Harrekin
Well-Known Member
"Buys a new IP"?
He probably just clicked "change IP" on Tor, or is using a free proxy or 100 other effortless ways to do it.
Why you so stalker tho?
If You Were a White Cop In America Today...
- Thread starter H.M. Murdoch
- Start date
He probably just clicked "change IP" on Tor, or is using a free proxy or 100 other effortless ways to do it.
Why you so stalker tho?
Nutes and Nugs
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Clearly, but seriously, moar troll and less stalking dude.
earnest_voice
Well-Known Member
trolling = stalking & raping
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
your trolling has been for shit lately too. no offense.
at least i got echelon to admit that he is a child raping pedo tonight. what have you done lately?
Ra$p0tin
Well-Known Member
I bet the stats came from his favorite web site. Is it Stormfront or something like that?
H.M. Murdoch
Well-Known Member
Buck, those statistics were formulated way BEFORE the Zimmerman and Ferguson incidents. They mean NOTHING in the context of this thread.probably not.
You just throw bullshit at facts and expect the bullshit to win. Yet it never does.
vostok
Well-Known Member
If You Were a White Cop In America Today...
I would have just recently retired from 30 years of dedicated duty in the drugs squad, arresting dudes all over the place and skimming my 30% cut, although if I were young enough I like to join the DEA ..for some serious promotion ...and skim, skim...and some more SKIM! ..lol
I would have just recently retired from 30 years of dedicated duty in the drugs squad, arresting dudes all over the place and skimming my 30% cut, although if I were young enough I like to join the DEA ..for some serious promotion ...and skim, skim...and some more SKIM! ..lol
theexpress
Well-Known Member
lol id be on yhe same shit. and if you get caught fuckit you go to an easy prison just for dirty cops. cuzz if not youd get fucked up da ass and stabbed with toothbrush handles
vostok
Well-Known Member
Toothbrush Handles,...you get free tooth brushed in usa prisons ....LOL .......Luxury ...lol LUXURY!
Fugit! ...I might just stay in and see if a good strong REPUBLICAN host can cancel this bullshit legalizing mary jane ...then I can make some serious cash ...Cause then I got all them names and addresses too ...for that 50% bonus come Christmas ...LOL!!!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
blacks are four times more likely than whites to be the victim of a cop's "justifiable homicide".
you are so wrong and deluded about reality that it hurts.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
Speaking of reality, blacks commit 8 times more crime against whites, than whites commit on blacks.
Have another drink, cupcake
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
blacks commit less crimes against whites than random chance would dictate.
but nice job at trying to act like you understand stats out of the book 'color of crime' penned by white supremacist jared taylor, it's definitely an improvement from when you were citing stats penned by holocaust denier victor thorn, washere.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
this is for you @jahbrudda
Stoking Fears About Interracial Crime — A Look at How Racists Do Math
Next, Taylor claims that most victims of black violent crime are white, and thus, that blacks are violently targeting whites. Furthermore, since only a small share of the victims of white criminals are black (only 4.4 percent in 2002, for example), this means that blacks are far more of a threat to whites than vice-versa. But there are several problems with these claims.
To begin with, the white victim totals in the Justice Department’s victimization data include those termed Hispanic by the Census, since nine in ten Latino/as are considered racially white by government record-keepers. Since Latinos and Latinas tend to live closer to blacks than non-Hispanic whites, this means that many “white” victims of “black crime” are Latino or Latina, and that in any given year, the majority of black crime victims would be people of color, not whites.
But even if we compute the white totals as Taylor does, without breaking out Hispanic victims of “black crime,” his position is without merit. In 2002, whites, including Latinos, were about 81.5 percent of the population (3). That same year, whites (including Latinos) were 51 percent of the victims of violent crimes committed by blacks, meaning that whites were victimized by blacks less often than would have been expected by random chance, given the extent to which whites were available to be victimized (4).
As for the claim that blacks victimize whites at rates that are far higher than the reverse, though true, this statistic is meaningless, for a few obvious but overlooked reasons, first among them the simple truth that if whites are more available as potential victims, we would naturally expect black criminals to victimize whites more often than white criminals would victimize blacks. Examining data from 2002, there were indeed 4.5 times more black-on-white violent crimes than the reverse (5). While this may seem to support Taylor’s position, it actually destroys it, because the interracial crime gap, though seemingly large, is smaller than random chance would have predicted. The critical factor ignored by Taylor is the extent to which whites and blacks encounter each other in the first place. Because of ongoing racial isolation and de facto segregation, the two group’s members do not encounter one another at rates commensurate with their shares of the population: a fact that literally torpedoes the claims in The Color of Crime.
Stoking Fears About Interracial Crime — A Look at How Racists Do Math
Next, Taylor claims that most victims of black violent crime are white, and thus, that blacks are violently targeting whites. Furthermore, since only a small share of the victims of white criminals are black (only 4.4 percent in 2002, for example), this means that blacks are far more of a threat to whites than vice-versa. But there are several problems with these claims.
To begin with, the white victim totals in the Justice Department’s victimization data include those termed Hispanic by the Census, since nine in ten Latino/as are considered racially white by government record-keepers. Since Latinos and Latinas tend to live closer to blacks than non-Hispanic whites, this means that many “white” victims of “black crime” are Latino or Latina, and that in any given year, the majority of black crime victims would be people of color, not whites.
But even if we compute the white totals as Taylor does, without breaking out Hispanic victims of “black crime,” his position is without merit. In 2002, whites, including Latinos, were about 81.5 percent of the population (3). That same year, whites (including Latinos) were 51 percent of the victims of violent crimes committed by blacks, meaning that whites were victimized by blacks less often than would have been expected by random chance, given the extent to which whites were available to be victimized (4).
As for the claim that blacks victimize whites at rates that are far higher than the reverse, though true, this statistic is meaningless, for a few obvious but overlooked reasons, first among them the simple truth that if whites are more available as potential victims, we would naturally expect black criminals to victimize whites more often than white criminals would victimize blacks. Examining data from 2002, there were indeed 4.5 times more black-on-white violent crimes than the reverse (5). While this may seem to support Taylor’s position, it actually destroys it, because the interracial crime gap, though seemingly large, is smaller than random chance would have predicted. The critical factor ignored by Taylor is the extent to which whites and blacks encounter each other in the first place. Because of ongoing racial isolation and de facto segregation, the two group’s members do not encounter one another at rates commensurate with their shares of the population: a fact that literally torpedoes the claims in The Color of Crime.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
pinkjackyle
Well-Known Member
i dont mind so much your liberal leanings as its your right , but making hateful , fictitious insults get you nowhere buck , and actually kills any sort of civil dicscourse . take the high road buck .
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
no, i'm actually citing math.You site an opinion.
No wonder you are proven wrong more than anyone on RIU.
do you see those numbers and references the justice department's data, washere?
deny reality some more.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
Federal Statistics of black on white violence, with links and mathematical extrapolation formulas.
Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
Blacks are 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit a robbery.
Forty-five percent of black crime is against whites, 43 against other blacks, and 10 percent against Hispanic
http://www.examiner.com/article/federal-statistics-of-black-on-white-violence-with-links-and-mathematical-extrapolation-formulas
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
and since whites are 70% of the population, that means blacks commit less crime against whites than random chance would dictate.
but nice job at regurgitating the stats out of 'color of crime' and pretending like you understand them, washere.