They get that data from police stations. The same police stations that are under authorities of mayors who want them to lie.
The US Murder Rate Is on Track to Be Lowest in a Century
- Thread starter Tinark
- Start date
They get that data from police stations. The same police stations that are under authorities of mayors who want them to lie.
Racists play that numbers game constantly. Let's take a look at the actual figures:
Roughly 80% of the US is white. About 13% is black.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
So, assuming a criminal isn't biased at all, he should be attacking about 6.15 times as many white people as black people. Now let's take a look...
If they were just randomly picking victims with no racial bias at all, black on white violence should be about 6.15 times as common as white on black violence. (because there are about 6.15 times as many whites in America as there are blacks) But it's only 5 times as common. So there's some kind of bias going on here. Either blacks are avoiding attacking white people, or white people are targeting blacks.
So a rational analysis would indicate that white bias against blacks is significantly more common than black bias against whites. Which, given our history of institutionalized racism, isn't surprising.
What's remarkable is how far we've come in a few generations. Which, I suppose is why racists are so desperately eager to peddle their foolish assumptions to the rest of us.
And yes, the final racist refuge: "They are all lying!"
Roughly 80% of the US is white. About 13% is black.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
So, assuming a criminal isn't biased at all, he should be attacking about 6.15 times as many white people as black people. Now let's take a look...
If they were just randomly picking victims with no racial bias at all, black on white violence should be about 6.15 times as common as white on black violence. (because there are about 6.15 times as many whites in America as there are blacks) But it's only 5 times as common. So there's some kind of bias going on here. Either blacks are avoiding attacking white people, or white people are targeting blacks.
So a rational analysis would indicate that white bias against blacks is significantly more common than black bias against whites. Which, given our history of institutionalized racism, isn't surprising.
What's remarkable is how far we've come in a few generations. Which, I suppose is why racists are so desperately eager to peddle their foolish assumptions to the rest of us.
And yes, the final racist refuge: "They are all lying!"
Tinark
Active member
False: crime victimization surveys can be carried by any one or any organization. The most well known one is the National Crime Victimization Survey carried out by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (a federal agency). They take a random sampling of individuals across the country and ask them if they had been victims of any crime during the year and, if so, what the crime was.
Sometimes there are state level crime victimization surveys.
Sometimes universities carry out their own crime victimization surveys for research.
Those arent used to compile national crime stats - the data from states and cities are
While you can get a better number looking at those, those are not what is used to compile the national crime stats, the states and cities police departments are.
Is the huffington post lying about this?
Quetzal
New member
Criminal conviction data? No, that comes from the courts.
we are discussing crime stats, nice diversion though. A murder having occured or not is not dependent on someone having been convicted of carrying it out - which again is why those kinds of things aren't used to compile actual crimes having occurred - or a lot of unsolved crimes wouldnt be reported.
Tinark
Active member
While I was hoping the right wingers could figure it out so that they would take a little bit of time you think carefully about it, you are close, but not quite.
We would expect white on black and black on white violence to be equal no matter what the proportion of the population is if members from either group committed crime at the same rate and their victims were random.
There are 9,000 members of group A and 1,000 members of group B. They commit crimes at a 10% rate.
Therefore, group A commits 900 crimes, 90 of which will be against members of group B.
Group B commits 100 crimes, 90 of which will be against members of group A.
The glaring hole I was referring to in the racist posting by musterion was to adjust for population to exponentially magnify the difference. The population differences are already embedded into the data, so it is wrong to "correct" for it.
The 3x difference in violent crime rate that does exist between blacks vs. whites can be explained in large part by poverty.
Tinark
Active member
But the number of murder _victims_ can be counted quite accurately regardless of what the cities report. Autopsy reports and crime victimization surveys, foe example. As I've already explained, there are multiple sources of data.
One more time, national crime stats depend on what local, city and state agencies report, if they decline to report the real numbers, the national numbers aren't right either and loads of cities and states have been caught woefully under-reporting.
Now for what good reason could a national report not be worried about under reporting? It makes America look better. It makes good little libbies like you think everything is awesome so you are more happy with the government and trust them more.
PS no, a police station can and does report some things as not murder that are. Happens all the time. For tons of reasons.
Quetzal
New member
Right, but they can be used in collaboration with victim data and reports. We can use medical reports, as well. The point is, there are a variety of different sources for data. Getting an accurate report might not be as difficult as you might imagine.
Yes, it is, if a murder was never claimed to be one, how do you count it?
Also neither of you have to like it, but national crime stats are compiled from local and state agencies reporting crimes. If they dont report them, they aren't listed. Period.
Tinark
Active member
One more time, national crime stats depend on what local, city and state agencies report, if they decline to report the real numbers, the national numbers aren't right either and loads of cities and states have been caught woefully under-reporting.
Now for what good reason could a national report not be worried about under reporting? It makes America look better. It makes good little libbies like you think everything is awesome so you are more happy with the government and trust them more.
PS no, a police station can and does report some things as not murder that are. Happens all the time. For tons of reasons.
You are simply flat out wrong. Crime victimization surveys are exactly as they sound, a survey about crime victimization that is answered by random people in the population. It has absolutely nothing to do with cities. No city or state officials are involved.
You can even access the raw data for yourself:
http://www.bjs.gov/rawdata.cfm
You can count them sound all day, pray tell how a murder victim reports it to a crime survey while you are at it, and once again, the national crime stats do not come from victim surveys no matter how accurate you think they are.
You even admit they are random yourself, and thats your proof that crime is dropping? :rotfl:
Quetzal
New member
I see what you mean in that semantics might skew some records, but do you believe this happens so often that it would skew the national average by a substantial amount?
Tinark
Active member
You can count the number of times medical examiners perform an autopsy and rule the death to be caused by homicide.
According to huffington post it does in ny, and then chicago and houston has been caught doing it too -tons of cities have - backtrack and read the thread. Then use google for more information.
Tinark
Active member
Yes, they do. It depends on which stats you are talking about.
Here are the national stats from the victimization surveys right here:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv13.pdf
The sample is random. Do I really need to explain the validity of statistical random sampling to you?
Quetzal
New member
What about this report published by the Census and carried out by the FBI? Seems to point to the thesis, that is, the the homicide rate has been on the decline since 1980. Granted it hasn't been the lowest, but it is trending down.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0312.pdf
Those aren't fbi crime stats. Once again also, cities have been caught and states have been caught for some time, lying about their crime stats.
Ive already proven it also, using a liberal source too, deal with it - my goodness you lemmings will stick to anything even when its shown blatently false, wont you. Dont care about where the real reports come from that make up the states either.
Weird, no wonder this nation is on the decline.
Tinark
Active member
That data is compiled from the Uniform Crime Reporting Program:
In other words, the data is complied in large part by 18,000 city reports that she believes to be completely bogus.