Homicide Statistics by Race & Gender

In summary: Latvia', it mentions 'Latvians', 'Russians', and others, but for Singapore it mentions 'Chinese', 'Indian', and others, and for Andorra it mentions 'Spanish', 'French', and others.- 'Suicide' is mentioned, but is not subdivided into 'murders' and 'manslaughters'.- 'serious fraud' is mentioned, but is not subdivided into 'financial crimes' and 'other crimes'.I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to get at here.(my emphasis).I am trying to understand the relevance of the US stats you quoted to the other ~95% of the people in the world. Your answer
  • #1
BlackVision
28
1
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/orace.gif [Broken]

Homicide Offense Rate by Race (1976-2000):

White 5.1 per 100,000
Blacks 39.3 per 100,000
Others: 5.2 per 100,000

Homicide Victim Rate by Race: (1976-2000):

Whites: 5.0 per 100,000
Blacks: 31.9 per 100,000
Others: 4.9 per 100,000

Homicide Rate by Gender:

Male: 16.7 per 100,000
Female: 2.2 per 100,000

Source: US Department of Justice
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/hmrt.htm#longterm [Broken]



Homicide Rate by Age Group and Gender (2000):

Males. Age 14-17:

Whites: 7.9 per 100,000
Blacks: 62.8 per 100,000

Males. Age 18-24:

Whites: 23.9 per 100,000
Blacks: 205.8 per 100,000

Males. Age 25+:

Whites: 5.3 per 100,000
Blacks: 39.2 per 100,000



Females. Age 14-17:

Whites: 1.0 per 100,000
Blacks: 4.9 per 100,000

Females. Age 18-24:

Whites: 1.8 per 100,000
Blacks: 12.6 per 100,000

Females. Age 25+:

Whites: 0.8 per 100,000
Blacks: 4.6 per 100,000

Source: US Department of Justice
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/oarstab.htm [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Interesting article on this subject. Note that the author of this article is black.

Black Community Must Rise Up Against Crime

By Walter E. Williams

Professors Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom have just published ''America in Black and White.'' Its discussion of race is far more level-headed and useful than anything the president or his recently appointed commission on race has said or is likely to say. The Thernstroms' 700-page volume covers race from the Jim Crow days right up to California's Proposition 209, but I want to highlight their chapter on crime.

Most violent crime in our country is committed by blacks. According to U.S. Department of Justice statistics, blacks commit 54 percent of murders, 42 percent of forcible rapes, 59 percent of robberies and 38 percent of aggravated assaults. For the most part, the victims are black. Ninety-three percent of murdered blacks were murdered by a black.

Rest of article here:
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_anchdn-voice.htm [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
I guess these statistics refer to the USA, not China, India, or Belize.

DarkVision, do you have comparable figures for serious fraud, etc (the kind of crimes which were committed in the WorldCom, Enron etc scandals)?

Do you know if there is any move to reclassify some of the suicides which followed the massive destruction of value by the senior managers in such companies (e.g. when a retiree's entire life savings - held in company stock, as mandated by the company - is wiped out) as murder or manslaughter?
 
  • #4
Nereid said:
I guess these statistics refer to the USA, not China, India, or Belize.
Yeah these are American statistics but the same racial gaps exists in every country. Canada, United Kingdom, Australia.


Here's statistics for the UK:

"The incarceration rate per 100,000 population in England and Wales was, 176 for whites. 150 for asians. 1,249 for blacks"
 
  • #5
BlackVision said:
Yeah these are American statistics but the same racial gaps exists in every country. Canada, United Kingdom, Australia.
(my emphasis). The 'races' are (per BlackVision): "Whites" (or "whites"), "Blacks" (or "blacks"), "Others", and (for the UK) "asians". How many of each 'race' are there in the following "countries" (from your list, in another post):
Latvia
Singapore
Andorra
Estonia
San Marino
Macau
Hong Kong
Guernsey
Liechtenstein
St Helena
Jersey
Gibralta
Isle of Man
Finland
China
BVI
Monaco
Seychelles
Montserrat
Caymans
Iceland
Mauritius
Christmas Island
Svalbad
"The incarceration rate per 100,000 population in England and Wales was, 176 for whites. 150 for asians. 1,249 for blacks"
And how does 'the incarceration rate' relate to homicides?
 
  • #6
Nereid said:
(my emphasis). The 'races' are (per BlackVision): "Whites" (or "whites"), "Blacks" (or "blacks"), "Others", and (for the UK) "asians". How many of each 'race' are there in the following "countries" (from your list, in another post):
Latvia
Singapore
Andorra
Estonia
San Marino
Macau
Hong Kong
Guernsey
Liechtenstein
St Helena
Jersey
Gibralta
Isle of Man
Finland
China
BVI
Monaco
Seychelles
Montserrat
Caymans
Iceland
Mauritius
Christmas Island
Svalbad

The ethnic makeup of each country can be found at CIA's World Factbook. Here: http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html [Broken]

But I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to get at here.

And how does 'the incarceration rate' relate to homicides?
Well overall crime rate I suppose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #7
Any statistics in terms of socio-economic class?
 
  • #8
BlackVision said:
Yeah these are American statistics but the same racial gaps exists in every country.
Nereid said:
The 'races' are (per BlackVision): "Whites" (or "whites"), "Blacks" (or "blacks"), "Others", and (for the UK) "asians". How many of each 'race' are there in the following "countries"
BlackVision said:
The ethnic makeup of each country can be found at CIA's World Factbook. Here: http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html [Broken]

But I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to get at here.
(my emphasis)I am trying to understand the relevance of the US stats you quoted to the other ~95% of the people in the world. Your answer to my first question was to say that "the same racial gaps exists in every country", so I was curious as to what these 'racial gaps' which exist in 'every country' are.

From the source you cite I learned that:
- 'country' seems to be used to mean several different things, and has a strong 'US government policy' flavour (which isn't really surprising, but does require anyone who wants to engage in serious discussion using it as a source to openly acknowledge its limitations)
- 'race' is not used as a demographic category
- 'ethnic groups' is used, but seems to have a highly variable meaning. E.g. for
China: "Han Chinese, Zhuang, Uygur, Hui, Yi, Tibetan, Miao, Manchu, Mongol, Buyi, Korean, and other nationalities"
India: "Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Mongoloid and other"
US: "white, black, Asian, Amerindian and Alaska native, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander, other"
Nigeria: "Nigeria, which is Africa's most populous country, is composed of more than 250 ethnic groups; the following are the most populous and politically influential: Hausa and Fulani, Yoruba, Igbo (Ibo), Ijaw, Kanuri, Ibibio , Tiv"
Brazil: "white (includes Portuguese, German, Italian, Spanish, Polish), mixed white and black, black, other (includes Japanese, Arab, Amerindian)"
UK: "English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, Ulster, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other"
Germany: "German, Turkish, other (made up largely of Serbo-Croatian, Italian, Russian, Greek, Polish, Spanish)"

So, what did you mean when you said "the same racial gaps exists in every country"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
The question also is how large the bias is against certain racial groups, are certain groups watched more closely and thus caught at a higher rate than others?
 
  • #10
Just a comment from Norway:
The "racial" crime component seems superficial, at best.
In contemporary Norway, the following ethnic groups are somewhat overrepresented in certain crime areas:
Ex-Yugoslavians/Albanians, Pakistanis, Somalians, Vietnamese.

The common denominator between all these diverse groups is that they are also heavily overrepresented in the lower socioeconomic classes.

To give a certain historical view on the matter:
Up to the 1950's/1960's, the aboriginal population in Northern Norway (Lapplanders/Samii a completely different "race" than Norwegians at large), was one of the primary groups with highest crime rates.
It was also one of the poorest.
Today, the economic distinction between Lapplanders and "Norwegians" is largely gone;
and so has the differential crime rates..
 
  • #11
Nereid said:
(my emphasis)I am trying to understand the relevance of the US stats you quoted to the other ~95% of the people in the world. Your answer to my first question was to say that "the same racial gaps exists in every country", so I was curious as to what these 'racial gaps' which exist in 'every country' are.

Melting pot countries that have a variety of different races. USA, Canada, Australia, are melting pot countries. Several European countries have also become melting pot countries such as UK, Germany, etc. In countries, where enough of a ethnic group exists to do such a study, these gaps exist and are consistent in every country.

In every country, blacks tend to be far over represented in the crime rate, over 8 times or more of the white rate. Asian crime rate tend to be slightly lower than the white rate. These are consistent in every country.
 
  • #12
Race, homicide, and the Philippines

BlackVision said:
Asian crime rate tend to be slightly lower than the white rate. These are consistent in every country.
The Philippines is number six on this International Homicide Rate Table, and has a homicide rate almost three times that of the United States.
 
  • #13
hitssquad said:
The Philippines is number six on this International Homicide Rate Table, and has a homicide rate almost three times that of the United States.
I suppose I should of been more specific and said Far East Asians. China, Korea, Japanese.

The Middle East is Caucasian and have an extraordinarily high crime rate as well.

Southeast Asians wouldn't be purebreed Mongoloids. They have a mixing with the Melanesian race. Middle East is also not purebreed Caucasians and have mixing with African.

Also you need to compare with the same environment. Meaning different races in the SAME country. That's why I used melting pot countries as examples. USA, Canada, UK, etc.

P.S. And Philippines is not 6th overall. There are only 40 countries on that list. There are over 200 countries in the world. Not to mention on this list, they compare several different years. You can't compare 1991 to 1994 to 1997.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
BlackVision said:
Melting pot countries that have a variety of different races. USA, Canada, Australia, are melting pot countries. Several European countries have also become melting pot countries such as UK, Germany, etc. In countries, where enough of a ethnic group exists to do such a study, these gaps exist and are consistent in every country.

In every country, blacks tend to be far over represented in the crime rate, over 8 times or more of the white rate. Asian crime rate tend to be slightly lower than the white rate. These are consistent in every country.
Evidence? Or simply unsubstantiated racist propoganda?
 
  • #15
Nereid said:
Evidence? Or simply unsubstantiated racist propoganda?
Well there certainly is a trend. After noticing the trend, you have to ask why.
 
  • #16
BlackVision said:
I suppose I should of been more specific and said Far East Asians. China, Korea, Japanese.

The Middle East is Caucasian and have an extraordinarily high crime rate as well.

Southeast Asians wouldn't be purebreed Mongoloids. They have a mixing with the Melanesian race. Middle East is also not purebreed Caucasians and have mixing with African.
From the link which hitssquad provided, selections (country and homicide rate (deaths per 100k)):
Colombia: 64.6
Estonia: 28.21
Taiwan: 8.12 (in east Asia last time I looked)
US: 5.7
Italy: 2.25
Canada: 2.16
Australia: 1.86
S Korea: 1.62
England/Wales: 1.41
Germany: 1.17
Kuwait: 1.01

Maybe Colombia and Estonia have recently suffered a huge influx of Middle East Caucasians? Or the US is overflowing with Taiwanese gangsters?
 
  • #17
Nereid said:
From the link which hitssquad provided, selections (country and homicide rate (deaths per 100k)):
Colombia: 64.6
Estonia: 28.21
Taiwan: 8.12 (in east Asia last time I looked)
US: 5.7
Italy: 2.25
Canada: 2.16
Australia: 1.86
S Korea: 1.62
England/Wales: 1.41
Germany: 1.17
Kuwait: 1.01

Maybe Colombia and Estonia have recently suffered a huge influx of Middle East Caucasians? Or the US is overflowing with Taiwanese gangsters?
I don't think you can compare the political and economical structure of Taiwan to America. Taiwanese in America would have a lower crime rate than Whites.

Estonia is a recovering communism country, I'm sure that has an effect.

But the point was that in every melting pot country. (USA, Canada, UK, etc) Every country that has a mix of different ethnic races. The asian, white, black holds. With a small gap between asian and whites and a huge one between whites and blacks. Unless you can name a country where this doesn't hold true.

Also these aren't the most accurate statistics for country comparisions I've seen.
 
  • #18
BlackVision said:
I don't think you can compare the political and economical structure of Taiwan to America. Taiwanese in America would have a lower crime rate than Whites.
Evidence?

Estonia is a recovering communism [sic] country, I'm sure that has an effect.
Maybe we could make up an 'excuse' for every country which doesn't fit any proposed effect?

But the point was that in every melting pot country. (USA, Canada, UK, etc) Every country that has a mix of different ethnic races. The asian, white, black holds. With a small gap between asian and whites and a huge one between whites and blacks. Unless you can name a country where this doesn't hold true.
So are we talking about 'races', 'ethnic groups', or 'ethnic races'? Maybe you'd like to propose a definition so that we can have a consistent discussion? In particular, especially given the inconsistency and confusion in your previous posts, what are 'asian', 'black' and 'white'?

In terms of a discussion, your suggestion is the classic debating technique of 'burden shifting': it's *your assertion* that these gaps exist, so the burden is upon *you* to provide evidence to support your claim. This is how it works in astronomy (the area of science I'm most familiar with), and I'm sure in all the sciences.
Also these aren't the most accurate statistics for country comparisions I've seen.
Please supply better ones then.
 
  • #19
BlackVision said:
Well there certainly is a trend. After noticing the trend, you have to ask why.
What trend?

A statement without supporting evidence is interesting; a racist claim without supporting evidence is likely to attract heated responses, but little in the way of informed debate.
 
  • #20
Ok first off you would have to equalize the environment. Comparing America to Russia does not work. My original point was that gaps exist WITHIN a country. I never brought this country to country comparision into the debate. Mainly cause the political and economical structure from country to country is excessively drastic to warrant any fair comparison. So I don't have a prove a thing in this retrospect.

White is anyone of the Caucasian race. This does include the Middle East and this group will inflate the score if there's a heavy surplus of them. (UK groups Middle East with Asian however) Asian is Far East and the Southeast Race. The Southeast will inflate the score. Black is the Sub-Sahara race. From what I know there isn't a particular Sub-Sahara group that will inflate the score and is quite even across the board.

You're right the burden is on me to support evidence for the gap and I did just that. Comparison of white, asian, blacks in countries that have these volumes. I provided US and United Kingdom. The same gap exists in Australia, Canada, and other countries that have volumes of these races. I have seen statistics for these countries before and will post them once I find them again. But like i said WITHIN a country, the gaps are very consistent.
 
  • #21
http://www.hometown.aol.com/pawnseek45/englandcrime.jpg [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #22
BlackVision said:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/orace.gif [Broken]

Homicide Offense Rate by Race (1976-2000):

White 5.1 per 100,000
Blacks 39.3 per 100,000
Others: 5.2 per 100,000

Homicide Victim Rate by Race: (1976-2000):

Whites: 5.0 per 100,000
Blacks: 31.9 per 100,000
Others: 4.9 per 100,000

Homicide Rate by Gender:

Male: 16.7 per 100,000
Female: 2.2 per 100,000

Source: US Department of Justice
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/hmrt.htm#longterm [Broken]

How exactly are these statistics calculated? Things don't add up at all. First, there are more offenders than victims. How do you get more people committing homicide than who have been killed, especially when you factor in multiple-homicides, serial or repeat offenders, and unsolved crimes?

Second, why is the total rate of homicide by race adding up to 49.6 per 100,000, but when broken down by sex, only adds up to 18.0 per 100,000. That's 30.7 homicides per 100,000 not accounted for as committed by either men or women...do we have a third sex I don't know about?

The other problem with these sorts of statistics is they are based on conviction rates. If someone isn't proven to have committed homicide, then they can't be included in the stats. So, this could simply reflect a societal bias toward arresting and convicting blacks over whites or asians.

What happens if you break down homicide rate by local population density and do a covariate analysis of population density by race? Seems that thanks to government housing projects of a few decades ago, crowded inner-cities are highly populated by blacks. The greater the population density in an area, the greater the likelihood of conflict escalating to violence. Of the whites committing homicide (and being convicted), how many of them live in the same type of environment? I don't have stats, I'm just asking, because I'd bet that a white person growing up in an inner city would have just as much likelihood as a black person to commit a violent crime, or any crime, whereas a black person growing up in a suburban, upscale neighborhood is going to have a much decreased likelihood of committing a violent crime, comparable to the rate of whites in the same neighborhood.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
Wow, we're at the end of page two already talking about heavy racial matters and not a single fallacy attack yet about the high political incorrectness.

BTW there are no human races.
 
  • #24
It occurred to me that my confusion over those stats is that the numbers are percentages within each population, so the 5.1 homicides per 100,000 means 5.1 whites commit homicides out of every 100,000 whites, not out of every 100,000 people living in the US.

The latter part of my questions, regarding the relationship between population density, more people to bump into in a day, so more chance for conflict and for that conflict to escalate to violence, is something I still would like to see answered. That certainly is something that can also be addressed across more countries, looking at homicide rates based on population density, as my prediction is that density is more predictive of homicide rates than the races comprising that population.
 
  • #25
I thought this question deserved a response:
0TheSwerve0 said:
Any statistics in terms of socio-economic class?
Its (and the nature of the cause/effect relationship) is critical.
 
  • #26
Moonbear said:
How exactly are these statistics calculated? Things don't add up at all. First, there are more offenders than victims. How do you get more people committing homicide than who have been killed, especially when you factor in multiple-homicides, serial or repeat offenders, and unsolved crimes?
Very often times multiple people are charged for 1 homicide. One that gets 1st degree, another that gets 2nd degree for aiding it, etc etc.

Second, why is the total rate of homicide by race adding up to 49.6 per 100,000, but when broken down by sex, only adds up to 18.0 per 100,000. That's 30.7 homicides per 100,000 not accounted for as committed by either men or women...do we have a third sex I don't know about?
These are AVERAGE statistics per 100,000 population. Since it's 16.7 per 100,000 for men and 2.2 per 100,000 for women, the average becomes roughly 9.45 per 100,000.

The other problem with these sorts of statistics is they are based on conviction rates. If someone isn't proven to have committed homicide, then they can't be included in the stats. So, this could simply reflect a societal bias toward arresting and convicting blacks over whites or asians.
The bias argument tends to fail when the victim homicide rate is close to identical to the offender's homicide rate.

What happens if you break down homicide rate by local population density and do a covariate analysis of population density by race? Seems that thanks to government housing projects of a few decades ago, crowded inner-cities are highly populated by blacks. The greater the population density in an area, the greater the likelihood of conflict escalating to violence. Of the whites committing homicide (and being convicted), how many of them live in the same type of environment? I don't have stats, I'm just asking, because I'd bet that a white person growing up in an inner city would have just as much likelihood as a black person to commit a violent crime, or any crime, whereas a black person growing up in a suburban, upscale neighborhood is going to have a much decreased likelihood of committing a violent crime, comparable to the rate of whites in the same neighborhood.

New Orleans:
Population: 484,674

Ethnicity:
White: 27%
Black: 67%
Hispanic: 3%
Asian 2%

Homicide rate: 53.3 per 100,000


Washington DC
Population: 572,059

Ethnicity:
White: 27.8%
Black: 60%
Hispanic: 7.9%
Asian: 2.7%

Homicide Rate: 45.82 per 100,000



Seattle:
Population: 563,374

Ethnicity:
White: 68%
Black: 8%
Hispanic: 5%
Asian: 13%

Homicide rate: 4.43 per 100,000


Portland:
Population: 529,121

Ethnicity:
White: 75%
Black: 7%
Hispanic: 7%
Asian: 6%

Homicide rate: 4.34 per 100,000

Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/metro/20030616-093406-7084r.htm
http://statestats.com/
 
  • #27
Testosterone and threshold for violence

Moonbear said:
I'd bet that a white person growing up in an inner city would have just as much likelihood as a black person to commit a violent crime, or any crime, whereas a black person growing up in a suburban, upscale neighborhood is going to have a much decreased likelihood of committing a violent crime, comparable to the rate of whites in the same neighborhood.
IIRC, Lynn and Rushton have proposed that:

  1. Testosterone level correlates inversely with threshold for violence

  2. Blacks tend to have higher testosterone levels than Whites

And, on this point, it is interesting to note that males growing up in the same neighborhoods as females, virtually everywhere, tend to suffer higher rates of commission of violent crimes.
 
  • #28
BlackVision said:
http://www.hometown.aol.com/pawnseek45/englandcrime.jpg [Broken]
Some data at last!

Some questions:
- what has this data got to do with homocides? At first glance it seems to be the numbers of people, per 100k population, who are in prison (and surely not everyone in prison in the UK is there for one of the crimes called 'homocide'!)
- has the data been analysed for the age effect? In DarkVision's post at the start of this thread, there is clearly a strong age effect: young men appear to have a far, far higher incidence of homocide than other groups. If the various groups in DarkVision's posted UK data have significantly different age (or sex) structures, then direct comparison is not very interesting
- how do 'Black Caribbean', 'Black African' and 'Black Other' relate to 'black' in DarkVision's US data? My guess is, 'only tenuously', given the very different history of, and reasons for, 'black immigration' into the US and UK.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
BlackVision said:
White is anyone of the Caucasian race. This does include the Middle East and this group will inflate the score if there's a heavy surplus of them. (UK groups Middle East with Asian however) Asian is Far East and the Southeast Race. The Southeast will inflate the score. Black is the Sub-Sahara race. From what I know there isn't a particular Sub-Sahara group that will inflate the score and is quite even across the board.
What is 'the Caucasian race'? 'Far East and the Southeast Race'? 'Sub-Sahara race'?

You may not have attempted to provide a comprehensive set of such (R)races, but in case you did, to which do the original inhabitants of the following islands and continents belong?
- New Guinea
- Tasmania
- New Zealand
- Taiwan
- Hawaii
- North America
- South America
You're right the burden is on me to support evidence for the gap and I did just that. Comparison of white, asian, blacks in countries that have these volumes. I provided US and United Kingdom. The same gap exists in Australia, Canada, and other countries that have volumes of these races. I have seen statistics for these countries before and will post them once I find them again. But like i said WITHIN a country, the gaps are very consistent.
Here is the list of 'Ethnic groups' for Canada and Australia (from the source you provided); please identify which belong to which '(R)race':
Canada: "British Isles origin, French origin, other European, Amerindian, other, mostly Asian, African, Arab, mixed background"
Australia: "Caucasian, Asian, aboriginal and other"

What 'other countries' have 'volumes of these races'?
 
  • #30
hitssquad said:
IIRC, Lynn and Rushton have proposed that:

  1. Testosterone level correlates inversely with threshold for violence

  2. Blacks tend to have higher testosterone levels than Whites

And, on this point, it is interesting to note that males growing up in the same neighborhoods as females, virtually everywhere, tend to suffer higher rates of commission of violent crimes.
Easy enough to test hitssquad, what is the relationship between testosterone level and violence in females?

Also, why is this relevant? I mean, is there a tight, well-documented relationship between violence threshholds and homocide (in the US)?
 
  • #31
What is 'homicide'?

DarkVision began this thread with data on 'homicide', and later mentioned that it refers to the US only. DarkVision later seemed to talk (inconsistently) about crime, incarceration, and homicide.

So I'm wondering, to what extent is 'homicide' itself a sociological phenomenon? I mean, when a US Marine kills an Iraqi 'soldier' or an Afghan 'terrorist', is he committing 'homicide'? What about the people who executed Timothy McVeigh, did they commit 'homicide'? How about doctors whose sloppiness or inattention results in the death of the patient? The drunk whose car he is driving kills a cyclist? And what are we to call the senior managers of tobacco companies who continued to enrich themselves by 'extending the market' for their products, knowing full well that their activities would inevitably result in the deaths of millions?
 
Last edited:
  • #32
And does "homocide" mean killing homosexuals, as it seems to? Homicide, on the other hand is defined (slightly differently) in the laws of every state of the US and the Federal code, and in the codes of all the nation states. When they report homicides, they are presumably using the definitions in their codes. This means a slightly various population of course, since what is a homicide over here might not be over there and vice versa.
 
  • #33
Good points selfAdjoint. IIRC, there was a case in the US a few years ago ... some mine (or company) owner (or manager) was convicted of murder ... he (it was a 'he', don't know if white, black, or purple) was responsible for allowing (forcing?) some of his employees to work in conditions that he knew were unsafe (deadly?), and at least one died. Analogous 'industrial accidents' in the UK apparently result in mere loss of employment (I recall a particularly nasty case a few years ago involving a malfunctioning industrial oven), not even jail time.

Similarly, in China some time ago, there was a horrifying case of babies being killed through the inattention of their carers ... those responsible who didn't commit suicide were executed ... for murder. If there were such a case in the UK, or anywhere in Europe, I doubt that murder charges would even be laid, let alone proven in a court of law.

And we haven't even started to look at infanticide, 'honour killing', the death of young wives in all-to-frequent 'kitchen accidents' (look up 'dowry'), ...
 
  • #34
In this article:

Gapstur SM, Gann PH, Kopp P, Colangelo L, Longcope C, Liu K. Serum androgen concentrations in young men: a longitudinal analysis of associations with age, obesity, and race. The CARDIA male hormone study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Oct;11(10 Pt 1):1041-7.

The authors conclude:

"Challenging the concept of differences in testosterone levels between black and white men, our results also indicate no differences in serum testosterone or SHBG concentrations after adjustment for age, BMI, and waist circumference."

Also, when I was asking about population density, I didn't mean the whole city, I meant in the "neighborhoods" where the homicides are being committed. Every city has diversity of neighborhoods and different population densities associated with those neighborhoods. I happen to live in a more suburban part of a city with about a 50/50 black/white ratio (not to many other races or ethnicities represented in my neighborhood...a few, but negligible), and it's a VERY safe neighborhood. On the other hand, there is a section of the city where there are lots of apartments, no backyards for the kids to play in, if you looked at the number of people/acre (or some other convenient measure of property size), it would be much higher than my neighborhood. There also happens to be much higher crime rates in that area...the sort of place I wouldn't walk alone at night, and maybe not in the daylight either. Even in the part of the city where I live, there is an apartment complex fairly close to my neighborhood, similar black/white ratio there, yet much higher crime rates. Now, this could be a socioeconomic issue, that poorer people live in apartments and the relative poverty contributes toward tendencies to commit crimes, or it could be a population density issue...too many neighbors, no place to go to get some space, more likely to run into someone you're not going to get along with.

BlackVision, it's interesting that you don't understand the statistics you are using to support your claims. Just two posts after my first one, I pointed out that I realized my error in understanding the crime rates, yet your post introduces a whole new set of errors. You can't take the rate for men and the rate for women and average them together to get the rate for the population!

Nereid, while I have my suspicions of BlackVision's agenda in presenting these statistics, I'm not opposed to him/her limiting the discussion to racial differences in the U.S., for the very reasons you're pointing out...there are different societal definitions of homicide in every country, as well as different cultural pressures. I don't believe that the higher rate of homicide convictions for blacks is just because they are black, but due to problems in our own society in the environment in which blacks live and the way they are treated. If we are going to identify and address these problems, we need to first acknowledge they exist. The data are not in question, the interpretation is.
 
  • #35
DarkVision began this thread with data on 'homicide', and later mentioned that it refers to the US only. DarkVision later seemed to talk (inconsistently) about crime, incarceration, and homicide.

Ok why do certain people consistently try to misinterpret what I'm saying. Yes it originally started out with homicide but it's crime in general. Notice right after that post, I quoted an article, which lists rape and robbery statistics that correspend to the homicide rate of blacks.

And here is my one and ONLY point. The asian, white, and black gaps are consistent WITHIN any country that has enough of each of these populations in order to conduct a study. Now if you feel I am wrong about this, you may name a country in this world where this does not hold true. Again you need to pick a country that actually has these populations and not a homogeneous one.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
99
Views
76K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
Back
Top