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
  • #246
NoahAfrican said:
I never said that higher testosterone levels in blacks was not true, what I said was that I have no reason to believe that it is true or false for that matter.
If you do not accept it despite the countless number of studies confirming it, without a single research countering it, then that would be on you.

Now, given black higher levels of T as being true, you still have not provided the links to the studies that link homicide rates to the T levels of the population.
Read "Race, Evolution, and Behavior" for tons of pages consisting on explaining just this.

My argument is not based upon research study, so I do not need to provide any links.
Yes your argument is completely nonscientific. At least we agree there.

NYC had homicides that reached over 2000 a decade or so ago. The rates now are less than 600 a year.
Source please. And if you want to show an example of a fluctuating homicide rate, you should show one that fluctuates EIGHT times the rate. The rate which separates the white and black homicide rate. A rate which has been as consistent for as long as the United States has kept homicide statistics.

show me the data that says Africa homicide rate is more 70 per 100,000.
Did I just not state South Africa? What makes you think the rest of the African continent is any different?

That statement is born from your own ignorance.
You might want to go back to where you state that I'm relying on research and where you state that you are not. From that statement alone, even you should be able to figure out who the ignorant one is.

Or should I say you are believing what you WANT to believe or what you EXPECT to be true of black people based upon your preconceived notions.
Must you make me repeat it again. I honestly do not care the slightest bit who has higher testosterone level and who does not. What I do care about is science. As a future scientist, I will not ever turn my back on something which I feel is accurate and honest no matter how politically incorrect society wants to deem it. My obligation is for the truth. Nothing else but the truth.

But the argument that you are only believing what you want to, certainly seems true.

The fact that I live as a black person and among black people, I understand black people motives and do not walk among my people in fear, while you, would be a terrified little punk around black just because f your ignorance.
Once again you have far less reliability and credibility than scientists that have the will, money, and resources to explore an issue. Once again, no one with any logic whatsoever, will take your word over a scientific valid done research.

BOOOOOOO….bet I scared yah didn’t I. Hahahahahahahahah
Huh?

your criteria for a nation keeping valid statistics are obvioiusly nation that have white people doing them
My criteria is a country that actually puts the effort to gather statistics. Now can you honestly say this is true for most African countries? The only thing you have proven throughout this whole debate, is of your own prejudice. Constantly assuming what I am and what I'm not.

your bias is glaring.
Incorrect. But once again, can you honestly say "as a black man" you are having absolutely no bias here?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #247
Prometheus said:
Everyone can agree that a precise definition of race can be problematic.
Now we're getting somewhere.

We are all, on this thread, posting to a website called PF, in a section called Social Sciences. As I said in another thread, PF is a forum for the discussion of physics, and other sciences. One of the cornerstones of science today is, in simple terms, the scientific method. Since PF is about science, I personally expect that everyone who posts to the science threads in PF - and that includes Social Sciences - has at least the intention of respecting the scientific method.

As I understand it, one of the key things to do in a scientific enquiry is to define the core terms of your study in a clear, unambiguous, objective fashion (let me know if you would like me to explain why I feel this is essential for the conduct of good science).

'Race' is clearly a core term for this thread, and it has been used with (to me) quite different meanings by different posters, and sometimes by the same poster in different posts. (I would have no problem with this if we were discussing politics).

You, however, would define it so that it loses all of its meaning.
I wasn't aware that I had said 'race' could be defined in any particular way (I have, however, pointed out some problems with others' definitions).
Do you consider that a word such as race is meaningless in describing differences within our species of the people in China that belong to the Han group and black people in east Africa?

If race is not an appropriate word, what word would you use to describe the physical and other differences that apply fairly regularly across these groups?
In the case of 'race', I started a thread, (https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=25340) to examine just this question. I am very happy to continue to discuss it there.
 
  • #248
NoahAfrican said:
Aside from the fact that BV cannot explain, using testosterone theory, why the homicide rates have fluctuated in Detroit and NYC so drastically
Because it hasn't fluctuated drastically. Fluctuating would be EIGHT times a rate. The rate which separates whites from blacks.

Adjust the population and homicides to per 100,000 scale of blacks, the resultant is that Southfield’s murder rate per 100,000 blacks is 12, while Detroit’s murder rate per 100,000 blacks is 52…a mere 400% plus differential. Hmmmmmm….
You're going to attempt to do statistics per 100,000 on a city that doesn't even have a 100,000 population? You need to learn about the errors of small samples. So if one more guy decided to murder his family of 5, the homicide rate is doubled simply because of one guy? Once again, learn about small samples. If you're actually going to use this city as an example, you have to combine the last 15 years at least, to get a reasonable sample.

By the way 12 is still extraordinarily high especially for middle class. Especially when you consider that low class white neighorhoods have a homicide rate of 4-5. You seem to be having trouble closing the gap. It is quite clear you have absolutely no ability to.

Look at the XY graphs at the rate of the black (pure Africans), it is more similar to that of the whites and Asians than it is to the coloureds or mixed blacks.
Do you even happen to know what South Africa's definition of colored is? It does not mean someone of mixed white & black ancestry. Do not use America and Europe's definition of colored. Look up what South Africa means when they say colored. It consists of groups such as Griqua, Cape, Malay, etc. White ancestry in the "colored group" is quite minimal. Also keep in mind that many, if not most, colored of South Africa is of the Muslim faith. Muslims in Europe have homicide rates closer to the African rate which seems to be the case here.

If you want to take this road, you need to use a group that is considered to be white/black mix and white/black mix ONLY. Which is certainly not the case here.

Do these women have higher testosterone levels than white men in America and Europe?
You didn't read this entire thread have you? If you did, you will notice someone else asking this question and me answering it. Once again, the fact that you are trying to insinuate that I believe testosterone is the ONLY factor in determining homicide risk, when I repeatedly told you many times that there are numerous factors, is either showing that you are paying absolutely no attention or simply choosing to not hear anything.

I will tell you again. Try to listen this time so I do not have to repeat myself again in the future. Homicide risk is not based solely on testosterone level. Did you understand so far? It is one of the factors. One of the major factors among numerous factors that overall determines homicide risk. Hope it rang through this time.

I do not expect this to alter BV’s beliefs, because he demonstrates willful ignorance.
You have absolutely no right, none whatsoever, to call anyone ignorant. You have repeatedly shown your ignorance over and over. Especially one where you admit that you are not basing this on any research whatsoever. Although there are numerous comments here that show your ignorance, that one comment is all I need right now to display it.

but have debunked his inference in regards to T levels and homicide rates
Actually you have completely failed. You have failed to show a single example of white homicide rate and black homicide rate closing in ANY region in the entire world.

There are numerous studies that show testosterone level is a risk to a multitude of different characteristics. Including criminal. You have shown no study whatsoever that will counter this.

I just hope that those who take note of the truth of high black homicide rates do not try to explain them with genetic predisposition.
There will always be a large and likely a majority that will hold on to the genetic argument as that is where most of the evidence lies. Now if new evidence happens to surface in the future that completely refutes all this evidence, then of course the perspective will change. But I sense that the evidence will be mounting as time goes by.

However, BV theories do not help but only hurt.
Quite the contrary. Better understanding, better knowledge of the situation can only bring out the proper ways to fix the problem. Trying to fix the situation without knowing the problem would be like trying to fix a car without knowing what's wrong with it.

If you are a person who wants to believe that these rates are directly linked to genetic make up and predisposition, you are racist because there is no studies that have proven such.
Calling people names, doesn't change the truth, doesn't change the facts, doesn't change reality. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that there are people that accept the genetic argument from it's evidence, NOT from any personal feelings or thoughts of that individual, only shows your own bigotry.

Even if there were such studies, examples such as the discrepancies between Southfield and Detroit Michigan black homicide rates failed to be explained by genetics.
I believe I already addressed this.

I think that the fallacy that people like BV think they can perpetrate is the belief that “reasoning” black inferiority
Who says I believe blacks are inferior? You need to stop with your prejudice, your lies, and your slander.

Racist people can have no emotional dislike for another race or intentions on hurting, yet feel their own race is superior, in behavior and performance due to genetic predisposition.
And all these researches, such as the book "Race, Evolution, and Behavior" who was written by a white person, just simply likes to state that East Asians are the lowest risk for crime? And that Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQ? Neither of which group he belongs to? And whose conclusions have been reaffirmed by countless other academics?

its racist when the argument fails to be supported in the practical field of application.
Since it's well supported I guess we don't have a problem.

BV is one of the misguided humans.
Quite the contrary. It is you.

I cannot speak towards his intentions, but his reasoning and effect is indeed racist.
Incorrect. It is science.

I know many good white folks and unfortunately it is people like you who degrade the reputation of whites to the degree that minorities are always complaining about your race.
Did I ever state that I was white? Hmm another prejudged statement.

you just need to get it the hell out of here.
Hey I was here first. And I was doing fine and dandy before you were here and I'll be doing fine and dandy after you leave.
 
Last edited:
  • #249
Nereid said:
So, what race is Tiger Woods?
Tiger Woods would be Black, Asian, White, and Native American. So he would be a mixture of races.
 
  • #250
On a side note, I just wanted to acknowledge that this is the most successful thread in terms of replies and views in this forum. Closing in at 250 replies and 4,450+ views. Only a race topic can this happen. :smile:
 
  • #251
donnie said:
Isn't there also a possibility that the simplest explanation is the best explanation? Like the fact that it just comes down to sheer numbers, that give the impression of high statistics?One also needs to consider that the social relationship in respect of the proximity of numbers, i.e. people staying in overpopulated areas aggravate the onset of 'fighting for personal space'. Nature somehow takes over in protecting personal space. Stood in a crowded bus or subway lately? How did you feel after 10 minutes? Could you actually last that long with all that body pressure, sight and smell around you?
I am willing to take social factors into consideration. However, what I will not do as of yet, is dismiss the genetic factor completely where there is so much ample evidence for it.
 
  • #252
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH….

As I said, I do not expect to alter BV ingrained opining, which he erroneously thinks is scientific. I am more concerned with those whites who are on the fence in regards to issues of race. BV has totally FAILED to prove his case. The Case study that I gave CLEARLY repudiates the application of this racist theory. He then says that Southfield black population is too small to make it valid. Southfield has about 40,000 African Americans. The unemployment rate for 280 million American are figures that come out every month from the our government is actually a sampling from ONLY 50,0000 households, why cannot. Now….get this…he is the one who just argued the validity of statistical sampling in the testosterone study that he used to extrapolate a truth for the entire black population. Hahahahahahahahahaha…. Also, never mind the fact that Southfield borders Detroit and that Detroit residents often commit crimes, such as car jacking, robbery and murder in easier suburban targets….Like Southfield. My good friends brother (the lord rest their souls), was killed in Southfield about 10 years ago in an Armored truck robber committed by a Detroit resident.

I don’t have anymore time to waste on ignorance. If the rest of the whites viewing and reading these post cannot see the glaring fallacy of BV’s argument…maybe most of you too deserve the label of racist…which you hate to have linked to you. As the old adage goes…the truth HURTS

This conversation has truly been Amerikkkan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #253
I'm going to close this now.

*edit* people want to know why the thread is closed: everyone had the chance to express their opinion, when a thread degrades to one-sentence-statements and personal remarks and becomes heated, there is a reason to close it.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

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