[The Sabbaticus]

7 Statistics You Need To Know About Black-On-Black Crime

By Aaron Bandler
•
Jul 14th, 2016 DailyWire.com
•

President Barack Obama has no problem making disgusting, untrue assertions about cops being racist at a funeral for murdered cops yet does not give major speeches on the epidemic of black-on-black crime. Here are seven statistics you need to know about black-on-black crime that the president will not address.

1. Data shows that 93 percent of black homicide victims are killed by other blacks.

The left’s rebuttal is that that 84 percent of white homicide victims are killed by other whites, but The Wall Street Journal‘s Jason Riley points out that the white crime rate is “much lower than the black rate.”

2. According to Riley, “Blacks commit violent crimes at 7 to 10 times the rate that whites do.”

Blacks committed 52 percent of homicides between 1980 and 2008, despite composing just 13 percent of the population. Across the same timeframe, whites committed 45 percent of homicides while composing 77% of the population, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Here are some more statistics from the FBI:

In 2013, the FBI has black criminals carrying out 38 per cent of murders, compared to 31.1 per cent for whites. The offender’s race was “unknown” in 29.1 per cent of cases.

What about violent crime more generally? FBI arrest rates are one way into this. Over the last three years of data – 2011 to 2013 – 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black.

3. Black crime is even more prevalent in the country’s largest cities and counties.

Heather Mac Donald writes in her book The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe that in Chicago, IL, blacks committed 76 percent of all homicides, despite composing 35 percent of the city’s population. Blacks also accounted for 78 percent of all juvenile arrests. Whites, who compose 28 percent of the city’s population, committed 4 percent of its homicides and 3.5 percent of its juvenile arrests. Hispanics, who compose 30 percent of the city’s population, committed 19 percent of its homicides and 18 percent of its juvenile arrests. (Another eye-opening fact from Mac Donald’s research is that only 26 percent of murder cases were solved in Chicago.)

Blacks are 10 percent of the population in Los Angeles, CA, but commit 42 percent of its robberies and 34 percent of its felonies. Whites make up 29 percent of the city’s population, and commit 5 percent of its robberies and 13 percent of its felonies.

In New York City, blacks committed “75 percent of all shootings, 70 percent of all robberies, and 66 percent of all violent crime,” despite only composing 23 percent of the population, said Mac Donald in a Hillsdale speech. Additionally, 2009 Bureau of Justice Statistics numbers show that in 2009, “blacks were charged with 62 percent of robberies, 57 percent of murders and 45 percent of assaults in the 75 biggest counties in the country, despite only comprising roughly 15 percent of the population in these counties.”

4. There were almost 6,000 blacks killed by other blacks in 2015.

By contrast, only 258 blacks were killed by police gunfire that year.

5. The percentage of blacks arrested for crimes is consistent with police reports.

This is according to the National Crime Victimization Survey, as well as this 1985 study:

“Even allowing for the existence of discrimination in the criminal justice system, the higher rates of crime among black Americans cannot be denied,” wrote James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein in their classic 1985 study, “Crime and Human Nature.” “Every study of crime using official data shows blacks to be overrepresented among persons arrested, convicted, and imprisoned for street crimes.” This was true decades before the authors put it to paper, and it remains the case decades later.

“The overrepresentation of blacks among arrested persons persists throughout the criminal justice system,” wrote Wilson and Herrnstein. “Though prosecutors and judges may well make discriminatory judgments, such decisions do not account for more than a small fraction of the overrepresentation of blacks in prison.”

This data disproves the notion that racism is what drives higher rates of arrests among the blacks than among whites or broader America.

6. According to Riley, “Black crime rates were lower in the 1940s and 1950s, when black poverty was higher” and “racial discrimination was rampant and legal.”

If it’s not racism and poverty that are blame for the high black crime rate, then what is?

7. According to Mac Donald, “A straight line can be drawn between family breakdown and youth violence.”

As economist Thomas Sowell points out, before the 1960s “most black children were raised in two-parent families.” In 2013, over 72 percent of blacks were born out of wedlock. In Cook County –which Chicago belongs to – 79 percent of blacks were born to single mothers in 2003, while only 15 percent of whites were born to single mothers.

“Until that gap closes, the crime gap won’t close, either,” writes Mac Donald.

Daily Wire

Once you actually look at the numbers, the entire BLM movement becomes a farcical example of social media spread mass hysteria that tends to influence simple-minded individuals. Even in Mauritania (a country with actual slavery) they're now comparing the local police to American police officers, as if they're the new standard of 'police brutality'.

[skinster]

Sab is a racist.

[Unthinking Majority]

The left is primarily concerned with victim-oppressor relationships, typically involving some kind of identity group dynamics. A black person killing another black person is a victim killing another victim. It's not that BLM etc doesn't care, it's that there is far more outrage over a white person killing a black person because of the racism element. The result is indeed that black-on-black crime doesn't get nearly the same attention, and it will often be blamed on historical white oppression.

The right is more focused on personal responsibility, while the left is more focused on victimization. There is truth in both viewpoints. If you ignore one and not the other you are simply ignoring part of the truth, and you're worse for it.

[wat0n]

Why do I suspect that much of this has to do with organized crime, also known as gangs, whose existence is fueled mainly by drug trade? If so, then maybe ending the War on Drugs would help quite a bit to solve this, and may be a better explanation than single-parent homes.

Furthermore, other data would suggest that this victimization is focused among the poor as well, with no differences among poor Whites and Blacks.

As such, it would seem that ending the War on Drugs and developing poor neighborhoods would be a part of the solution. I think these are things the BLM people do support, so while I don't see how any of this supports the idea of defunding/abolishing the cops, they aren't entirely wrong in their proposals either. The real question is just how many among them, and the taxpayers at large, are willing to live with the tax hike necessary to fund any anti-poverty strategy to address these issues.

[Saeko]

Why do I suspect that much of this has to do with organized crime, also known as gangs, whose existence is fueled mainly by drug trade?

Because you'd be exactly right. Most black homicide offenders are gangsters. Also, most black homicide victims are also gangsters.

It's not that people aren't focusing on black-on-black violence because of hypocrisy, as racists like Sab would suggest. Rather, black-on-black violence isn't seen to be much of an issue because it doesn't directly affect non-gangsters all that much.

As a law-abiding black citizen, your biggest worry is the violence that comes from the police.

If so, then maybe ending the War on Drugs would help quite a bit to solve this, and may be a better explanation than single-parent homes.

Yes, ending the war on drugs and developing poor neighborhoods would do A LOT to improve the situation.

As such, it would seem that ending the War on Drugs and developing poor neighborhoods would be a part of the solution. I think these are things the BLM people do support, so while I don't see how any of this supports the idea of defunding/abolishing the cops, they aren't entirely wrong in their proposals either. The real question is just how many among them, and the taxpayers at large, are willing to live with the tax hike necessary to fund any anti-poverty strategy to address these issues.

The police treat every black male as a potential cop-killing gangster. It should be obvious why defunding/abolishing the police would reduce the rate at which the police murder black people.

[Sivad]

black-on-black violence isn't seen to be much of an issue because it doesn't directly affect non-gangsters all that much.

As a law-abiding black citizen, your biggest worry is the violence that comes from the police.

The insane levels of crime and violence in black communities definitely affects "non-gangsters" and it affects them way more than police violence. You're typing straight out your ass.

[maz]

Obama: Murder Rate in African-American Community 'Way out of Whack'

— -- President Obama said that the murder rate in the African-American community is “crazy” during a town hall on race relations in America titled "The President and the People: A National Conversation" today.

“It is absolutely true that the murder rate in the African-American community is way out of whack compared to the general population,” Obama said. “And both the victims and the perpetrators are black, young black men.

“The single greatest cause of death for young black men between the ages of 18 and 35 is homicide. And that’s crazy. That is crazy,” the president continued, responding to a question from Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn.

This police officer exercised his white privilege and challenged the president to do something about black crime. He cited a figure that African Americans represented as high as 51% of victims in some communities.



In the end, Obama did nothing the help the black community. All he did was get them all riled up and he is still out there riling them up while not addressing black crime.

[Donna]

Considering that black-on-black violent crime is predominantly gang-related and thus transparently a socioeconomic problem, the only way to confront the issue is by confronting racialized poverty. 13/50 dog whistles aren't going to help black communities overcome economic marginalization and racism, it's just going to embolden racists and fuel the ascendancy of the far-right.

[Unthinking Majority]

The police treat every black male as a potential cop-killing gangster. It should be obvious why defunding/abolishing the police would reduce the rate at which the police murder black people.

Let's walk a mile in the shoes of a cop for a minute. Cops know young black men commit up to 50% of the violent crime in the US, and in a country where people are heavily armed and people in gangs are especially armed, I think often cops start to racially profile to protect their own lives. I think they'd rather be wrong and prejudice in profiling than risk being shot etc. I think it becomes automatic for them after awhile to fear a young black man over a young white man etc. When they deal with a certain population more than others I think a lot of cops develop resentment and an "us vs them" mentality vs young black men and blacks in general, and it fuels their racism.

On top of that, you get this "brotherhood" atmosphere where cops and departments protect their own and these things off-the-record become permissible, so accountability is gone. So the question is, what do cities need to do to prevent this from infecting cops & departments? We can defund police, but at some point somebody is going to have to respond to a dangerous crime happening, and defunding doesn't make people with guns less racist.

[Donna]

Let's walk a mile in the shoes of a cop for a minute. Cops know young black men commit up to 50% of the violent crime in the US, and in a country where people are heavily armed and people in gangs are especially armed, I think often cops start to racially profile to protect their own lives. I think they'd rather be wrong and prejudice in profiling than risk being shot etc. I think it becomes automatic for them after awhile to fear a young black man over a young white man etc. When they deal with a certain population more than others I think a lot of cops develop resentment and an "us vs them" mentality vs young black men and blacks in general, and it fuels their racism.

On top of that, you get this "brotherhood" atmosphere where cops and departments protect their own and these things off-the-record become permissible, so accountability is gone. So the question is, what do cities need to do to prevent this from infecting cops & departments? We can defund police, but at some point somebody is going to have to respond to a dangerous crime happening, and defunding doesn't make people with guns less racist.

I mean, if the argument is going to hinge on trying to relate to individual officers then my advice to them is to find a more ethical line of work.

[maz]

Considering that black-on-black violent crime is predominantly gang-related and thus transparently a socioeconomic problem, the only way to confront the issue is by confronting racialized poverty. 13/50 dog whistles aren't going to help black communities overcome economic marginalization and racism, it's just going to embolden racists and fuel the ascendancy of the far-right.

There are already programs and policies that are in place to subsidize the poor within the black community.

Where is your evidence that providing more programs and policies that subsidize the poor within the black community will bring down black crime rates?

[Unthinking Majority]

I mean, if the argument is going to hinge on trying to relate to individual officers then my advice to them is to find a more ethical line of work.

Most of them aren't ethical. You have to enforce ethics somehow. People with power will abuse it if left unchecked.

[Donna]

There are already programs and policies that are in place to subsidize the poor within the black community.

There are programs that alleviate some of the effects of poverty. This isn't the same thing as eliminating poverty.

Where is your evidence that providing more programs and policies that subsidize the poor within the black community will bring down black crime rates?

Is this the claim that I made?

[Donna]

Most of them aren't ethical.

Then you shouldn't really be surprised if people don't sympathize with them.

[Saeko]

The insane levels of crime and violence in black communities definitely affects "non-gangsters" and it affects them way more than police violence. You're typing straight out your ass.

In Boston, intraracial violence is concentrated almost exclusively within social networks closely connected to gangs.

https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/defau ... olence.pdf

By contrast, police violence affects the entire black population, and is extremely disproportionate.

[Unthinking Majority]

Then you shouldn't really be surprised if people don't sympathize with them.

People shouldn't sympathize with them, but they should empathize with them. Easier to solve a problem if you know the cause.

[maz]

There are programs that alleviate some of the effects of poverty. This isn't the same thing as eliminating poverty.

Has subidizing the poorest in the black community even brought down a measurable amount of crime since the programs have been in place? Surely you have some data on this?

Also, who pays for these subsidies? Do wealthier whites and other middle class Americans pay for these subsidies? Also, if they do, then why should they pay for them if they receive little to no benefits from them?

Is this the claim that I made?

How much money are you willing to put out of your pocket to end poverty and crime in the black community?

[Donna]

Has subidizing the poorest in the black community even brought down a measurable amount of crime since the programs have been in place? Surely you have some data on this?

Again, I am asking you, is this the claim that I made?

Also, who pays for these subsidies? Do wealthier whites and other middle class Americans pay for these subsidies? Also, if they do, then why should they pay for them if they receive little to no benefits from them?

Which "subsidies" are you referring to?

How much money are you willing to put out of your pocket to end poverty and crime in the black community?

You didn't answer my question.

[maz]

Again, I am asking you, is this the claim that I made?

You said "the only way to confront the issue is by confronting racialized (sic) poverty"

I could have sworn that you meant that you wanted more programs and policies to give more money to marginalized communities to help get the crime levels down.

If so, you provided no data, statistics or other information to support your claim.

Maybe we can give it a day or so for you to come up with it?

[Donna]

You said "the only way to confront the issue is by confronting racialized (sic) poverty"

I could have sworn that you meant that you wanted more programs and policies to give more money to marginalized communities to help get the crime levels down.

If so, you provided no data, statistics or other information to support your claim.

Maybe we can give it a day or so for you to come up with it?

The logical misstep you're making here is immediately conflating the 'confronting [of] racialized poverty' with piecemeal social programs that are designed to alleviate the effects of poverty, not eliminate it. These are two very different things.