The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 PodcastsGregory Hood Archive
The Year of 'Black Lives Matter'?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The FBI just released its Expanded Homicide Data (EHD) for 2020, which includes reports from 15,875 of 18,623 American police agencies. Murders rose by about 30 percent. It is safe to assume that this is the result of Black Lives Matter lawlessness and “progressive” crime fighting.

Notice the two increases that correlate roughly with Michael Brown’s death in Ferguson in 2014 and George Floyd’s death in 2020.

In 2020, there were 3,267 more homicides than in 2019 for a total of 17,815. Who were the additional victims? There were 950 more dead whites (which included an unknown number of Hispanics), but no fewer than 2,164 more dead blacks. Thus, in 2020, the year “black lives matter” was shouted in the streets, celebrated in sports arenas, chanted in schools and corporations, and practically made the national motto, 2,164 more blacks lost their lives to homicide than the year before. Almost all were killed by other blacks. Unlike the fake martyrs of the BLM movement — Trayvon Martin, Freddie Gray, Michael Brown, George Floyd — these victims have been all but ignored. Nothing could more clearly prove the degeneracy of a movement into which Americans poured billions of dollars in donations.

Who were the killers in 2020? Of 21,061 offenders, 6,612 were of “unknown” race.

Click here for the full-size version.
Click here for the full-size version.

Of the remaining 14,449, 8,166 (56.5 percent) were black. Race of offender is not known when there is no arrest and no witness reports. This is most likely in black areas, where witnesses are less likely to come forward and clearance races are low. Therefore, it is probably safe to assume that more than 56.6 percent of the “unknown” offenders were black. The Anti-Defamation League says the “13/50” meme — which refers to the fact that 13 percent of the population (blacks) commit 50 percent of the murders — is “racist propaganda.” It is an understatement.

If we make an assumption very generous to blacks — that they are no more likely to be among the “race unknown” than the “known” offenders — and if we use a figure of 13 percent for the black population, this calculation (56.6/13)/(43.4/87) tells us that any given black is 8.7 times more likely than any given non-black to kill someone. This figure is called an “odds ratio.”

What about whites? Calculations are a lot harder. Federal crime reports treat Hispanics not as a race but as an ethnicity, assuring us that Hispanics can be “of any race.” They are therefore treated separately, and the FBI reports 1,997 Hispanic offenders and 8,005 who were clearly not Hispanic, but 11,037 offenders for whom Hispanic/non-Hispanic is unknown. In other words, at the national level, we have only a vague idea of how many Hispanic offenders or victims there were.

Click here for the full-size version.
Click here for the full-size version.

Of these 1,997 known Hispanics, how many were categorized as white? Probably almost all of them. If we assume that roughly 75 percent were classified as racially white, we can make a rough calculation of the number of white non-Hispanic offenders by subtracting 1,500 (roughly 75 percent) of the Hispanics from the 5,866 offenders classified as white. That leaves 4,366, or 30.2 percent of the offenders whose race was known.

Based on this approximate number, what is the black/white offender odds ratio? If we take the white population as 61 percent, the calculation (56.6/13)/(30.2/61) gives us an odds ratio of 8.8, meaning that any given black was 8.8 times more likely than any given white to be a homicide offender. To repeat, this number is uncertain because of very incomplete federal data on Hispanics.

Because victims’ bodies are almost always found, there are very few homicide victims whose race was not known: only 320. Of the 17,495 victims of whom the race was known, 9,941, or 56.8 percent were black, meaning that any given black is about eight times more likely to be killed than any given non-black.

The information about the circumstances of homicides is vague.

Click here for a full-size version.
Click here for a full-size version.

Do gang killings (487) and juvenile gang killings (415) really account for only 5 percent of American homicides? This figure seems very low, but the huge number of killings under unknown circumstances probably includes many gang killings. Low clearance rates for black homicides probably makes it impossible to identify many gang murders.

Men are dangerous to women. Boyfriends killed 577 girlfriends, but only 223 girlfriends killed boyfriends. And men are more dangerous in general. Of the known offenders, 89 percent were men and 11 percent were women. Women are killed more often than they kill; they account for 20 percent of victims.

We can calculate a homicide odds ratio for men and women. Assuming a population that is 50 percent women and 50 percent men, the calculation (89/50)/11/50) gives us a multiple of 8.1, which is to say that any given man is 8.1 times more likely than a woman to commit murder. This is only slightly lower than the homicide odds ratios for blacks and non-blacks and for blacks and whites. It means that blacks are slightly more likely than whites to kill someone as men are more likely than women.

Everyone understands that men are more dangerous than women, and takes precautions based on “sex profiling.” If you see three strange men in your backyard, no one will blame you for being a lot more worried than if you see three strange women in your backyard. It should be just as acceptable to take similar precautions against blacks — black men in particular.

What about murder weapons?

Click here for a full-size version.
Click here for a full-size version.

Handguns were the most common murder weapon in 2020, as they are every year. And, just as they do every year, Americans used rifles to kill people less often than they used their hands and feet, but the cry to ban “assault rifles” is as loud as ever.

But to return to the question of perpetrators, this report gives us a broad but incomplete view of the color of crime in 2020. We probably should not use the “13/56.” The number after the forward slash is probably higher.

Maybe we can start another meme in the the form of a question: Who is more likely to kill someone? A man compared to a woman or a black compared to a white?

(Republished from American Renaissance by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 18 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “13 percent of the population (blacks) commit 50 percent of the murders”

    Probably closer to 5-6 percent: black males between 16 and 45 years of age commit 50 percent of all murders.

    Anything outside of that range is probably insignificant.

  2. While many blacks are hostile to more immigration(as they see the newcomers as usurpers and competitors), they identify so closely with the Democratic Party that they favor anything to its advantage. There’s kneejerk sense among blacks that what is good for the Democratic Party is good for black people, just like many white conservatives believe GOP is implicitly about white interests. Of course, while a party can boast of its concern for blacks(and Jews and homos), it’s taboo for any party or political figure to show any interest that pertains to whites as a group.

    But the pro-mass-immigration stance of both parties seem hellbent on replacing both historical blacks and historical whites of America. As Jews control America, it’s mainly in their interests. Even as Jews flatter blacks to use against whites, Jews know blacks are the main destroyers of cities where Jewish Power is concentrated. So, Jews want more docile immigrants to replace blacks in urban areas. And Jews want non-white immigrants to replace the historical white Christian America because more diversity among goyim means Jews can play divide-and-rule over them.

    With Trump at the helm, it seemed just barely possible for blacks and whites to unite on anti-immigration position. But once Jews engineered the 2020 BLM riots by indulging the worst tendencies among blacks, the black-white anti-immigration coalition seems to be dead.

    Even MAGA people, after the black riots, would prefer immigrants.
    And as immigrants tipped the South to Democratic control which led to the toppling of Confederate statues, blacks are okay with mass immigration too. Blacks alone couldn’t take the south, but blacks and immigrants are turning the entire South to the Democratic Party.
    Same happened in the Midwest. They were mostly Republican, but the combination of white progs, blacks, and immigrants tipped them Democratic.

    • Replies: @Currahee
  3. Currahee says:
    @Priss Factor

    I doubt very much that anti-immigrant sentiment will increase among the black population. Jobs? As El Stevo famously said:

    “The majority of blacks are either working for the government, not working; or both.”

    • LOL: Jim Bob Lassiter
  4. ytcarl says:

    What!?! Are you trying to justify racial profiling with MATH?!? That’s long been discredited, buddy… Better to ignore the several Saudi Arabian nationals with one-way tickets and no luggage, and instead grab the grandma from Des Moines and take her off to the back room to be strip-searched. Because “that’s who we are.”

  5. Anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:

    Race, IQ and the IQ and race deniers. There’s an old saying “Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear”. This is an adage that’s certainly found its proof in the modern Sars-CoV-2 world.

    The above deniers, though, have seemingly taken this adage and put their own peculiar spin on it. They’ve obviously rewritten it to include “Believe none of what you experience” – with the caveat that only experiences they find racist or belittling to themselves or those whom they view as their pets are not to be believed.

    The Negro mean IQ isn’t just below that of Whites and Asians, their differing bodily physiology, if the same criteria which is used to distinguish between different species of birds were used, places the Negros as a sub-species of European and Asians.

    Sub-Saharan Africans have a different cranium physiology to Whites and Asians. The Negros have a post-orbital constriction, which is a pinching and narrowing of the front part of the skull just behind the eye sockets. This pinching is to allow for the larger chewing muscles which accompanies the Negro’s prognathic jaw – a degenerate evolutionally feature on a par with gorillas and chimps; which is needed for a diet of tough vegetation and tearing apart uncooked meat.

    The prognathic jaw, with its accompanying narrowed forebrain, was selected because it was a survival asset in the jungle. In a First World city, though, it is an evolutionally handicap – not just to the Negros, but also to those they live amidst. Because of this constriction at the front of their skulls (hence the term slope-heads) there is less room for the Negro’s forebrain to develop.

    Thus, the Negro’s forebrain is physiologically different and much smaller than that of Asians and Whites. The forebrain is where the centre for planning and abstract thought are located in Whites and Asians. The Negros don’t have this centre because their hunter gatherer life styles with a year-round supply of vegetation and prey meant they never had a need to select for planning ahead or abstract thought.

    As well as this, the Negro’s bone structure and, in particular, the cranium is also denser and heavier than the skeletons of Asians and Whites – the Negro’s physiology is on the evolutionary side of the fence with chimps and gorillas, whilst White’s and Asian’s are on the other side with orangutans. Therefore, not only is the Negro forebrain smaller and missing parts that Whites and Asians have, the rest of the brain is also of smaller construct and a very much less corrugated surface – meaning it has less surface area than the brain of a White or Asian.

    This is why negro musical lyrics are simple doggerel and why they can’t plan for the future, or be aware or worry about the future consequences of their actions. The Negros simply have not got the brain capacity or mental processing power to be anything other than the predatory beasts they mostly display as.

    Because of their incapability for abstract thought Negros don’t have any internal sense of the difference between one thousand items and one million items. They’d need to see these items laid out in their respective lots before they’d get any sense of the numerical difference. But worse than this, Negros can’t tell the difference between kindness and weakness. This is why every time Whites and Asians advance opportunities and advantages to the Negros; the response is an uptick in violence and crime.

    One early explorer to sub-Saharan Africa commented: “They’ve spent thousands of years watching pieces of wood float on water and seeing leaves blow across lakes, but they never conceived of tying logs together to make a raft or of using the wind to power a boat.

    Proof of this was found on islands around Africa’s coast. Many large islands just off the coast of Africa were not visited or settled by sub-Saharan Africans. The Canary Islands are just 67 miles off the west coast of Africa. The highest mountain on these islands is visible from Morocco, but they lay unsettled through thousands of years of sub-Saharan evolution, until eventually being colonised by Arabic Berbers.

    Zanzibar is only 20 miles off Africa’s eastern coast and was visited by Egyptians in about 2500 BC, and Phoenicians circa 600 BC. The sub-Saharan Africans didn’t reach it until 100 AD – and this was most likely due to getting boats from Arab slave traders.

    One of the largest islands in the world, Madagascar, lies just 229 miles off the east coast of Africa, with yet smaller islands lying in between, yet all these islands were first settled by Indonesians, not sub-Saharan Africans.
    Stone tools and artefacts found in Asia clearly indicate that rafts and boats were being built and used on this continent as early as 900,000 years ago.

    The IQ and race deniers tells us that modern man migrated out of Africa 65,000 years ago, after having spent the previous millennia evolving alongside his sub-Saharan Negro brethren. Yet up to 2000 years ago modern man’s sub-Sharan brethren had not the intelligence to build a raft and reach islands overflowing with fruit and game just a few miles off Africa’s coast.

    Domesticating animals, taming and keeping them in a limited area so they can be located, controlled, fed, watered and protected and slaughtered for food. Selectively breeding the good ones and eating the weak requires abstract thought and an ability to plan for the future. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that animals were domesticated in sub-Saharan Africa. A culture that domesticate animals would leave an abundance of easily discerned evidence.

    Three African tribes were found by White explorers to herd cattle, but those tribes had had interactions with Arab slave traders. Arabs did have domesticated cattle and it was probably these that introduced cattle herding to the Negro’s whilst settled there in their slave trading bases.

    The best modern example of the effects of the Negro post-orbital constriction is Charles McRay Blow, a “op-ed columnist” for the New York Times. In 2017 Blow wrote: “I prefer the boot of truth to slam down to earth like thunder, no matter the shock of hearing its clap”. Then this year Blow wrote: “The death dealing of COVID amounts to the Appalachians of ignorance”.

    Yeah, the post-orbital constriction is strong in this one.

    Eddie Scarry in the Federalist does a wonderful takedown of the pathologically narcissistic Blow: https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/30/charles-blows-self-obsession-is-pathetic-but-i-cant-look-away/

    But Blow is simply acting in the way that the alpha predator does in a pack of hunting animals. The underlings don’t respect the alpha predator because he runs down more prey than the others. They respect him because he CAN run down more prey than them. His underlings respect the alpha because he’ll be able, if given reason, to also run them down and savage them.

    Charles McRay Blow’s post-orbital constriction has him doing exactly as an alpha male chimpanzee does to keep his troop subdued and inline and the females in awe of him. He has to constantly be on show, preen and continually boast about how wonderful he is. Blow’s in-your-face and childish narcissism can be nauseating, but his actions are driven by an animalistic insecurity.

    The alpha chimpanzee doesn’t stand-down and retire and then become a respected village elder. The chimp’s inability for abstract thought and planning ahead means he’ll cling on until a younger fitter contender tears him asunder and banishes him from the troop. Charles McRay Blow’s behavioural alleles codes for similar type behaviour.

    • Agree: R.C.
    • Thanks: beavertales, Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @Truth
  6. Truth says:
    @Anonymous

    So what are you trying to imply?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  7. FYI lived the review of runaway slaves at amren! When will we get new podcasts from yous guys? They can be about anything—just get up there and talk!

  8. Anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:
    @Truth

    So what are you trying to imply?

    It seems the post-orbital constriction is also strong in this one.

    • LOL: Truth
  9. Charles says:

    Yet again, this is great opportunity to mention Erectus Walks Amongst Us by Richard Fuerle, available free-of-charge right here at TUR. I mention it as often as it is relevant (and sometimes when it isn’t).

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  10. Andreas says:

    The FBI just released its Expanded Homicide Data (EHD) for 2020, which includes reports from 15,875 of 18,623 American police agencies. Murders rose by about 30 percent.

    And then there is this interesting statistic from the web.

    FBI Report: Marijuana Arrests Plunge More Than 30 Percent in 2020

    https://norml.org/news/2021/09/30/fbi-report-marijuana-arrests-plunge-more-than-30-percent-in-2020

    While I see the latter as being essentially a good thing, the correlation of 30 percent between these two figures can’t possibly be a coincidence.

    But I don’t think that the individuals not being arrested for pot are the same individuals committing murder. That is, there is no scientific relationship between cannabis and violent behavior.

    Rather, in the absence of any hard counts regarding the specifics of location and demographic, I’m interpreting both of these figures as a common 30 percent reduction in police presence and will to enforce the law.

    Defunding is a double-edged sword.

  11. Resartus says:

    That is, there is no scientific relationship between cannabis and violent behavior.

    You mean other than, most all blacks that died in police custody or fighting arrest, tested positive for MJ……

    • Replies: @Andreas
  12. TG says:

    The cry to ban rifles is not of course about caring about public safety, it’s about power. Rifles can be used for things like insurrections, pistols, much less so.

    We know how to reduce the murder rate, but our elites don’t care to. The murder rate is not associated with guns: wonderful gun-controlled Mexico has an official murder rate about five times that of the Untied States. The murder rate mostly correlates with social order. Specifically: can the bottom of the working class earn a decent living through honest work, or not? If the answer is no, well, things tend to fray.

    There have been two major spikes in crime in the United States: one starting in 1965, and one in 1888. That’s because these times heralded the onset of abusive cheap-labor open-borders immigration policies. People obsess over whether ‘immigrants’ or ‘native born’ are more or less criminal, but the real issue is that by flooding the market for labor wages are crushed and you have all these angry young unemployed young men looking for something to do… (No offense to the ladies, but it is particularly important for young men to feel like they are breadwinners, IMHO. Welfare is not enough).

    And Mexico: there the elites deliberately ignited a population explosion “to make Mexico bigger and better”, and yes, wages crashed and profits soared, and crime went through the roof.

    No, poverty does not ’cause’ crime – every individual has a choice – but widespread poverty and, even more I think, lack of feeling like you have a role to play, are corrosive to social order.

    And take Japan and China, now extremely peaceful and low-crime, but in Japan before WWII, and China under Mao, widespread poverty and famine caused massive violence and instability. Sure, blacks may on average be more violent than the other races, but there is no race that will not lash out if pressured enough.

    Seal the border to immigration, let the economy catch up with population Groth, let wages rise, let blue collar employees easily be able to rent a decent apartment and raise a family, and crime will trend down, just as it always has. But where’s the profit in that?

    • Agree: Rogue
  13. Andreas says:
    @Resartus

    You mean other than, most all blacks that died in police custody or fighting arrest, tested positive for MJ……

    Your comment was predictable.

    How does it follow that cannabis is causal to the violent behavior any more than the perps having brown eyes?

    I’m sticking to my hypothesis that the common 30 percent figure is due to a reduction in police enforcement of the law.

    I’m not sure how you lose.

  14. Resartus says:

    Your comment was predictable.

    If so, why didn’t you address it in your post, which I commented on……

    Not that MJ causes violent behavior, but it could be viewed that it suppresses
    the response thinking, similar to a brain injury……

  15. joef says:

    The 90% of the 13% of the total population (afros) are not the problem because of low IQ…
    Residing in the urban areas I met stupid people who were not criminally malicious in any way; and met very smart people who were criminally malicious in every way.

    I don’t see low IQ people, of other races, acting in such maliciously depraved use of violence as afros do. I worked in various jobs, and seen stupid people of other races purposely going about their employment contributing to the extent they are capable, with little complaint; whereas many afros will resent, complain, and produce poor work performance.

    Thus low IQ does not really explain the propensity of uncivilized acts committed routinely by the urban afros, as opposed to a willful intent to be that way. Its the collective choices they make that causes the 13% to be a problem, which far surpasses the ratio of overall population they represent

    … not low IQ.
    (besides I rather share a foxhole with a righteous dullard than an evil genius any day).
    By blaming it on IQ removes the culpability they have for committing asocial acts against their fellow citizens, and each other. We already have progressives refusing to ascribe responsibility to afros, why add to it.

    If low IQ is a significant cause for bad behavior then all specific members of other races, who have low IQ, would commit bad acts at the same rate as afros perform. Yet there are low IQ people who never do so, just as there are Blacks who never committed a crime, have productive jobs, and take care of their own business in a respectful manner (because they make the choice to).

    So being Black or low IQ does not produce automatic bad behavior. Instead it’s a matter of volition, that 90% of 13% make decisions that is hostile to the society at large (to varying degrees). And should be held to account for the animus path they choose for themselves against others. That is what is done to other races, yet we treat afros as irreproachable.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Gregory Hood Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Hidden Information in Our Government Archives
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV