Question to ANYONE on the Ferguson Protesters Side...And some facts!!

originally posted by: JackWax

originally posted by: blupblup
a reply to: thesmokingman

Well it's kind of a chicken and egg thing, no?
If you stop black people 10 times more often than you stop white people then it goes without saying that more will be arrested and charged.
People of all colour and creed break the law and carry things illegally... but if you stop one race far more frequently (10 times more) then it's likely that race will end up having higher crime rates than other races.

Blacks are 13% of the population of the U.S. and commit around 50% of all violent crime. The excuse of "more blacks" being stopped, I would think, doesn't apply to getting stopped versus violent crime rate. If you want to use that excuse for drug charges then do so but for violent crime that just doesn't fly.

Aye, and I am pretty sure that proportionately more teenagers and twentysomethings get stopped than eighty and ninety year olds .....

There is a reason. As far as I know, not many 90 year olds are drug dealers or gang members .... So is it ageist not to stop just as many 90 year olds as 20 year olds? Should we demand that more old people get stopped? Or should we stop those people who statistically are most likely to be engaged in criminal activity. Tricky one ...

a reply to: amazing

What I was referring too comes directly from your link. Look at the columns on the right. 49% murder is by blacks, 32.5% rape by blacks, 55% robbery by blacks, 35% assault by blacks etc etc. This is by only 13% of the population. Blacks are not under 13% in any violent crime category.

Not saying 50% of ALL blacks commit I just know that blacks as a whole commit a disproportionate amount of crime versus their population numbers.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Burning building vs. killing.

Neither is acceptable. One is CERTAINLY worse.

This thread is filled with ignorance and confirmation bias mixed in with just plain old stupidity.

Whites and blacks commit crimes at the same rates. This is simply true and if you don't understand how to read stats, then don't share them.

91% of black victims are victims of black criminals
83% of white victims are victims of white criminals

That is already a high percentage for both groups. You'll fund similar number for asian communites and in fact any community. Why?

Becasue people commit crimes to those they are in close proximity to. People don't drive out of town to commit a crime in a different demographic. Black communities, black crime, white communities, white crime, Asian communities, Asian crime.

Because some people don't understand this, is not the fault of the stats, just poor education and common sense.

Why 91% and 83%?

The numbers are different due to the way communities are different. White people are slightly more mixed with black communities, than the other way around. There are a number of reasons for this which aren't really relevant to the point.
However, this obviously lowers the numbers for white perps as they are more dispersed.

Its not just murders, but any crime - all crime is committed comparably by different groups. It really isn't difficult to work this out.

Some people seem to be focused and brainwashed into thinking some communities are inherently more violent. I can only think they get this from racist websites or right wing media or just plain lack any academic ability to work out the facts for themselves.

With this in mind, disproportiante arrests is clearly racist; it is based upon the same level of ignorance that is seen in this thread. If I am watching Mr Jones and not Mr Smith, I am more likley to see Mr Jones commit crime even though Mr Smith and Mr Jones commit crime at the same rate. I can then convince myself that the Jones familiy is inherently more criminal inclined than the Smith family. Not only convince myself, but a whole slew of ignorant people who have names that sound like Smith.

And of course, we have nobodies, who due to their colour, or in this instance, due to the fact that they are related to a 'Smith', think to lecture the Jones', as thought they have something wise to impart to them.

The whole thing is a joke on people who are no different from the people next door, regardless of their colour, yet deluded into thinking they are something special, rather than just the plain old common dross that everyone else is.

originally posted by: JackWax
a reply to: amazing

What I was referring too comes directly from your link. Look at the columns on the right. 49% murder is by blacks, 32.5% rape by blacks, 55% robbery by blacks, 35% assault by blacks etc etc. This is by only 13% of the population. Blacks are not under 13% in any violent crime category.

It still seems like you're demonizing black people. Not taking into account impoverished areas, prosecution rates, unemployment rates and a really a whole slew of other data and information, and why white people commit nearly 4 million more crimes a year than other races!

But that leads to the next question. What does it really mean to you that black people commit a higher percentage of crimes based on percentage of population? Why is that important?

That CNN pic of the riot locations tells a story, a story of blue democrat voting districts.

They riot, they loot, they suck from the coffers of govt.

The police in all those areas should all refuse to go on duty and let them be ruled by the toughest street thugs. When nobody is left living in those hell holes a lot of problems will have solved themselves, including the political strategies of voter demographics.

Did Michael Brown really assault the officer?

I mean, I see his injury on his face and neck, I'm just wondering if it really went down.

Because from all the media frenzy, they seem to always depict it as M. Brown as an innocent kid who threw his hands up in the air but got murdered in cold blood.

But clearly, as the evidence rolls out, that's not entirely the case.

So if the officer was assault, shot back in retaliation, then... why all the riots?

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

That CNN pic of the riot locations tells a story, a story of blue democrat voting districts.

They riot, they loot, they suck from the coffers of govt.

The police in all those areas should all refuse to go on duty and let them be ruled by the toughest street thugs. When nobody is left living in those hell holes a lot of problems will have solved themselves, including the political strategies of voter demographics.

LOL So wait! Are you saying it would be good for all Black people or all Democrats to kill each other. That would leave white republicans left. Hmmmm. LOL

a reply to: spacedog1973

Yes ok sure. If you say so. 8506 murders/manslaughter in 2012, blacks committed 4203 of those or 49.4%. Blacks are 13% of the population. Demonizing? Idiot? Stupid? Those are FBI numbers posted by another member on this thread. Blacks violent crime rates aren't disproportionate to the % of the overall population they consist of?

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Burning building vs. killing.

Neither is acceptable. One is CERTAINLY worse.

Not really. Building could have people in it, or the brave fireman battling the flames could be killed, or it could spread to another structure that may or may not have people in it.....they are both deplorable on the same level.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

That CNN pic of the riot locations tells a story, a story of blue democrat voting districts.

They riot, they loot, they suck from the coffers of govt.

The police in all those areas should all refuse to go on duty and let them be ruled by the toughest street thugs. When nobody is left living in those hell holes a lot of problems will have solved themselves, including the political strategies of voter demographics.

LOL So wait! Are you saying it would be good for all Black people or all Democrats to kill each other. That would leave white republicans left. Hmmmm. LOL

No, not at all, the people will immigrate out of those blue areas that are dead zones for development and rife with unrest.

behind there ideas maby varries from looter to looter lol sorry had to

but no the idea to stop inequality and police brutality yes

to do so bye burning down ur own city and beating anyone not of ur own race not

so the idea yes the actions no

sad sad world we live in i was always hoping going up against opreshion was all of of not just 1 part of of

Im black and ive been kidnapped(arrested) for riding my bike at night with no ID as an example. At a point people are tired of explaining to deaf ears. they killed all the black leaders working to explain these questions and answers to you. A simple unbiased look at history wll answer your questions

originally posted by: GoldenOne23
I am a millennial and I can tell you that the government is going to have problems trying to oppress and manipulate us . Most everyone around my age is awake and totally against the American government. We are not as gullible as some earlier generations. (indigo children ect.)

All they have to do is launch a new shiny phone and you will be too busy lining up to get one!

Actually you are the easiest and most gullible generation to manipulate, all via "social media"!

originally posted by: truthseeker84
So if the officer was assault, shot back in retaliation, then... why all the riots?

Christmas is coming, a chance for very cheap tv's and shoes etc.

haha you all talk of revolution and fighting big brother, unless it doesnt look like you. People sitting around complaining , hording guns and food in case the end of the world comes.

The end of the world is the destruction of white/western supremacy system and there are plenty of good white folks on the side of the people in the streets fighting for change , right or wrong.

There are no leaders because they have been murdered by the powers that be, and in your little world view you support that system because in the end you benifit from it.

So yes the line has been drawn and people are deciding where they fall in.

If you want change as you see fit perhaps you should get off your asses and drop the assumptions and help create a world where people dont feel the only way they have a voice and youll will pay attention is to burn # down.

a reply to: hellobruce

And thats the problem here you are online and we in the streets, because we are so gullible

originally posted by: magnetik
you are online and we in the streets, because we are so gullible

Very true.... how many buildings did you rob and burn down?

Can't imagine why so many people keep complaining that they are being marginalized and nobody cares to listen???

At a point people are tired of explaining to deaf ears.

Oh. Yah, maybe this why???

All they have to do is launch a new shiny phone and you will be too busy lining up to get one! Actually you are the easiest and most gullible generation to manipulate, all via "social media"!

Christmas is coming, a chance for very cheap tv's and shoes etc.

Very true.... how many buildings did you rob and burn down?

Here's someone trying to tell you their reality as directly as possible and what do you hear and see instead??? Just another criminal, thief, arsonists, gangster who wants some cheap stuff!!! Now who's being manipulated by social media??? BTW, how big is your TV?? What I-Phone do you have?? After all, that's all I need to know about you to put you in a nice cozy box too.

When's the last time you stood up against the very system that you complain about daily from the safety of your own home???

A reply to: hellobruce

Actually let me correct you there.
It is NOT because of social media. It is because we have a better understanding of technology... How it works, how to find things for research purposes. Yes, most people my age do have social media accounts but that is beside the point.
We were raised around technology our entire lives.
I am 22 , never had a twitter, snapchat, whatever the hell else there is to have. I had a Facebook around 4 years ago... And deactivated it a month later..
So, no.. That has nothing to do with where I (and I speak solely for myself) get my information. And I would have to disagree about them being gullible as well.
More open-minded.. On almost every issue.
Anything is possible.. Especially with proof. Anything is acceptable in certain situations and anything is ethical depending on the person.