Why Black-on-White Crime Statistics are Not an Appropriate Response

A friend (real friend, someone I actually know) posted this on facebook last week:

Dear Racist FB Friends: I know that black people kill white people, just like white people kill black people. It’s OLD NEWS. Old, ancient, boring, sickening news. Can we please focus on loving one another instead of spreading hate and discontent and fomenting racism? Every time I see one of you post *yet another* status about black-on-white crimes, I feel a little sicker and even more disheartened about our world. Move on.

At the time she wrote this, I hadn’t seen many posts or comments about the black-on-white vs white-on-black crime ratio, but since then it’s become ubiquitous.

I image there are people who don’t understand why black-on-white crime statistics aren’t relevant to the outrage over the delay to arrest George Zimmerman. The following is an attempt to explain it.

I am White. There exist violent thugs who are White. Those thugs do not represent me. They are not my agents. I get nothing from their crimes. When a White murderer kills innocent Black people, the White race does not get a point. And I am not personally responsible for George Zimmerman’s actions.

The same would be true if I were Black, in reference to Black criminals. Black criminals don’t act on behalf of law abiding Black people. The Black race gets no points for crimes against Whites. There have been Black people committing violent acts against White people in retaliation for Trayvon Martin, but most Black people have nothing to do with them, and are not responsible for their actions.

The outrage over Mr. Zimmerman is not about the actions of criminals. It’s not even about George Zimmerman. The outrage is about the apparent approval of Trayvon Martin’s death by the lawmakers and enforcers who are supposed to keep us safe. It’s about the feeling of some law abiding citizens that race and demographics, rather than deeds, determine who gets punished for crimes and who gets to go free.

Gun ownership is much higher among White people than Black people, so stand-your-ground laws do not provide equal protection. While laws and attitudes which encourage vigilantism might increase the amount of people who kill criminals, they also increase the amount of people who mistakenly kill innocents who they assume to be threats. People who fear falling into the “assumed threat” category don’t see this as a fair trade-off.

Some White commenter’s have asked, since so many Black people kill so many White people, why isn’t it White people who are protesting against Blacks? But White people have protested, and the result has been laws and attitudes which enabled George Zimmerman to track down Trayvon Martin and start a confrontation with him while armed and ready to kill.

One particularly mean spirited writer suggested that Blacks and Whites should call it even, considering the balance of racial oppression against the violence of Black criminals. But again I emphasize, criminals are not agents of law abiding citizens, and should not be treated as their representatives.

Instead of Blacks protesting Whites and Whites protesting Blacks, law abiding citizens should protest criminals. And instead of laws which promote confrontations, we should have laws that reduce crime. These laws include youth programs, police outreach and increased patrols (by which I mean more cops, not more overworked cops), better education, safe public transportation, and perhaps even increased gun ownership.

The protests aren’t about equaling the balance of cross-race crimes or the desire to protect Black criminals as equally as White criminals. The protests are about equal protection of the law and and a desire to protect law abiding citizens.

Advertisements
Leave a comment

33 Comments

  1. Patty

     /  2012 April 17th

    Benjamin-the reason why your article is so inaccurate is because you don’t think about what you say before you put it in print. The reason WHY more white people are known to have guns statistically is because they are law abiding citizens and they REGISTER their guns. Unlike some individuals who buy them on the street and procure them in other illegal ways. That is just one of the blatant flaws in your biased op-ed. I have to go to work, so I don’t have time to address the rest. Maybe learning to do some research would benefit you more before you write.

    Reply
    • bnmng

       /  2012 April 17th

      I know that there are illegally owned guns out there but I was referring to actual statistics from ATF and the National Institute of Justice, summed up in the chart that I linked to. I didn’t mention illegally possessed firearms because their existence doesn’t affect my conclusions. Stand your ground laws are unlikely to help someone who kills an unarmed citizen with an illegal firearm. Also, there are thousands of guns stolen or illegally sold each year but millions manufactured and sold legally. It just seems wrong to suggest, as you do, that there are so many stolen guns out there in the hands of Black people that they offset the results of surveys which show a higher degree of ownership among White people. So I stand by my conclusions. People who fear being assumed as threats don’t think laws and practices which make legitimate gun owners feel they can shoot unarmed civilians without consequence, are fair.

      Reply
    • Klud

       /  2013 June 20th

      Someone who LEGALLY buys guns, and ever registers them, sells them on the ‘black’ market (no pun intended).. so these “(some) individuals” of whom you speak get them from these so-called ‘law abiding’ white folks. Get a grip.

      Reply
    • Anonymous

       /  2013 July 16th

      exactly white pple LEGALLY own guns, unlike most black pple

      Reply
    • Anonymous

       /  2013 July 16th

      You had time to address you bs tho smh..

      Reply
  2. Anonymous

     /  2012 April 23rd

    funny how everyone already know all the facts in this case when it has not even went to trial.

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

     /  2012 May 16th

    Oh man, if you ruled the world, right? All the incentives you named (except the more guns part) are wanted by everyone, so who is going to get it done? Over 43% of the nation is somehow supported by government assistance, so who is going to pay for all these wonderful programs you want? We are tapped and it is up to every person to make thier immediate surroundings better. It takes a village to raise a good child so instead of saying “The government should do” this or that, why don’t you try doing it.

    Reply
    • Ok, so I’m tax and spend liberal and I admit it. But I think of the programs that I mentioned as an investment. We lose a lot of money to criminal destruction and spend a lot on security and prisons. Shooting people who scare us is an inefficient way of dealing with crime.

      I agree that people should take responsibility for themselves and their neighbors, and work together to raise better children. But there are people who live in places that most of us are afraid to drive through who are trying to do just that, and they could use a little help.

      Reply
  4. true article,
    but this still doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t tackle racism when it plays a role.

    Reply
  5. I love how everyone on here seems to think they’re an expert of social programs.

    I’ve never seen so much arrogance than I have in recent years.

    Get an education and actually pick up a book and study these topics before you act like you’re an expert.

    Guess what took America out of the great depression:
    Social programs, workers rights, regulations, etc
    and after world war II during one of the biggest booms,
    leader would not touch these social programs with a ten foot pole.

    Social programs were also better during the next big economic boom (the space race)

    I’ve studied this stuff for years and it just makes you want to bang your head off your desk when you read people spewing hatred about people on assistance because of their own prejudices instead of actually knowing the facts.
    The vast majority of people on social programs actually need them.
    The people who abuse them are the minority by far.

    also, everyone pays into unemployment, health care, etc
    that’s where the money comes from
    The government has no right to keep the money we pay into.

    This has been happening so bad in Canada that the government took in a billions of dollars surplus on the unemployment we all pay into and kept it.
    They are still even bashing unemployed, disabled, and similar people and trying to cut back their benefits even more still even after all of this.
    Conservatives will do that until there’s nothing left if no one stops them.

    You guys should also look at public health care in some other countries before you bash that too.
    You’re so ignorant that you don’t even care enough to look.
    It’s cheaper and more efficient than your old system hands down.

    Reply
    • Anonymous

       /  2013 May 14th

      Michael, Michael, you are so misinformed. You say people should read the facts, well take your own advice. The New Deal came into affect years before WW2. It was world war 2 that brought us out. All the vacant warehouses, and production companies laid dormant until it all kicked in during the 40’s NOT the 30’s. Men went to war and women went to work. It was the women who actually turned it all around-I’m a man just stating the facts- So don’t tell people to look at facts when you haven’t yourself and if you have then you need to learn how to read.

      Reply
  6. GoodGreg

     /  2012 July 17th

    Michael, you should read more widely and not simply read the progressives view of life, economics and everything.

    In spite of the feel good rhetoric, the federal works programs did not bring the US out of the depression. There was not a magic trickle out of money and multiplication of jobs. The positive result is that a lot of infrastructure was constructed. The downside was that it cost more than if it has been bid out. Recovery didn’t start until 1938 when Congress voted to constrain the New Deal and tax laws were changed to support long-term growth. During WWII, all of the New Deal was cancelled except Social Security.

    There is no one type of person on assistance. But the way the programs have been operated they have created an entire class of people who feel no need to become productive members of society. They rely on gaming the system to maintain an adequate (in their minds) lifestyle. Any work they do is for cash under the table. These people are the cause of the general negative stereotype of people on welfare. Many (most) people know someone who is on welfare, who is not like “those welfare people.” So the truth is, social programs are not necessarily a bad thing, but unfortunately they are poorly designed or run to create these problems. I would take exception to your argument that most people on welfare need it, unless somewhere you have found an accurate and well-done study to verify this.

    The healthcare in this country if fabulous. The delivery of health care is a disaster. This largely started when HMOs came into being and when the government began trying to control costs through medicare/medicaid. This has created a system of payment that is costly, slow, career limiting to doctors and financially untenable to most working people. It has largely taken the doctor-patient relationship and the practice of medicine and inserted some bureaucrat or insurance person in the middle. The sad part is that if you think it is bad now, just wait until the Affordable Care Act is in full force with its 2000 pages of law and 13,000+ pages of regulation.

    Reply
  7. GoodGreg

     /  2012 July 17th

    Bmnmg
    Whether white people kill black people or black people kill white people (or any other race on race), it is not really news unless it is done because of race. So if a gang of black youths rampage through a white neighborhood specifically targeting white people that’s news. Likewise if a car load of white youth drive through a black neighborhood shooting at black people, that is news.

    Stand your ground laws, or castle laws are not designed to equal protection from a racial perspective, they were designed to provide legal protection in accordance with the US Constitution. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness and all that. Now whether or not GZ is protected by that is yet to be determined by a court of law. But just because white people own more guns doesn’t mean the law is preferential to them, it only means that they are more likely to own guns.

    I also take exception to your contention that SYG or Castle Laws are confrontational. Why should I have to flee if I am someplace I have a right to be and I am threatened? Why am I, as the law-abiding citizen the one who is being accosted, assaulted, robbed or whatever, the one with a requirement to flee. Why do I not have the right to meet force with force, if that is my decision, realizing that I have the burden of proof and that I am legally responsible for the end result of every bullet that leaves the barrel?

    Finally, all of those great social programs you have pointed out, have been tried and largely don’t work. They don’t work because they don’t get to the root of the problem. They are just large bandaids on a sucking chest wound. Those criminals, gang-bangers and the like who have devalued the value of life, who have devalued the work ethic, who are willing to make a living off other people either by crime or by welfare don’t care about education or youth programs or police outreach. They are firmly opposed to more police patrols and more legally owned weapons by people who can and will use them. Until this segment of the population shares the values of the rest of us. Nothing will change.

    Reply
    • Brett

       /  2012 November 26th

      “Whether white people kill black people or black people kill white people (or any other race on race), it is not really news unless it is done because of race. So if a gang of black youths rampage through a white neighborhood specifically targeting white people that’s news. Likewise if a car load of white youth drive through a black neighborhood shooting at black people, that is news.”

      Really? There’s no coverage happening on the multiple occurrences of black teen flashmobs across the country targeting white people. It’s funny, I searched MSN, found only a few articles about it, and the refuse to identify the 99.9 percent black mobs as “black”… We had an instance in TN where a white couple were car jacked by 4 black men, the man and woman were both gang raped repeatedly, his genitals where then removed in front of his wife… and both were set on fire… so brutal gang rape, mutilation and murder (the likes of which you don’t even see in Iraq) isn’t even news worthy if it’s perpetrated against a white person. Personally the liberal media bias and blatant blind eye being turned to this type of barbaric behavior across the country is gut wrenching.

      Reply
  8. Anonymous

     /  2012 July 27th

    same old shuck and jive civil rights propaganda from a Jew

    Reply
  9. Forget the whole black on white, white on black thing for a minute, I just wonder if people are aware of how mainstream American reacts differently depending on if the perpetrator of a crime happens to be white or some other ethnicity. That the instance of the shooter in the theater in CO. I don’t read a bunch of comments on any thread that make reference to his race, and how everybody from that race is this and that. I don’t see any racial slurs. Everyone is able to stay focused on one deranged individual. This would not be the case if the perpetrator were not white. Same thing with shooter at the sikh temple over the weekend. I’ve even seen comments that are angry because reports said that the shooter was white! Even comments that consider it some kind of payback, which is doubly ignorant since they’re confusing Sihkism with Islam. I keep hearing people tell minorities how they should quit bringing up race, while they continue to keep bogus statistics, and make loony racial comments on crime when it’s not a white person involved, and cheer when whites commit any act against a person of another race. I guess our culture hasn’t evolved that much in the 21st century after all.

    Reply
  10. striket

     /  2012 November 11th

    Your friend is a bleeding heart liberal. Its apparent. Statistics don’t lie. White women who marry African men multiply their chances of being beaten by their spouses by 12.4 (1140% increase). People like your friend who defend them are the idiots. Please rebut my claim so I can make you look like an idiot with stats.

    Reply
    • Anonymous

       /  2013 July 16th

      I believe the point is more that every black man should not be labeled an abuser because of the stat you may have provided….not sure of the validity of them…but none the less, I think you are missing the point in the article.

      Reply
    • That is a seriously inaccurate statistic. The leading danger to white women in America is white men, as statistically proven by FBI reports.

      Reply
  11. DannyE

     /  2013 January 14th

    How about we ask people be responsible for the kids they bring into the world? Out of wedlock births are lauded among some as a ticket to paradise by government check. Time and time again not having two parents sets a kid up to be a criminal for many reasons.

    Its time to stop subsidizing cultures of dependency and get rid of “white guilt.” I, for one, have tired of being called a racist at every turn. Time to look at the real causes of crime and do something about it instead of kissing the butts of the racial hate baiters.

    The entitlement mentality is part of this problem too. We have generations of people who have never worked. They think they are “entitled” to the fruits of other’s labor. Time is fast running out, since the government is out of money and can’t borrow any more.

    Reply
    • This seems to presume that your friend was making a general statement about a situation, and not addressing one particular situation that was of concern to them at the time. The idea that we’ve got to address general major issues is well and good in theory, but we’ve been saying that for ages to no avail. Even then you can’t address all problems in a statement. Sure entitlement mentality is a big problem, but white and blacks equally suffer from entitlement mentality; it just manifests itself in different forms. The one everyone recognizes is the Black side of the equation, as that’s the one people are generally talking about if they bring up the term. It’s become one of the new generation “code words” where you get to talk about “those” people without specifically mentioning the group by name. This is part of the problem too. Sure there are kids that grow up lost because they grew up in single parent homes, but you know what? Kids grow up in single parent households that make it alright, those kids; however aren’t used as statistics, or to make points about which groups have the biggest problems. With all the shootings going on recently why doesn’t anyone ever talk about the problem of middle class white households instead of using it as an excuse to ban guns?

      Reply
  12. cojo

     /  2013 January 21st

    “…Gun ownership is much higher among White people than Black people, so stand-your-ground laws do not provide equal protection…”

    Where do you find logic in this hair-brained ststement?

    Reply
    • MojoInFL

       /  2013 July 1st

      So all these teenage gangbangers have legal firearms ?

      Reply
  13. Race has nothing to do with anything. This is America, and those who do not abide by the law of the land, need to be prosecuted!! We cannot tolerate ANARCHY!! We cannot tolerate unprovoked attacks on defenseless citizens!! To HELL with the “reasons”!! There is NO justification for BARBARISM!! That is why there are laws!! “Vengence is mine,” sayeth the Lord, “I will repay.” Do away with anything anywhere that smacks of “minority” “racial” “Gender” or “sexual” rights, or benefits. And, make English the language of the land. We became one nation by eschewing our racial and national identities, and electing to becoming ONE nation, the United States of America. SCREW Diversity!! Jesus said it best: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

    Reply
  14. MojoInFL

     /  2013 July 1st

    I like the way you claim to be so open minded, yet willing to convict Zimmerman with no trial. Also enjoyed is your play on words . Legal gun ownership is more common in the white race would be so much more accurate .

    Reply
    • I have an open mind. I’m not willing to convict Zimmerman without a trial, but I’m also not willing to acquit him without a trial.

      There are thousands of guns stolen or illegally sold each year but millions manufactured and sold legally. The numbers don’t support the idea that there are so many illegally armed Black people that Black gun owners outnumber White. Also, somebody who shoots somebody else with an illegal gun is not going to get off on stand-your-ground, so the amount of illegal gun owners has nothing to do with my post.

      Reply
      • MojoInFL

         /  2013 July 1st

        So minorities most likely have illegal guns and can’t apply the stand your ground statutes . Thus making it unfair ?

      • No.. that’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying illegal gun owners don’t count in this post, be they Black or White. This is a post about law abiding citizens affected by Stand-your-ground laws.

  15. dagger

     /  2013 July 14th

    You left out an important detail – Zimmerman lost sight of Martin. It was Martin who doubled back and assaulted Zimmerman. It was also Martin who used a racial slur, making that that assault a hate crime. It’s a shame he didn’t just go home and notify police that a man had been following him. But what if a white teen had jumped a black security guard and been shot? If the security guard had been tried and found not guilty, black people would have believed the verdict was just. And based on evidence, it was just, because there was reasonable doubt.

    Reply
  16. Zimmerman stalked Trayvon? Zimmerman started the confrontation?
    How about a major network (NBC) actively editing the 911 tape to make GZ appear racist?
    What about Trayvon punching a bus driver in the face, refereeing steet fights, being suspended from school for destruction of property, drugs, carrying burglary tools,
    text messages about fighting and dealing dope? Calling George a “creepy ass cracka”?
    How about he didn’t have a scratch on him and GZ had a broken nose, cranial lacerations, etc? Let’s not forget the eye witness who saw Trayvon on top of him.
    In short, what the hell are you talking about?
    Lets also forget that GZ took a black girl to prom, mentored black children and stood up in the community for what he perceived as police bias against a black homeless man.
    Again, what the hell are you talking about?
    The claim that the refusal to take GZ in to custody immediately following the shooting was a race based decision even though there are current cases where black have killed whites and, like GZ, were not taken in to custody. The ‘shooters’ in these cases were not taken in to custody because the evidence was overwhelming that the act was self defense.
    And, of course, statistics don’t matter because they are an inconvenient truth to all the race baiting idiots that actively endeavor to destroy society.
    How is it NOT a hate crime that several hundred blacks rendezvous at the Wisconsin state fair chanting “beat whitey”, then proceed punch, kick, and crush every white person they have time to get their hands on?
    There are over three dozen accounts of “Justice for Trayvon” beatings reported in the past week alone, and scores more in the preceding year.
    A white person is 39 times more likely to be assailed by a black than the reverse.
    Apparently, it is nearly impossible for an african american to be charged with a hate crime.
    The only people who see GZ as guilty in this case are those that are either stupid, racist, or both.

    Reply
  17. Geeves

     /  2013 August 9th

    Maybe, if Sharpton, Holder and Obama really knew that Trayvon Martin had assaulted a bus driver 5 days before and bragged about beating someone else bloody 2 days before his confrontation with Zimmerman, then this would not have been such big news. But, to call the Zimmerman situation travesty or injustice when there is ZERO proof that Martin did not attack Zimmerman is the real travesty. Especially, when we don’t know if Trayvon would have ever confronted or attacked a black Zimmerman whom he probably called “Crazy Cracker”.

    What the African American community needs is Real Leaders as Sharpton, Holder and Obama have all been corrupted by power and politics and spend all their time whining and pointing fingers instead of being leaders and role models coming up with game plans to educate youth to not fall into crime and violence. Because, that is all what is happening is these so called leaders are inciting todays youth to be angry about not being accepted. But, who is going to accept minorities who have a history of drugs, violence and thug mentality?

    Case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJhed0U3EZw

    Reply
  18. The reason it matters is that black on white crime way outnumbers the reverse and if we do not talk about it then it will continue . Blacks are statistically 50 times more likely to attack whites than vice versa”

    Reply

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s