BLACK HISTORY MONTH: CRIME, IN BLACK AND WHITE

Crime.
  
When raving, foaming-at-the-mouth diehard White supremacist racists speak of crime, they often attempt to invoke the fear factor of Black Americans running wild in the streets committing all manner of crimes, especially against White people. The meme of Black Americans committing more crimes than White Americans is not only a lie, but an irrational fallacy. Add to the fact that many WS consider any crime committed by a Black against a White, as a hate crime, one would see how ignorant WS are when it comes to Basic Crime 101: the majority of crimes are intra-racial as opposed to the minority of crimes committed that are inter-racial.
  
When it comes to racially motivated crimes, anti-black crimes/hate crimes (bias) is very much more common than anti-white/hate crimes.
  
As for the scare-tactic of millions upon millions of Blacks committing crimes that constitutes believing the lie that crime is random.
  
In order to understand Basic Crime 101, where random crimes are concerned, the following would stand as logical fact:
 
“If crime was randomly distributed, about 70% of the victims of crimes perpetrated by blacks would have white victims.”
 
But, crime is anything but random.
  
IF crime victimization was random, that would mean that the victims would match each group’s proportion of the population. Non-Hispanic whites are about 70% of the US population, so if crime was random, this is what you would see.
 
In contrast if crime was random, about 30% of the crimes committed by whites would be against people of color.
 
There would also be more black-on-white crimes, but, crime remains moreso intra-racial, as opposed to inter-racial, concerning non-hate crimes.
 
Racially motivated white-on-black crime is more prevalant than racially motivated black-on-white crime, concerning hate crimes.

 

Also, keep in mind,  if crime victimization was random, the victims would match their groups proportion of the population; but, due to residential segregation, crime patterns lend themselves to the sense that most criminals perpetrate crimes against those people with whom they are in close proximity:  blacks on blacks, whites on whites, Asians on Asians, etc.  That is one of the major reasons that crime in not random. Also to be factored into the equation: Blacks have more contact with whites than whites have with blacks, whether it is on the job; at a museum; at the movies; on public transportation; at universities; at the grocery store, or even in neighborhoods. Therefore, logically this shoots down the rabid white supremacy notion of excess black-on-white crime. Therefore blacks would have to leave their bantustans/segregated neighborhoods,  to enter predominantly white neighborhoods. Therefore, logic dictates that crime is not random, and that blacks are not committing major acts of crime against whites.
 
Black citizens are approximately 13% of the U.S population. Whites (and you must include those who would be classified as “white” as well: Latinos, Arabs, etc.) are approximately 70% of the U.S. population.
Since there are ethnicities that self-identify as “white” the numbers of “whites” involved would soar, and work in whites favor (numberswise), not blacks, where crime is concerned.
 
IF each person in the population had an equal chance of being selected to commit a random crime, that would mean that more white/non-black people would be in a position to attack and harm black people more since there are more non-blacks in America.
 
IF each person had a chance to be selected for random violence, the scenario would be similar to the race-riots of the early part of the last century, where whites went into black neighborhoods, going from home to home, entering homes, pulling black citizens out of their homes and brutalizing and killing them. Just the same during the time of the Nadir of brutal lynchings against Black citizens. Now, those are examples of random crime. Terrorist crimes against Black women, men and children. But, the terrorist crimes against Black citizens, of lynchings and racial pogroms, are not the issue of this essay; it is what people think of when they hear the word “crime’ that is the essence of this essay:  burglary, rape, arson, kidnapping, embezzlement, etc.
 
Understand also that if a person lives in their segregated neighborhood, the chances of them committing a crime in a neighborhood they know nothing about, goes down tremendously.
 
 
Scenario:
 
Person A lives in XYZ neighborhood. Person A decides to buy a gun to commit burglary with habitation. Person A does not have a car. A catches the bus to ABC neighborhood. A gets on the wrong bus; A has to change buses. A gets to the intended neighborhood at midnight. A is exhausted from riding the bus, for two hours, to get to the area he desires.
 
A knows nothing about the lay-of-the -land. A sticks out like a sore thumb. A is probably too tired to break and enter from catching all those buses. A is spotted by the cops cruising by because A definately does not live there because he is not of the same racial group that lives in that neighborhood, therefore, there is no way (as far as the cops are concerned) that A could live there because he is considered as not rich enough to afford the housing, not to mention not a member of the dominant group of those residing in that particular neighborhood.
 
A gets arrested and charged with:
 
-Tresspassing
_Loitering
_Vagrancy
_Carrying a Concealed Weapon (forgot to mention A had a snub-nose .38 in his pocket)
 
Since A does not live in that neighborhood, he would not know of the escape routes, the alleyways, the dead-end, cul-de-sac, one-way entry streets of that neighborhood. Since A had no way to “case the joint” out, he would be at a loss as to commit any crime since he would be out of his segregated territory/ homeland/bantustan.
 
Therefore, he would settle for committing crime against those who live nearest him.
 
That type of crime would be more than “random”. Crimes committed close to home/neighborhood; thought out; planned.
 
Random crime is more opportunistic, than premeditated.
 
If A lives in a poor neighborhood, and is of an ethnic/racial group that is considered “criminal” to begin with, if he commits crime in his neighborhood, against a fellow neighbor, in the eyes of the dominant group, his crime is looked upon as not just  “random” at all.
 
His crime is looked upon as doing the dominant group a favor.
 
Translation:
 
“Why should the dominant group try to kill off A’s racial group with extra-legal means, when A does it for them”?
 
The idea of going into an unknown terra firma to commit a crime would be more than daunting.
 
The A’s (and B’s [those of various racial/ethnic groups])of the world prefer to stick close to home and commit crime against those who live in the same neighborhood.
 
Going to a neighborhood they know nothing of is not only suicidal, it would be downright stupid.
 
Since most crimes are committed by those who live in the same neighborhood, the chances of whites suffering crimes from blacks, would be low, because residential segregation is still the law of the land, whether many Americans want to face that fact or not.
 
 
Therefore, most serious, or petty, crimes would be committed by someone who knows someone else; or else, lives within close proximity to that person:
 
 
-Neighbors
-Relatives
-Acquaintances
-Friends of those acquaintances
 
 
Not many people go to far away neighborhoods to commit crimes unless there is an “inside” person who knows the area, building, times when people go out, times when they return, etc.
 
When it comes to crime, criminals mainly stick with what they know.
 
And being lazy, they will prey on the weakest of their group (be that group White, Black, Latino, etc.), instead of going where they will face bigger guns, bigger police forces, bigger neighborhood watch protection.
 
 
Crime is not random.
 
It is not done without a definate aim, without a fixed goal or purpose. If it were so, criminals would be willy-nilly picking just any target, not knowing what they would be going up against. (bigger guns, bigger police forces, bigger neighborhood watch protection; bigger odds.)
 
Crime is methodical, thought out, planned:
 
-the rapist who watches a single woman living alone, noting her coming and going;
-the burglar/robber who may be the live-in help, or the caterer who comes once a month to catered affairs;
-the murderer who plans to kill a business partner whose interest he cannot buy out for whatever reasons.
 
The huge bulk of crimes are not on-the-spur. They have method and intent behind them.
 
With the exception of “crimes of passion” (boyfriend who kills girlfriend because he thinks she is cheating on him), crimes are definately not random.
 
RANDOM CRIME:
“If crime was random, most black criminals would perpetrate their crimes against white victims, not including victimless crimes.
 
Because (pardon the expression) there are more white people to pick off, after the blacks went through the blacks.
If crime was random most white criminals would perpetrate most of their crimes against whites (again ignoring victimless crime).
 
Because (pardon the expression) there are more white people to pick off, before the whites got to the blacks; because of population density means whites would wade through few blacks, (more whites per capita population) and blacks would wade through more whites (less blacks per capita population).
 
But, crime is anything but random.
 
IF crime victimization was random, that would mean that the victims would match each group’s proportion of the population. Non-Hispanic whites are about 70% of the US population, so if crime was random, this is what you would see.
 
In contrast if crime was random, about 30% of the crimes committed by whites would be people of color.
 
There would be more black-on-white crimes, but, crime remains moreso intra-racial, as opposed to inter-racial.
 
Racially motivated white-on-black crime is more prevalant than racially motivated black-on-white crime.
 
Also, keep in mind,  if crime victimization was random, the victims would match their groups proportion of the population; but, due to residential segregation, crime patterns lend themselves to the sense that most criminals perpetrate crimes against those people with whom they are in close proximity:  blacks on blacks, whites on whites.  That is one of the major reasons that crime in not random.
 
Black citizens are approximately 13% of the U.S population. Whites (and you must include those who would be classified as “white” as well: Latinos, Arabs, etc.) are approximately 69-70% of the U.S. population.
Since there are ethnicities that self-identify as “white” the numbers of “whites” involved would soar, and work in whites favor (numberswise), not blacks.
 
IF each person in the population had an equal chance of being selected to commit a random crime, that would that mean that more white people would be in a position to attack and harm black people more since there are more non-blacks in America.
 
IF each person had a chance to be selected for random violence, the scenario be similar to the race-riots of the early part of the last century, where whites went into black neighborhoods, going from home to home, entering homes, pulling black citizens out of their homes and brutalzing and killing them? Now, that is an example of random crime.
 
Understand also that if a person lives in their segregated neighborhood, the chances of them committing a crime in a neighborhood they know nothing about, goes down tremendously.
 
If crime was random.
 
But, most blacks and whites live in segregated homelands/bantustans.
 
Because of segregated lives, blacks would still commit black-on-black crime, and whites would still commit white-on-white crimes.
 
That the media plays up people’s fears does not help either, along with white supremacists, that blacks are “running amok”, because there are less blacks than whites in America to commit crimes against whites.
 
Blacks would have to go through a lot of Blacks in their bantustans, before they (Blacks) could even make a dent in black-on-white crimes.
 
 
So…..Black Americans are not out committing all the crimes in America, no matter how WS try to spin it into some frightening, spiralling, out-of-control crime epidemic. Blacks would have to go through blacks in their neighborhood, then leave their segregated bantustans, then advance across to predominantly white neighborhoods to even begin to commit the rates of crimes that WS scream about. If anything, white-run America has committed the most horrific crimes against blacks:
 
-substandard education;
-disparity in the criminal (in)justice system;
-economic crime (Black women paid less than White men for the same type of job/same commensurate skills);
-environmental waste hazards dumped into Black neighborhoods, but, not dumped/located into white neighborhoods (think River Oaks, Rodeo Drive, Marin County, etc.)
 
Because of segregated lives, blacks would still commit black-on-black crime, and whites would still commit white-on-white crimes. Keep in mind that Blacks have more interaction with Whites, than Whites have with Blacks.
 
So, WS racist memes of black crime in America falls flat on its collective rectum.
 
Illogical, and irrational fallacy.
 
The figures would lend themselves to more Whites committing crimes against Blacks since there are more Whites in America than Blacks.
 
Numbers would put the crimes of white/black more in the area of Whites, than Blacks, since Whites outnumber Blacks in America.
 
Many of the so-called studies that indicate that interracial rapes involving a Black American male attacking a White female constitute a significant percentage of total rapes reported, while rapes involving a white assailant and black victim are comparatively rare—-should be looked at with a logical evaluation of said rapes.
Statistics such as these perpetuate the kinds of myths and stereotypes about black aggression and white victimization recurring throughout American history (and into the present):
 
Big-bad Black man attacking White woman, when reality has shown that Big-bad White males have overwhelmingly raped and attacked Black women, and contribute to the persistent belief that the paradigm rape involves a black perpetrator and a white victim.
 
However, studies have shown that rape is far more intraracial, and less interracial, than has commonly been believed. By looking at population distributions rather than simply at number of reported rapes, Robert O’Brien demonstrated that even though the number of black assailant-white victim rapes is higher than the number of white offender black victim rapes, (and we must also factor in the many Black women who do not report rape when the rapist is a White man) its relative frequency is not.
 
When one group in a population is smaller than another, members of the smaller group will experience a higher rate of interaction with members of the larger group than vice versa. After taking into account the distributions of whites and blacks in the general population and in the offender population, one can conclude that not only are rapes less interracial than would be expected; by looking at population distributions, they are actually more intraracial than many want to acknowledge.
 
Thus, the common myth/lie that Black Americans are more likely to rape White people than the reverse is unfounded, thus a fallacy. (1)
 
Therefore, White men are more likely to commit crimes (embezzlement, arson, murder, kidnapping, and yes!—rape) NUMBERS WISE/POPULATION WISE against whites and blacks, than say, moreso, than a Black woman would commit a crime against a White person (man or woman) NUMBERS WISE/POPULATION WISE.
 
At any given moment, there are more White men committing crimes in comparison to Black women. White men outnumber Black women 7-to-1, therefore, it is illogical to state that more Blacks commit crime than Whites.
Because Blacks are smaller in numbers to Whites, the figures on crime statistics can be misleading. A smaller population group will always have crime numbers skewed that mislead people to think that there are large numbers of that small group committing ALL the crimes in America.
 
Such misinformation would be lies and disinformation.
 
(1). See Robert M. O’Brien, The Interracial Nature of Violent Crimes: A Reexamination,
92 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY 817–35 (1987).
 
His theory is founded on the insight that because there are fewer Black Americans in the population than there are Whites, the relative frequency of blacks’ interacting with Whites will be higher than Whites’ interacting with Blacks in “asymmetrical” situations like rape. That is, “[a]ll minority groups, singly or in combination, are more involved in intergroup relations with a group
constituting a majority than the majority group is with them.” Id. at 820 (quoting PETER M. BLAU, INEQUALITY AND HETEROGENEITY: A PRIMITIVE THEORY OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE 22- 23 (1977)) (internal quotation marks omitted).
 
30 “To illustrate, assume that there are 10% blacks and 90% whites in a population of 1,000; then, if there are 10 black-white marriages, 10% . . . of the blacks would beintermarried, while only 1.1%. . . . of the whites would be intermarried.” Id. at 819. Id at 822.
 
 
Robert O’Brien, “The Interracial Nature of Violent Crimes”.
 
White supremacist. . .screaming about the ferocious black-on-white crime. Yeah right.
 
But, you’ll never hear them caterwauling about the hate crimes of white-on-black crimes, nor the continued crimes of structural racism that still have a continuous assault against the humanity of Black citizens.
 
WS care nothing about the white-on-black crimes. To WS, white-on-black crime is normal and okay. Just peachy.
 
And not just the past—-the present crimes as well.
 
Unless it is a possible white victim, WS have not the balls nor the humanity to accept the fact that much crime continues to remain within each racial group.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

One response to “BLACK HISTORY MONTH: CRIME, IN BLACK AND WHITE

  1. Randy

    Black History Month IS a grime. A racial crime. Do American Indians have their own history month? Of course not. how about Eskimos? Nope. Puerto Ricans? Nada. Why is it that ONLY negroes have a month set aside for them?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s