White Girl Bleed A Lot

[DarkHorseRising]

You come across as very poorly informed. You should try checking actual statistics before making your comments. And before you make any assumptions about who the victims where, actually read the report. Black victims are overwhelmingly killed by black offenders.

BJS: Bureau of Justice Statistics:​

Homicide Trends in the U.S. -​

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htius.pdf


Page 11 of 183

The demographic characteristics of homicide victims and offenders differ from the general population
​

Based on data for the years 1976-2005 -
​

* Blacks are disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders. The victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than those for whites. The offending rates for blacks were more than 7 times higher the rates for whites.
​

* ​

Males represent 77% of homicide victims and nearly 90% of offenders. The victimization rates for males were 3 times higher than the rates for females. The offending rates for maleswere 8 times higher than the rates for females.
​

* Approximately one-third of murder victims and almost half the offenders are under the age of 25. For both victims and offenders, the rate per 100,000 peaks in the 18-24 year-old age​

group.

Those are not statistics!! Those are raw numerical data, which are great for talking points and infographics, but don't tell the real story. These numbers do not consider any covariates, such as income level, family composition, and geographic factors. Once you factor them out, blacks are NOT more likely than any other race to commit a crime.

What are you trying to prove by this? Would it bring you pleasure to have the media announce far and wide that people different than yourself are "dangerous"? Does the victim of a crime suffer differently according to the skin color of the offender? Your motive appears to be able to smugly declare black people to be criminals based on faulty statistics. Not only are you wrong, but it comes across as rather heartless. Who benefits from this, besides those espousing racial beliefs?

 

[Mike S]

Those are not statistics!! Those are raw numerical data, which are great for talking points and infographics, but don't tell the real story. These numbers do not consider any covariates, such as income level, family composition, and geographic factors. Once you factor them out, blacks are NOT more likely than any other race to commit a crime.

Ah, so once again you didn't read the linked information.

What are you trying to prove by this? Would it bring you pleasure to have the media announce far and wide that people different than yourself are "dangerous"?

No. I just want honest reporting.

Does the victim of a crime suffer differently according to the skin color of the offender? Your motive appears to be able to smugly declare black people to be criminals based on faulty statistics. Not only are you wrong, but it comes across as rather heartless. Who benefits from this, besides those espousing racial beliefs?

You're proving Flaherty's premise.

 

[DarkHorseRising]

Ah, so once again you didn't read the linked information.

I did read it. it's one long block of raw data. No statistical analysis. And there's major conjunction fallacies inherent in the paper. They should have used both ANCOVA and regressions as the data permits. They didn't (to be fair, this wasn't necessary for what they were doing; but your assumptions are not supported by this data).

No. I just want honest reporting.



You're proving Flaherty's premise.

I have never heard of Flaherty. Does he also espouse racist ideas?

You clearly want more than honest reporting, or you would have addressed this issue to a media outlet, rather than posting it online. You wanted to express a racist opinion to the readers, probably in the hopes that others would affirm your opinion, thus normalizing it. Don't play innocent.

 

[Mike S]

I did read it. it's one long block of raw data. No statistical analysis. And there's major conjunction fallacies inherent in the paper. They should have used both ANCOVA and regressions as the data permits. They didn't (to be fair, this wasn't necessary for what they were doing; but your assumptions are not supported by this data).




I have never heard of Flaherty. Does he also espouse racist ideas?

He's the author of White Girl Bleed A Lot, the subject of the thread...which you also clearly did not read. And yet, you feel free to comment on it.

You clearly want more than honest reporting, or you would have addressed this issue to a media outlet, rather than posting it online. You wanted to express a racist opinion to the readers, probably in the hopes that others would affirm your opinion, thus normalizing it. Don't play innocent.

Is this - commenting on what you imagined I wrote rather than what I actually did write, and magically divining what I really, secretly meant - part of your fantasized superiority to "unarmed" commenters? Fantasy and self-delusion and knee-jerk opinions don't count as superiority.

Let me give you another link, by someone almost certainly better qualified than you or I to comment intelligently on this issue. Please take the time to read it.


A Censored Race War: The media ignore racially motivated black-on-white crime.
By Thomas Sowell

 

[DarkHorseRising]

He's the author of White Girl Bleed A Lot, the subject of the thread...which you also clearly did not read. And yet, you feel free to comment on it.



Is this - commenting on what you imagined I wrote rather than what I actually did write - part of your fantasized superiority to "unarmed" commenters? Fantasy and self-delusion and knee-jerk opinions don't count as superiority.

Let me give you another link, by someone almost certainly better qualified than you or I to comment intelligently on this issue. Please take the time to read it.


A Censored Race War: The media ignore racially motivated black-on-white crime.
By Thomas Sowell

None of this is relevant. You can toss around all the anecdotes you want, the bottom line is that you're promoting racial hatred and it's pathetic. This is yet another reason that Christians come across as such hypocrites. You are all so smug and prideful in your condemnation of anyone different than yourselves.

You can harp all you want on whether the media is or isn't distorting racial crime figures. It's irrelevant. Christians are supposed to take their orders from God, not from the newspapers. How many people do you lead to Christ through your divisive and hurtful opinions? And how many do you drive away? Do you even care?

Both of the articles you linked to have clear agendas. They're not news, they're opinions. Very hurtful ones, at that. I realize that, debating with someone who really doesn't seem to care about others, such an assertion is meaningless. But you don't respond well to logical arguments either. So I'm baffled as to how to get through to you.

 

[Mike S]

None of this is relevant. You can toss around all the anecdotes you want, the bottom line is that you're promoting racial hatred and it's pathetic. This is yet another reason that Christians come across as such hypocrites. You are all so smug and prideful in your condemnation of anyone different than yourselves.

You can harp all you want on whether the media is or isn't distorting racial crime figures. It's irrelevant. Christians are supposed to take their orders from God, not from the newspapers. How many people do you lead to Christ through your divisive and hurtful opinions? And how many do you drive away? Do you even care?

Both of the articles you linked to have clear agendas. They're not news, they're opinions. Very hurtful ones, at that. I realize that, debating with someone who really doesn't seem to care about others, such an assertion is meaningless. But you don't respond well to logical arguments either. So I'm baffled as to how to get through to you.

The progression of your argument has gone roughly along the trajectory of
"it's not happening" to "this is the reason it's happening" to "this is why it shouldn't be reported." It would be difficult to present a more nearly perfect validation of Flaherty's premise.

 

[Barbarian]

The not-surprising result is that blacks commit violence against whites much less often than would be indicated by random selection of victims, but whites commit violence against blacks much more often than a random selection of victims would show.

I do not know why this is so, but it was the last time I checked it out. I could probably pull the data back together, if someone would like to see it. It remains true that both blacks and whites commit violence more often against their own "race" than would be indicated by random selection. This is likely due to the fact that there are still black and white neighborhoods.

 

[Danus]

I think we can all agree that racism exist in the hearts and minds of people collectively and individually, but to attempt to measure it is futile.

There is only one way to stop racism, and it starts and stops within each person individually. It does not matter if racism is abound, or propagated by any particular group. One person can stop racism by searching their own heart and allowing God to help them with love. All people need to forgive. All people need to stop seeing others as part of a group and reach out for once. We all need to do this, but if we are unwilling to be lead by Gods will, then we are unable because of our own will, and we deserve what we get for our own stubbornness not to let go.

 

[Mike S]

I think we can all agree that racism exist in the hearts and minds of people collectively and individually, but to attempt to measure it is futile.

There is only one way to stop racism, and it starts and stops within each person individually. It does not matter if racism is abound, or propagated by any particular group. One person can stop racism by searching their own heart and allowing God to help them with love. All people need to forgive. All people need to stop seeing others as part of a group and reach out for once. We all need to do this, but if we are unwilling to be lead by Gods will, then we are unable because of our own will, and we deserve what we get for our own stubbornness not to let go.

The thread is about how the media report, or don't report, crimes.

 

[jasoncran]

they pick choose what they went to report. i saw what i thought was a murder of a toddler. yet nothing. i tried to save that boy and called 9-1-1. the mother lost her kids and is gone. nothing. no word , but an obituary.

 

[Danus]

The thread is about how the media report, or don't report, crimes.

Is it?

 

[handy]

I trolled YouTube and found a lot, a whole lot, of videos about black on white violence including flash mobs and ganging up on one person.

Each and every one of the YouTube videos' were lifted from...

News station reports.

The news most certainly are reporting on these crimes.

Perhaps the reason why they don't go "viral" in the way the Zimmerman/Martin case has is because Zimmerman/Martin has a lot more than just a violent act that occurred between people of different races.

There was the fact that Zimmerman was a very large man and Martin was just a kid. There was the fact that Martin was just walking back over to his house during half-time with snacks. There was the fact that Zimmerman pursued Martin after being told not to. There was most of all the fact that an armed adult killed an unarmed juvenile and no police charges were brought...

All of that pulls together a story that will catch the attention of people all over the world.

Most crime is local news. The Zimmerman/Martin case transcended local news status and not just because it was a matter of white on black violence.

 

[Stormcrow]

The Zimmerman/Martin case transcended local news status and not just because it was a matter of white on black violence.

Obama is half white, half black, but because he's president, he's called "black."

Zimmerman is half white, half Hispanic, but because he shot a black teen he's called "white."

I think that sums up Mark's point perfectly.

 

[handy]

I've noticed that a lot of the media are now (correctly) reporting that Zimmerman is half white half Hispanic.... yes, they certainly did run with the fact that Zimmerman was white... but I think the story wouldn't have gone viral the way it did if the parents of the boy who died didn't turn to the media to try to get some justice. I would have done the same thing if somebody shot my unarmed kid dead while he was on his way home from the store, and the police didn't even try to bring a case to trial.


And these past two posts are exactly why there is always going to be race issues as long as this world remains. Race is one of the most successful deceptions of the devil... race doesn't even exist, it's simply a matter of micro evolution and genetics that the skin pigmented differently in different areas of the world and genetics solidified those differences. The approximately 1mm of epidermis is the only thing that identifies "race"... and yet people will talk of being "half black and half white" as if we run around like we're Oreo cookies or something.

Somehow, someway we have to start recognizing that there is NO SUCH THING AS RACE!!!!! It simply doesn't exist. Maybe then, we'll get more of a handle on things. But, I don't think that will happen, because there are too many who have a vested interest in keeping the "races" stirred. And, in this interest, the media most certainly is a useful idiot.

 

[Mike S]

Is it?

Yes.

Both the Flaherty article I linked to in the OP, and the Sowell article I linked to in a later post, as well as all my own comments, are about media bias in reporting race related crimes.

 

[Stormcrow]

I've noticed that a lot of the media are now (correctly) reporting that Zimmerman is half white half Hispanic

How many of them are now (correctly) reporting that Obama is half white, half black?

If race doesn't matter, why is it mentioned at all? If it does, shouldn't it always be reported correctly?

Why the double standard in reporting? (It was a rhetorical question. I know why.)

 

[Stormcrow]

And why does a discussion of race almost always bring out people who want to play the "racist" card on others?

(It was a rhetorical question. I know why.)

 

[Stormcrow]

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3uek29f

Excerpt follows:

What makes this even more startling is that it is just one of many examples of racial mob violence occurring around the country, without any comment from national figures such as President Obama or Attorney General Eric Holder. But if whites were attacking blacks in this manner, you can bet it would have already have become a national story worthy of comment from national political figures.
Consider these incidents:

• At the Wisconsin State fair, groups of black teens numbering anywhere from 25 to 100 “were targeting anyone who was white or appeared to look white,” and beating them, according to the local police chief. At least 18 people were injured, and 30 have been arrested.
• In Denver, couples leaving restaurants were being attacked by a group of black men with baseball bats.
• A young white man named Carter Strange had his skull fractured by a mob in South Carolina. He was attacked at random while jogging.
• A young white man named Dawid Strucinski was beaten into a coma by a mob in Bayonne, NJ.
• Anna Taylor, Emily Guendelsberger, and Thomas Fitzgerald were beaten to the ground and stomped in separate Philadelphia flash mobs.
• “Every weekend in July,” according to local news, “police have battled large, flash-mob beatings and vandalism” in Greensboro, NC.
• In a mostly-white suburb of Cleveland, witnesses reported large groups of young blacks walking through the streets, “shouting profanities and racial epithets,” and one man was viciously beaten while leaving a restaurant with his wife and friends.
• A young white lady named Shaina Perry was taunted and beaten by a black mob in Milwaukee who remarked “Oh, white girl bleeds a lot.”

End excerpt.


Trayvon Martin, a troubled teen who had been suspended from his high school in Miami for Marijuana possession, and who had Marijuana in his blood and urine as seen in the post mortem, was shot to death by George Zimmerman, who claimed he shot the teen in self defense: a claim we're now learning may be well supported by the evidence. Nevertheless, this story has drawn national attention as an example of "white on black crime" while incidents like those - cited above - see virtually no national media coverage at all.

More importantly, the President and his "Justice" Department (you know, led by the same Eric Holder who refused to prosecute the Black Panthers at the Philly polling place for voter intimidation even after they had essentially plead guilty to it) inject themselves into the Martin case with nary a peep about all these other incidents!

When it comes to white on black crime, the news of it is shouted from every loudspeaker across the land. When it comes to the equally insidious black on white crime, or the far more frequent black on black crime, the media become "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil."

Why? (It's a rhetorical question. I know why.)

 

[jasoncran]

holder alone should be charged for not investigating the fast and the furious incident.

 

[Stormcrow]

holder alone should be charged for not investigating the fast and the furious incident.

He can't investigate something that would lead straight to him and - quite likely - to his boss. He should be fired and investigated by a special prosecutor and his boss should be impeached. But that will never happen given that riots would likely ensue.

And that is why much of this other stuff slips under the national radar.