this could be resolved would be for American to collectively recognize the issues and consciously take on the burden of investing in the poor and disadvantaged of America, both black and white or whatever.
 

BANGS

Banned
I never said it was GAF's fault, I was pointing out that via proxy GAF is profiting off racism and sexism. We never had to chance to discuss the subject as the mods closed it right away for obvious reasons...

No I quoted the right post. My post shows the research behind white flight. Your argument was that you claimed economics were the primary cause which you stated without evidence. I countered this with actual evidence and no reply of any intellectual merit was received. White flight is a continuous phenomenon not defined by any particular decade, I would happily discuss more academic research if you are mentally up to the task.
30s...
 

TheMikado

Banned
BTW I wasn't really blaming Obama, but just saying he didn't really help make race relations any better. Sure, going on TV and interjecting things like "my son could have been Trayvon" before the case was even ruled on in court (where his shooter was acquitted btw) makes his base happy, but it doesn't really resolve anything or make things any calmer. It only got both sides more stirred up.

I mean I didn't even think the Trayvon shooting was a race issue at first (wasn't the guy who shot him Hispanic?), it was only after Obama made that comment that it became a race thing. I mean even CNN criticized Obama about this.
https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/15/opinion/thernstrom-trayvon-martin-obama/index.html

I understand how this can be perceived but I want to put this into context, here is the quote:

"I can only imagine what these parents are going through. And when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids. And I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this, and that everybody pulls together—federal, state and local—to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened….

But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. And I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves, and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened."

The context of this specifically is that Obama talks about the idea of perception and race. Specifically the idea that his son wouldn't be dressed in a suit from head to toe. His son would likely look similar at a similar age. That the President of the United States son would for the most part in appearance look similar to this child and that perceptions as to whether his race or his dress were contributing factors to this issue should not be at play. It is a statement that the outer appearance of both the dress and skin color has no merit or value and that the idea of whether Trayvon Martin was "one of the good one" or not could not simply be assessed from outward appearances. The message, as he said was directed to the parents but for American to hear. Trayvon's appearance has no place in determining the type of person he was.

As far as it being a race issue, being Hispanic in no way makes it not a race issue. Inter-minority racism occurs. Further it was already reported as a racial crime before Obama said anything, Obama responded to the nation which was receiving news feeds on this topic.

Again I want to reiterate his statement in context was not directed at solely his race, at least I did not take it that way and so did many Americans with the wearing of the hoodies. It was in response that the reports of his dress, specifically the hoodie made him appear suspicious and being a young black male in a hoodie made him appear so much so that he was followed. The majority of america took it to mean what Obama was implying, that if he had a son he would look and dress similar to Trayvon in a similar situation, and that you begin to question why was his appearance alone enough for someone to follow this teenage boy with a loaded weapon. It's incredibly frightening to think about as a parent and can empathize with the pain that realization brings. A person's appearance should not be enough to warrant monitoring with a loaded weapon. This isn't a third world country, this is America.
 

TheMikado

Banned

What does it being the 30s have to do with anything? It's H-I-S-T-O-R-Y. It's like trying to talk about modern democracy history while trying to ignore its Greek influence. It's appalling to be this anti-intellectual and anti-fact based. Further the historical context was given to you so could have a frame of reference that the phenomenon was neither new nor isolated. It appeared across decades, regions, and economic circumstances. It is proving that this phenomenon which still occurs even today is not isolated to just a specific decade as your lack of both understanding and research claim. The 30s... is just a pitiful qualifier for someone who knows they have no defense against actual facts and research. Your claims have been debunked.
 

BANGS

Banned
You were talking about the 30s I was talking about the 70s-90s and all of the pretentious buzzwords in the world won't make you correct... Sorry pal...
 

TheMikado

Banned
You were talking about the 30s I was talking about the 70s-90s and all of the pretentious buzzwords in the world won't make you correct... Sorry pal...

No, I'm talking about the entire phenomenon. But I will even humor you by posting information on integration during that time period. I will use your claim of economics being the reason for white flight and raise you a scenario. Where white suburbanites are able to keep predominantly white neighborhoods, services, etc., but the only difference being that their school are integrated through busing, thus eliminating your claim of an economic issue in sharing a neighborhood. Lets see how they respond to integration from the time period you requested:

"In September of 1975, Louisville, Kentucky, was no exception, as integration was met by students with extreme violence. When the district announced a plan that involved busing black urban students to predominantly white suburban schools in Jefferson County and vice versa, white students attacked buses of black students with bricks, started fires, and organized rallies. In addition, at that time, 98 percent of white suburban parents opposed desegregation and did not hesitate to voice their concerns about educational quality and freedom to Mayor Harvey Sloane as he made walks throughout Louisville and Jefferson County."
https://tcf.org/content/report/louisville-kentucky-reflection-school-integration/

People tend to forget that people didn't just start holding hand and cheering immediately after the Civil Rights Act was signed.
 

BANGS

Banned
No, I'm talking
And this is your problem. You're not actually listening to the discussion, you're just busting in talking unrelated nonsense and expecting me to reply like it matters to the issue at hand. Kentucky? Really? This is what I'm saying... fake ass wannabe Cathy Newman...
 

Nightstick10

Neo Member
While I understand the sentiment, the fact is racial profiling is both illegal and unconstitutional.

Yes and no. A policy specifically targeting a race based on race is unconstitutional. A policy that tends to have a disproportionate impact on a race is not, in of itself, unconstitutional so long as it is for a compelling governmental interest and there are no less restrictive alternatives.

As a sidenote, in the landmark Supreme Court case San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, plaintiff argued that having local education funded by local property taxes violated the equal protection clause because it disproportionately benefited whitey and harmed blacks and browns. The Supreme Court disagreed.
 
D

Deleted member 12837

Unconfirmed Member
And this is your problem. You're not actually listening to the discussion, you're just busting in talking unrelated nonsense and expecting me to reply like it matters to the issue at hand. Kentucky? Really? This is what I'm saying... fake ass wannabe Cathy Newman...

Maybe, then, to get the discussion back on track, you could take this opportunity to clearly articulate your original point rather than just whining that TheMikado is missing it.

Although I find it hard to believe that absolutely nothing he/she has researched and posted is related to whatever your argument is.
 

TheMikado

Banned
And this is your problem. You're not actually listening to the discussion, you're just busting in talking unrelated nonsense and expecting me to reply like it matters to the issue at hand. Kentucky? Really? This is what I'm saying... fake ass wannabe Cathy Newman...

Yes, please clearly articulate your premise so that we can discuss the merits of it. You have an entire forum willing to listen to you and we would like to provide feedback on all the research and effort you have taken to explain your point. We want to listen to you and respond to your specific claims.
 

BANGS

Banned
Maybe, then, to get the discussion back on track, you could take this opportunity to clearly articulate your original point rather than just whining that TheMikado is missing it.

Although I find it hard to believe that absolutely nothing he/she has researched and posted is related to whatever your argument is.
The segregation of schools is voluntary and mostly comes from "white flight" due to leftist government agenda. Don't blame racism on that shit...
We were clearly talking about modern day voluntary segregation via white people and black people not living together due to economic reasons. Forcing in racism from the 30s/fucking Kentucky is just as disengenous as one can possibly be...
 

TheMikado

Banned
Yes and no. A policy specifically targeting a race based on race is unconstitutional. A policy that tends to have a disproportionate impact on a race is not, in of itself, unconstitutional so long as it is for a compelling governmental interest and there are no less restrictive alternatives.

As a sidenote, in the landmark Supreme Court case San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, plaintiff argued that having local education funded by local property taxes violated the equal protection clause because it disproportionately benefited whitey and harmed blacks and browns. The Supreme Court disagreed.

I certainly agree on the first point, stop and frisk violated the 4th constitutional amendment which is not really an issue of specifically race while it did impact a disproportionate number of minorities. Japanese internment camps were an example of racial and ethnic profiling as well. I also want to clear in that I am not claiming racism is always to blame, nor am I advocating against personal responsibility. Higher violent crime in the black community should not be excused, however a system of government which carries biases on an individual in response to a greater population they belong to are not acceptable either. I really have no answers but I believe at least having information is the first step to discussion and finding solutions.

As to the court ruling, to be fair, it was not the court's decision that the method of funding was indeed fair, but rather that education and equality of education are not fundamental rights under the 14th amendment:
"The majority opinion, reversing the District Court, stated that the appellees did not sufficiently prove a textual basis, within the US Constitution, supporting the principle that education is a fundamental right. Urging that the school financing system led to wealth-based discrimination, the plaintiffs had argued that the fundamental right to education should be applied to the States, through the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court found that there was no such fundamental right and that the unequal school financing system was not subject to strict scrutiny." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Antonio_Independent_School_District_v._Rodriguez

To which I begrudgingly have to agree to. Further and unfortunately wealth is not a protected class. In the strict sense of the constitution the equality of education is not a guaranteed fundamental right, however it should be something the country strives for.

Further:
"In the Supreme Court, a new group of justices had been appointed since the filing of the case. The most significant new member was Justice Lewis Powell, who proved to be the swing vote in the Rodriguez case. Powell led the narrow majority in deciding that the right to be educated (as a child of school age or an uneducated adult), was neither 'explicitly or implicitly' textually found anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. It was therefore, not anywhere protected by the Constitution.

He also found that Texas had not created a suspect class related to poverty. The two findings allowed the state to continue its school financing plan as long so it was "rationally related to a legitimate state interest.""

I do not think anyone disagrees that the system of education tied to local taxes benefits wealthier communities and harms poorer communities. The issue is it is not guaranteed in our framework and it would require a law to be passed equalizing it. If one did pass, it would not be struck down by the supreme court as there is no law regulating education so it would be considered constitutional if a theoretical law were introduced to equalize education per capital. The only challenge would be to the states rights of education systems and I do not know enough to know if that would be a problem.
 

TheMikado

Banned
We were clearly talking about modern day voluntary segregation via white people and black people not living together due to economic reasons. Forcing in racism from the 30s/fucking Kentucky is just as disengenous as one can possibly be...

The last post I made was about the time period you requested. 70-90s. It took place in 1975. The communities were already segregated and when there was an attempt to integrate it was rejected. I gave you an examples where integration was still rejected within the time period you requested and where they was no economic impact of them living in the same communities because they didn't and the integration was still rejected. I've given you more evidence than you have given us. I have taken the economics off the table for this example again in the time period you requested. I've given you everything you asked for of your argument and you've given me nothing. Do you have anything of value to give?
 
White flight back then was mostly possible because of the intent of the racist government and it's racists policies. Of course society as a whole was racist. The trends that happened back then still impact today BANGS.

When the government equalized policies, it didn't make up for or undo the decades worth of damage, or head start depending on what race you were.
 

BANGS

Banned
The last post I made was about the time period you requested. 70-90s. It took place in 1975. The communities were already segregated and when there was an attempt to integrate it was rejected. I gave you an examples where integration was still rejected within the time period you requested and where they was no economic impact of them living in the same communities because they didn't and the integration was still rejected.
Of course parents would be against dragging kids from their school close to home to another school further away just for the sake of "muh duhversihtee", you can't blame that on racism either...
 

TheMikado

Banned
Of course parents would be against dragging kids from their school close to home to another school further away just for the sake of "muh duhversihtee", you can't blame that on racism either...

"white students attacked buses of black students with bricks, started fires, and organized rallies"

What do you want to blame that on? Its what I posted in response earlier.
 

Super Mario

Banned
Thank you for the counter argument because it makes our actual arguments sharper. Continuing with the FBI link which I listed earlier.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43

I will list in order the percentage of crime in order from worse offenses to least. I am only listing violent crimes as proposed:

Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter White: 45.3 Black 52.3
Rape White: 66.2 Black 31.2
Robbery
White : 41.9 Black 56.4
Aggravated assault White: 62.9 Black 33.9
Burglary
White 67.5 Black: 30.4
Larceny-theft White 68.3 Black: 28.7
Motor vehicle theft White 66.7 Black: 30.5
Arson White 74.1 Black: 23.0
Total Violent crime White 58.4 Black: 38.7
Total Property crime White 68.2 Black: 29.0
Other assaults White 65.1 Black: 32.2


By every measure with the exception of murder/manslaughter white the number of violent crimes committed by white people fair outstrips the number of violent crimes by black people. Crimes by white people are nearly twice as many as those by black people and shows the incarceration rate by any of these measures is not proportional.

So your evidence to prove racism is this data?

Yes, we will go to rudimentary lesson #2. Black people make up 13% of the population, white people about 61%.

Black people commit overall crime that is DOUBLE their demographic representation. White people commit less than their representation. Yet you try to conveniently sweep that under the rug by saying white people commit more crime. No one can be that ignorant.

Your own data proves that black people disproportionately commit more crime than any other race. Yet this means their incarceration rates and traffic stops can't be disproportionate.
 

TheMikado

Banned

What does it being in kentucky have to do with anything? I will even humor you again and I will even use your own source and article you posted this time.

"Much of that testimony was also contested by Mr. Ellis because it focused on Los Angeles, where a busing plan ordered by state courts in the 1970's drove most whites out of what had been considered one of the country's best urban school districts."

Again your argument is that the economics/quality drives white people out. All the evidence and various scenarios show that where integration occurs regardless of the circumstances there is white flight. I even use your own sources against you. Just to break this down for you.

White flight occurs:
Whether the community they previously lived in and the one they move to are similar.
It occurs even when just some facilities like schools are used by minorities and has resorted in actual violence.
Further even if the facilities such as education were better than they would achieve elsewhere white flight still occurs.
 

BANGS

Banned
But now you are talking about people leaving due to integration. Integration is not voluntary. Integration is forcing people who don't live together to go to school together because of their skin color. Integration in itself is racist, that's why people resist it...
 
Last edited:

TheMikado

Banned
So your evidence to prove racism is this data?

Yes, we will go to rudimentary lesson #2. Black people make up 13% of the population, white people about 61%.

Black people commit overall crime that is DOUBLE their demographic representation. White people commit less than their representation. Yet you try to conveniently sweep that under the rug by saying white people commit more crime. No one can be that ignorant.

Your own data proves that black people disproportionately commit more crime than any other race. Yet this means their incarceration rates and traffic stops can't be disproportionate.

I already addressed that and this is true, however their incarceration rates are NOT NOT NOT proportionate to their crime rate which is the point. Again in strictly numbers to which I see you are failing.

25% of the crimes committed are from black people. 38% of the prison population are black people. White people commit nearly 70% of all crime yet have an incarceration rate of 58% of the population. Asian Americans have a crime rate of 1.2% yet have an incarceration rate of 1.5%. White Americans ARE THE ONLY race who have an incarceration rate lower than the percent of crimes they commit. The incarceration rate is NOT proportionate to the percent of crimes. That is the issue. No one is ignoring the number of crimes the black population commits, yet you are trying to claim it is proportionate and I am showing you statistically it is not. I understand the aversion to facts, I just do not know why.
 

BANGS

Banned
I already addressed that and this is true, however their incarceration rates are NOT NOT NOT proportionate to their crime rate which is the point. Again in strictly numbers to which I see you are failing.

25% of the crimes committed are from black people. 38% of the prison population are black people. White people commit nearly 70% of all crime yet have an incarceration rate of 58% of the population. Asian Americans have a crime rate of 1.2% yet have an incarceration rate of 1.5%. White Americans ARE THE ONLY race who have an incarceration rate lower than the percent of crimes they commit. The incarceration rate is NOT proportionate to the percent of crimes. That is the issue. No one is ignoring the number of crimes the black population commits, yet you are trying to claim it is proportionate and I am showing you statistically it is not. I understand the aversion to facts, I just do not know why.
Have you checked the incarceration rates for repeat offenders, severity of crimes, public vs private lawyers, etc? You know, all the other factors besides skin color that contribute to reality?
 
Last edited:

TheMikado

Banned
But now you are talking about people leaving due to integration. Integration is not voluntary. Integration is forcing people who don't live together to go to school together because of their skin color. Integration in itself is racist, that's why people resist it...

integration
(ˌɪntɪˈɡreɪʃən)n
1. the act of combining or adding parts to make a unified whole

2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the act of amalgamating a racial or religious group with an existing community

3. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the combination of previously racially segregated social facilities into a nonsegregated system

I don't think you actually know what integration is... voluntary or involuntary has nothing to do with integration itself.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Have you checked the incarceration rates for repeat offenders, severity of crimes, public vs private lawyers, etc? You know, all the other factors besides skin color that contribute to reality?

I do not, hence the discussion. The fact is the incarceration rate is not proportionate to crimes committed and that is the point. If you would like to give sourced evidence as to why that is, I'm all ears.
 

BANGS

Banned
You're patronizing me with the dictionary definition of integration vs the actual use of the word in the subject we are talking about... Which I already described. Again, if you're just gonna be disingenuous and not even try to post in good faith, you're not gonna be taken seriously...
 

BANGS

Banned
I do not, hence the discussion. The fact is the incarceration rate is not proportionate to crimes committed and that is the point. If you would like to give sourced evidence as to why that is, I'm all ears.
Nope, I don't denounce actual facts and statistical data. I jumped the gun and thought you were drawing a conclusion from said data. My apologies...
 
Last edited:

TheMikado

Banned
You're patronizing me with the dictionary definition of integration vs the actual use of the word in the subject we are talking about... Which I already described. Again, if you're just gonna be disingenuous and not even try to post in good faith, you're not gonna be taken seriously...

These were your words
"Integration is not voluntary"
I gave you the dictionary definition because you stated something as fact which was wrong. I am trying to help you with correct information so that we can take your arguments seriously. Just helping you get your facts straight.
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Banned
These were your words
"Integration is not voluntary"
I gave you the dictionary definition because you stated something as fact which was wrong. I am trying to help you with correct information so that we can take your arguments seriously. Just helping you get your facts straight.
School integration programs are not voluntary, that's why people leave. You're embarrassing yourself at this point. I'm ending this here, discussion over...
 
School integration programs are not voluntary, that's why people leave. You're embarrassing yourself at this point. I'm ending this here, discussion over...

Now you just invented a hypothesis that people leave just because they don't like involuntary integration programs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TheMikado

Banned
School integration programs are not voluntary, that's why people leave. You're embarrassing yourself at this point. I'm ending this here, discussion over...

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/02/06/nyregion/expert-links-mandatory-desegregation-to-white-flight.html

From the source you literally posted a few moments ago:

"But as her research progressed, she said today, it began to show that voluntary integration plans, in which parents could choose to send children to new schools, or keep them in their neighborhood schools, were achieving greater mixing of whites and minority students than mandatory plans."
 
Top Bottom