The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NYT: "Police Killings of Blacks: What the Data Says"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow 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

From the NYT’s Upshot section:

Police Killings of Blacks: What the Data Says
OCT. 16, 2015

Tamir Rice. Eric Garner. Walter Scott. Michael Brown. Each killing raises a disturbing question: Would any of these people have been killed by police officers if they had been white?

… As an economist who has studied racial discrimination, I’ve begun to look at these deaths from a different angle. There is ample statistical evidence of large and persistent racial bias in other areas — from labor markets to online retail markets. So I expected that police prejudice would be a major factor in accounting for the killings of African-Americans. But when I looked at the numbers, that’s not exactly what I found.

I’m not saying that the police in these specific cases are free of racial bias. I can’t answer that question. But what the data does suggest is that eliminating the biases of all police officers would do little to materially reduce the total number of African-American killings. Police bias may well be a significant problem, but in accounting for why some of these encounters turn into killings, it is swamped by other, bigger problems that plague our society, our economy and our criminal justice system.

To understand how this can be, let us start with the statistics on police killings. According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population.

But, considerably lower than the 52% of homicide offenders who were black over the years 1980-2008 according to a a 2011 Obama Administration report.

Instead, there is another possibility: It is simply that — for reasons that may well include police bias — African-Americans have a very large number of encounters with police officers. Every police encounter contains a risk: The officer might be poorly trained, might act with malice or simply make a mistake, and civilians might do something that is perceived as a threat. The omnipresence of guns exaggerates all these risks.

Such risks exist for people of any race — after all, many people killed by police officers were not black. But having more encounters with police officers, even with officers entirely free of racial bias, can create a greater risk of a fatal shooting.

Arrest data lets us measure this possibility. For the entire country, 28.9 percent of arrestees were African-American. This number is not very different from the 31.8 percent of police-shooting victims who were African-Americans. If police discrimination were a big factor in the actual killings, we would have expected a larger gap between the arrest rate and the police-killing rate.

The real question is why the black % of total victims of police killings is that low (32%), much lower than the black % of people who commit homicides (52%), for example.

My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing than a black thing, so a lot of police killings are of suicidal white guys, which reduces the black share of total victims of cops. A couple of months ago right on Ventura Boulevard there was a classic suicide by cop: a 40-something white homeless guy sat down on the sidewalk and fired a gun into the air and into the ground (making no effort to hit any pedestrians) until the LAPD came and killed him. So, this higher white suicide-by-cop propensity is one reason why the black proportion of those being killed by cops isn’t much higher than their arrest rates, when blacks tend on average to behave worse in most hostile situations.

This in turn suggests that removing police racial bias will have little effect on the killing rate. …

If the major problem is then that African-Americans have so many more encounters with police, we must ask why. Of course, with this as well, police prejudice may be playing a role. After all, police officers decide whom to stop or arrest.

But this is too large a problem to pin on individual officers.

First, the police are at least in part guided by suspect descriptions. And the descriptions provided by victims already show a large racial gap: Nearly 30 percent of reported offenders were black. So if the police simply stopped suspects at a rate matching these descriptions, African-Americans would be encountering police at a rate close to both the arrest and the killing rates.

Second, the choice of where to police is mostly not up to individual officers. And police officers tend to be most active in poor neighborhoods, and African-Americans disproportionately live in poverty.

In fact, the deeper you look, the more it appears that the race problem revealed by the statistics reflects a larger problem: the structure of our society, our laws and policies.

The war on drugs illustrates this kind of racial bias. African-Americans are only slightly more likely to use drugs than whites. Yet, they are more than twice as likely to be arrested on drug-related charges. One reason is that drug sellers are being targeted more heavily than users.

We should eliminate police prejudice because it is wrong and because it undermines our democracy. It blights — and all too often destroys — lives.

But there are also structural problems underpinning these killings. We are all responsible for those.

Except for blacks, like Michael Brown. They’re not responsible for anything.

 
Hide 146 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. • Replies: @Anonymous

    "Pulled you over because you flashed me," Frost can be heard on the video. "I didn't have my brights on."

    "Yes, you did, sir," Guilford says.

    "Nope, I didn't, partner," Frost replies.
     
    So a fight subsequently breaks out between these guys and Guilford gets shot. This sounded like an argument between a couple of kindergarten kids only now one of them is six feet under.
    , @AnotherDad
    This cop sounds like a jackass, but the kid drove this interaction into the ditch with his refusal of the cop's request for license and registration.

    I can't imagine the pain the parents are feeling--my youngest daughter's first boyfriend (a few years back in HS) died of a drug overdose a month back at college; being even an arms length away from that, talking to his mom at the memorial, incredibly painful. Can't imagine anything worse than losing your kid right as they enter adulthood.

    But ... these parents screwed up. They raised a "give me your badge number" and pull out my cellphone to take video kid.

    Once of the very first things i told my boy while teaching him to drive--after "this is a 3500 pound killing machine"--is "don't fight with cops on the street; you'll get pulled over, occasionally because the cop's being an a*hole; but don't every get into a fight with a cop--he has a gun, you don't; if the cop's a dickhead ... have your fight with him in the courtroom."
  2. Police respond to calls of a crime or suspicious activity….rarely is it happenstance. In high crime, black majority neighborhoods, the calls come from black citizens. Regardless of color, law-abiding citizens deserve police protection.

  3. A word of caution about the “justifiable homicide” stats (in particular the 31.8 figure.) The database is incomplete because it’s based on voluntary info submissions to the FBI. It’s definitely a large sample size, but I haven’t seen any discussion about its representativeness.

    That said, the proportion of blacks killed by police in the FBI supplementary report has declined over the past few decades, which seems plausible to me.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    The Graniad has a little project called the Counted where tay are trying to monitor all police killings in the US

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/series/counted-us-police-killings
  4. There’s only one way that the killing of blacks by police officers will stop. That’s if cops ignore any situation where they see a black suspect who looks like he might act aggressively and have to be shot in self-defence. But of course it’s hard to do that if you’re asked to respond to a call. I’m sure that, with hindsight, most cops would prefer to look the other way if they found themselves in the same position as Officer Darren Wilson when he drove towards Michael Brown on that fateful day.

  5. My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing than a black thing, so a lot of police killings are of suicidal white guys, which reduces the black share of total victims of cops.

    My family knew a tragedy this year that supports that impression: http://www.rrstar.com/article/20150516/NEWS/150519531

    My cousin’s husband had an alcohol-fueled episode of bipolar insanity and opened fire on the cops who were called to the house after he had stripped down and started stalking the property with an AR-15. Pretty certainly it was a suicide by cop. (Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot.) After that I looked into it a bit. From Wikipedias “Suicide by cop” page:

    Some of the first research into suicide by cop was completed by Sgt. Rick Parent of the Delta Police Department. Parent’s research of 843 police shootings determined that about 50% were victim precipitated homicide. Police defined victim precipitated homicide as “an incident in which an individual bent on self-destruction, engages in life threatening and criminal behavior to force law enforcement officers to kill them.”

    50 percent–that’s very interesting.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot
     
    Rockford has 150,000 residents, with 200,000 more in the suburbs. Only someone in Chicago would think of that as a "small town".

    Now Rockford, Michigan and Rockford, Minnesota are small towns.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Police defined victim precipitated homicide as “an incident in which an individual bent on self-destruction, engages in life threatening and criminal behavior to force law enforcement officers to kill them.”"

    Of course, some policemen have a fairly low threshold as to what constitutes threatening behavior. Perhaps suicide-by-cop became popular because of its efficacy.
  6. Only people with names like SENDHIL MULLAINATHAN are allowed to notice numbers these days.

  7. Article: No evidence for police bias.

    Conclusion: “We should eliminate police prejudice because it is wrong and because it undermines our democracy.”

    • Agree: International Jew
  8. I guess if we mention the other way around where a white guy is killed by a black cop like Gilbert Collar in Alabama in 2012 and Dillon Taylor in Utah someone will said that’s racist.

  9. Would the Gentle Giant have attacked Darren Wilson had Wilson been black?

  10. The obvious solution is for negroes to retreat to the safe confines of Africa, Haiti, Detroit and the like …

  11. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    Steve, why are you obsessing with this stuff and not covering Alanis’ re-release?

    • Replies: @SFG
    It's ironic, don't you think?
  12. Keep an eye out for when data starts informing editorials in the NYT.

    At the link you can see his other NYT articles — the Wikipedia page on the author — seems to be an imported academic SJW/do-gooder type.

  13. My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing than a black thing, so a lot of police killings are of suicidal white guys, which reduces the black share of total victims of cops.

    I knew a guy back in my barfly days who did this. We were friendly with each other, but never put it past that. His sister was nuts, but he was calm and softly spoken. He called 911 one day and walked onto his front lawn with a pistol in his hand. The cops came and shot him dead. He didn’t fire it. I don’t know that was even loaded. That might be in police report, for what it’s worth.

    Do blacks do that too? I don’t know. “My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing…” may not be one of your best speculations.

    • Replies: @WGG
    Not really. Your purely anecdotal evidence aside, whites are far more likely to commit suicide in general than blacks are.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_suicide#Race_and_suicide

    Blacks tend to choose a self-destructive lifestyle more often than whites, which amounts to a lower life expectancy. Whites are far more likely to live fairly productive lives and then one day just Hunter Thompson their way out.
  14. Eric Garner was selling “loosies” because no one will hire a black man in NYC if he can get a Dominican for half as much. No one ever frames it that way.

    • Replies: @endicott coil
    Most Dominicans are only marginally less black than Eric Garner. They are, however, generally willing to work harder than American blacks and are often somewhat, if not hugely, smarter. And they are willing to endure more in the way of underhousing.
    , @CJ
    Eric Garner had a job with the NYC Park Department until he screwed up too many times. At least, according to his wife's account.
    , @E. Rekshun
    Eric Garner was selling “loosies” because no one will hire a black man in NYC...

    Something tells me that Garner probably didn't do well on job interviews or have any marketable skills or job references.
  15. “According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population.”

    Don’t New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not “more than two and a half”.
    Or is it the FBI who can’t do arithmetic?

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    Don’t New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not “more than two and a half”.
    Or is it the FBI who can’t do arithmetic?


    The author is wrong but right, while you are right but wrong. Comparing rates of blacks killed by cops to "the general population" is pointless since the general population includes blacks. More useful would be to compare the rate of blacks killed by cops blacks that of the non-black population. That would mean taking the 2.409 figure and dividing it by 68.2/86.8. You get 2.409/0.785 = 3.066. Per capita, blacks are over 3x as likely as non-blacks to be killed by cops.
    , @Wilkey
    Think about it this way: say 100% of Americans with sickle cell anemia are black. That means blacks are 7.5x as likely as "the general population" to have sickle cell anemia. What it really means is that blacks are infinitely more likely than non-blacks to have sickle cell anemia.
    , @AndrewR
    Akkkuracy is a tool of White Supremacy used to oppress numerically challenged People of Color.
  16. To understand how this can be, let us start with the statistics on police killings. According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population.

    No, it’s not! It’s 2.409 times 13.2%.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    At first I thought you were just being pedantic but then I noticed how the author had said "more than two and a half times" instead of just rounding up to 2.5.

    The NYT is supposed to be a reputable paper but clearly it's ok to make mistakes in arithmetic that anyone who finished fifth grade should not be making as long as such a mistake advances the agenda.

  17. But then, come monday, Narrative trumps Data again.

  18. This NYT story breaks from the herd for a little while by considering that discrimination doesn’t explain this disparate impact. But then it runs back to the herd and muses that:

    the deeper you look, the more it appears that the race problem revealed by the statistics reflects a larger problem: the structure of our society, our laws and policies.

    Blah. I guess we can’t consider too much truth at one time.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    The guy calmly pointing out that this particular friendless old lady isn't a witch can be forgiven for surrounding his argument with some boilerplate about how of course witches are a threat to us all, the devil's ways are insidious, etc.
    , @AndrewR
    I would concur with NOTA. An unfortunate fact of human psychology is that people often refuse to believe the truth unless it comes packaged with rhetoric that flatters their prejudices and dogmas.

    We see this phenomenon among all groups. The particulars of the prejudices widely vary but the overall phenomenon remains remarkably fixed.
  19. @Reg Cæsar
    Eric Garner was selling "loosies" because no one will hire a black man in NYC if he can get a Dominican for half as much. No one ever frames it that way.

    Most Dominicans are only marginally less black than Eric Garner. They are, however, generally willing to work harder than American blacks and are often somewhat, if not hugely, smarter. And they are willing to endure more in the way of underhousing.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Any other city, and I would have said "Mexican".
  20. The actual percentage of murders committed by blacks is probably higher than the reported 52% by a fairly substantial margin.

    About a third of the murders in the US are not cleared. The unsolved homicides are disproportionately urban and black, and probably committed by other blacks. In Chicago no suspect is arrested in two thirds of the homicides. It’s about the same in Detroit and Atlanta and New Orleans, all high bodycount cities that collectively have a significant effect of the nationwide statistics. The unsolved homicides are mostly the result of anonymous black urban street violence. In Chicago 77% of the victims are black, and it’s a good bet that most of the perps who killed them but whose race is unknown are also black. In contrast about 4% of the victims are white.

    I suspect the actual percentage of murders committed by blacks nationwide is closer to 60%, maybe more.

    http://heyjackass.com/

    • Replies: @NOTA
    The FBI homicide report has some algorithm for guessing the race of unknown murderers based on statistics for the known ones. I don't know if they got this right, but I suspect they did about as well as could be done with the data they had.

    The police shooting data in that report is known to be an undercount; I think the Washington post and Guardian have their own more complete counts. I think the other murders aren't likely to be undercounts, but I may be missing something--I'm definitely no expert.
    , @Steve Sailer
    What about average number of perps per dead body? I wouldn't be surprised if there were more black homicide offenders per victim because blacks are more likely to kill as part of a gang (e.g., a drive-by shooting), while whites tend to kill in solitary fashion. That would increase the number of black homicide offenders relative to the number of victims of blacks.
  21. The real question is why the black % of total victims of police killings is that low (32%), much lower than the black % of people who commit homicides (52%), for example.

    A “bad” shooting of a black guy in an urban area means the cop’s employer is out about about $5 million in a civil suit. Places with rowdier whites usually don’t have juries who will soak a city over a police shooting like this, so there is much less economic incentive to discourage police from opening fire.

    As a further disincentive, shooting a black guy will often become a political headache in a way that shooting a white will not. You won’t have hundreds of people protesting, calling for you to be fired and jailed, and maybe vandalizing your house.

    A couple years ago some tests showed that cops are less likely to shoot blacks all other things being equal.

    Urban blacks have limited political capital, and they have stupidly but successfully used much of it to make police marginally less likely to draw their guns and fire in encounters with young black males.

    • Replies: @bomag
    Urban blacks have limited political capital, and they have stupidly but successfully used much of it to make police marginally less likely to draw their guns and fire in encounters with young black males.

    I give them a little more credit. Libertarians complain that the central gov't has a monopoly on using violence; thus the authorities can enforce rules at their pleasure. There is some value to being cut in on this monopoly power, even if it is to more Mau Mau the flak catchers.
  22. Okay, this is the second time I’ve spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased. I know how hard it is to roll your own software.

    Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.

    • Replies: @EriK
    Penalty for using, sorry, trying to use, that moniker. Best of luck.
    , @AnotherDad

    ... apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased.
     
    Has happened to me a few times. Agree definitely worth fixing.

    In the interim, my suggestion--a subset of the more general "save your work" principle--is once you have a comment that starts heading toward being a "piece of work", then move to using your email or other favorite editor. Advantage you're in control--have the editing you're used to, can send a copy to yourself, etc. etc.

    Other suggestion is do the "remember my info" and let unz.com populate these fields for you.
    , @Anonymo1
    A modern comment system is supposed to use AJAX - so you don't even leave the page.
    , @Ron Unz

    Okay, this is the second time I’ve spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email...Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.
     
    There's really nothing to fix. This is partly to encourage people to use the "Remember My Information" option, which would also allow you to use Agree/Disagree buttons. If you don't want to use that option and also don't bother to remember your authenticating email and *also* don't bother to save the text of your comment, I can't much help you.
  23. @Lot

    The real question is why the black % of total victims of police killings is that low (32%), much lower than the black % of people who commit homicides (52%), for example.
     
    A "bad" shooting of a black guy in an urban area means the cop's employer is out about about $5 million in a civil suit. Places with rowdier whites usually don't have juries who will soak a city over a police shooting like this, so there is much less economic incentive to discourage police from opening fire.

    As a further disincentive, shooting a black guy will often become a political headache in a way that shooting a white will not. You won't have hundreds of people protesting, calling for you to be fired and jailed, and maybe vandalizing your house.

    A couple years ago some tests showed that cops are less likely to shoot blacks all other things being equal.

    Urban blacks have limited political capital, and they have stupidly but successfully used much of it to make police marginally less likely to draw their guns and fire in encounters with young black males.

    Urban blacks have limited political capital, and they have stupidly but successfully used much of it to make police marginally less likely to draw their guns and fire in encounters with young black males.

    I give them a little more credit. Libertarians complain that the central gov’t has a monopoly on using violence; thus the authorities can enforce rules at their pleasure. There is some value to being cut in on this monopoly power, even if it is to more Mau Mau the flak catchers.

  24. If racial discrimination by cop were eliminated, that times 2.4 black-white cop killing rate rate would look a lot more like the 8-1 black to white homicide rate.

  25. @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    "According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population."

    Don't New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not "more than two and a half".
    Or is it the FBI who can't do arithmetic?

    Don’t New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not “more than two and a half”.
    Or is it the FBI who can’t do arithmetic?

    The author is wrong but right, while you are right but wrong. Comparing rates of blacks killed by cops to “the general population” is pointless since the general population includes blacks. More useful would be to compare the rate of blacks killed by cops blacks that of the non-black population. That would mean taking the 2.409 figure and dividing it by 68.2/86.8. You get 2.409/0.785 = 3.066. Per capita, blacks are over 3x as likely as non-blacks to be killed by cops.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The author wasn't comparing the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of general population killed. He was comparing the rate of blacks killed to the rate of blacks in the general population.
    , @bomag
    I see what you are saying here, and it is a good point to keep in mind.

    As written, though, the author slipped up a little bit.

    (I thought you were making a different point with your sickle cell reference.)
  26. @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    "According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population."

    Don't New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not "more than two and a half".
    Or is it the FBI who can't do arithmetic?

    Think about it this way: say 100% of Americans with sickle cell anemia are black. That means blacks are 7.5x as likely as “the general population” to have sickle cell anemia. What it really means is that blacks are infinitely more likely than non-blacks to have sickle cell anemia.

    • Replies: @bomag
    Your analysis doesn't capture it, either. There is an implicit assumption that crime and disease should follow a Poisson distribution amongst the population, thus it is proper to divide by the total population.

    The next step would be to derive a baseline death-by-cop rate for each race by examining 100% White areas and 100% Black areas. Then we would have to correct for socioeconomics and "predator" effects and we are off to the races (pun intended).
  27. WGG [AKA "World\'s Greatest Grandson"] says:

    The BLM tards that held the Baltimore City Council hostage this week made a list of 19 demands including millions in handouts and carte blanche to commit “minor crimes”- not just misdemeanors but thefts as well. One of their state principles said “human life is always more important than property.”

    I have heard this argument so many times from the hand wringing blacks that, “He just stole some jewelry, he didn’t deserve to lose his life over it.”

    Uh, yeah, probably not, but when he decided to fight the cop that was trying to arrest him, he sealed his own fate.

    “Well that cop should have just let him run off when he started to run/fight.”

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. Whites see law-breaking and theft as always wrong and always deserving punishment from authorities. Blacks see theft as something everyone does- sometimes you get robbed and sometimes you get away with the loot. It’s yin and yang, take the good with the bad- no need for cops.

    This is why both sides should be for separatism. Blacks will never be a majority in this country, therefore their utopian Detroit dreams will very rarely come to fruition. However, this particular brand of lawlessness is so potently detrimental to urban living (from a white perspective) that whites will always flee and dislike it. No compromise will make either side happy. Separation appears to be the only answer.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    A complete separation would bring out the truth about race. It would finally reveal how blacks would deal with the matter of justice and policing when left to their own devices. If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he's incarcerated. It would soon be revealed that the administration of justice by whites, far from being harsh on blacks, actually had a moderating influence.
    , @Jonathan Silber
    Separation [of Whites from Blacks] appears to be the only answer.

    Apartheid in South Africa appears to have been an approach based on that point of view; but, however satisfactory it may have been, it could not survive the opposition from other Western nations operating under the theology of Liberalism.

    Section 8 housing is the weapon employed by American liberals to destroy the same kind of separation of the races otherwise achievable by White flight.

    White people may find themselves with nowhere else to run to, and sooner rather than later.
    , @AnotherDad

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. ...

    This is why both sides should be for separatism.
     
    Excellent comment, Mr. Grandson.

    A lot of the NYT\fellow traveller commentary was about how racist it was for majority black Ferguson to have a majority of white cops and (implicitly) for Michael Brown to have be stopped by a white cop. But, of course, in any integrated community, even if the police force exactly matches the racial demographics, everyone has to put up with being stopped by cops from another race. This "white cops" argument is really an argument against integration.

    "Disparate impact" school discipline mau-mauing is another issue like this. A fundamental disagreement on what behavior is acceptable.

    But hey, i--and i suspect 95% of whites--don't have any need to be around blacks. So let's just fix it with segregation.

    ~~~

    However, this is far from the only issue where separation is the solution.


    Even more important is "open borders". There's a group of people who love open borders--and relentlessly push it on us. I don't want to deprive them of their desire to live amid "diversity"--have at it! But most folks do not want open borders--at all.

    Again separation is the answer. Let us "normals" have our own normal country, while the "cosmopolitan globalists" have their diversity utopia.

    Of course, the reason separation is not on the table is that both these groups--the blacks and the open borders cheerleaders--do not actually want *their own* nation. These folks don't really want "racist" or "xenophobic" whites to go-their-own-way--which would seem to be the obvious win-win solution-- ... because their fundamental relationship to whites is parasitic. They want--in different ways--to feast off the high quality society that white people create. Essentially they want whites to be slaves--creating prosperity that can be looted, but unable to control their own destiny.
  28. WGG [AKA "World\'s Greatest Grandson"] says:
    @jJay
    My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing than a black thing, so a lot of police killings are of suicidal white guys, which reduces the black share of total victims of cops.

    I knew a guy back in my barfly days who did this. We were friendly with each other, but never put it past that. His sister was nuts, but he was calm and softly spoken. He called 911 one day and walked onto his front lawn with a pistol in his hand. The cops came and shot him dead. He didn't fire it. I don't know that was even loaded. That might be in police report, for what it's worth.

    Do blacks do that too? I don't know. "My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing..." may not be one of your best speculations.

    Not really. Your purely anecdotal evidence aside, whites are far more likely to commit suicide in general than blacks are.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_suicide#Race_and_suicide

    Blacks tend to choose a self-destructive lifestyle more often than whites, which amounts to a lower life expectancy. Whites are far more likely to live fairly productive lives and then one day just Hunter Thompson their way out.

  29. @WGG
    The BLM tards that held the Baltimore City Council hostage this week made a list of 19 demands including millions in handouts and carte blanche to commit "minor crimes"- not just misdemeanors but thefts as well. One of their state principles said "human life is always more important than property."

    I have heard this argument so many times from the hand wringing blacks that, "He just stole some jewelry, he didn't deserve to lose his life over it."

    Uh, yeah, probably not, but when he decided to fight the cop that was trying to arrest him, he sealed his own fate.

    "Well that cop should have just let him run off when he started to run/fight."

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. Whites see law-breaking and theft as always wrong and always deserving punishment from authorities. Blacks see theft as something everyone does- sometimes you get robbed and sometimes you get away with the loot. It's yin and yang, take the good with the bad- no need for cops.

    This is why both sides should be for separatism. Blacks will never be a majority in this country, therefore their utopian Detroit dreams will very rarely come to fruition. However, this particular brand of lawlessness is so potently detrimental to urban living (from a white perspective) that whites will always flee and dislike it. No compromise will make either side happy. Separation appears to be the only answer.

    A complete separation would bring out the truth about race. It would finally reveal how blacks would deal with the matter of justice and policing when left to their own devices. If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he’s incarcerated. It would soon be revealed that the administration of justice by whites, far from being harsh on blacks, actually had a moderating influence.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Also, of course, any compensation paid out to victims of police misconduct would be money earned by black taxpayers.
    , @E. Rekshun
    If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he’s incarcerated.

    Who would pay the taxes to fund these government workers?
    , @Flip
    So how does it work in Jamaica or the Bahamas? These are black run countries.
  30. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    If ‘economists’ are this obviously just so full of shit when pontificating about a subject which is not their ‘natural’ remit – and which they haven’t shrouded in deliberate levels of obfuscation and arcanery in order to deter the laity – just imagine how much they must lie and lie and lie, deceive, deceive and deceive when doing their own thing.

    Let’s cut through all the bullshit.

    Blacks violently offend at many, many times the multiple of whites. This has been well known for centuries. It is a pattern repeated in just about every society studied at every historic time period studied. I offer no explanations, but that’s just the way it is.

    Now, persons who violently offend are likely to encounter cops.

    Just stating the f*cking obvious.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    Isn't that basically what the writer is saying? A simple model that fits the data passably well is that each arrest has some small probability of going wrong and ending up with the cops shooting someone, regardless of the races of the people involved. Blacks are about as likely to get shot as whites when they're arrested, but blacks get arrested per capita a lot more often than whites, and that accounts for why they get shot by the cops more often.
  31. @Rob McX
    A complete separation would bring out the truth about race. It would finally reveal how blacks would deal with the matter of justice and policing when left to their own devices. If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he's incarcerated. It would soon be revealed that the administration of justice by whites, far from being harsh on blacks, actually had a moderating influence.

    Also, of course, any compensation paid out to victims of police misconduct would be money earned by black taxpayers.

  32. @Pat Casey

    My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing than a black thing, so a lot of police killings are of suicidal white guys, which reduces the black share of total victims of cops.
     
    My family knew a tragedy this year that supports that impression: http://www.rrstar.com/article/20150516/NEWS/150519531

    My cousin's husband had an alcohol-fueled episode of bipolar insanity and opened fire on the cops who were called to the house after he had stripped down and started stalking the property with an AR-15. Pretty certainly it was a suicide by cop. (Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot.) After that I looked into it a bit. From Wikipedias "Suicide by cop" page:


    Some of the first research into suicide by cop was completed by Sgt. Rick Parent of the Delta Police Department. Parent's research of 843 police shootings determined that about 50% were victim precipitated homicide. Police defined victim precipitated homicide as "an incident in which an individual bent on self-destruction, engages in life threatening and criminal behavior to force law enforcement officers to kill them."
     
    50 percent--that's very interesting.

    Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot

    Rockford has 150,000 residents, with 200,000 more in the suburbs. Only someone in Chicago would think of that as a “small town”.

    Now Rockford, Michigan and Rockford, Minnesota are small towns.

    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    Point granted. I'm from where the city of Alexandria is not unusually called a small town, and its more populous than Rockford proper. Ten shot in one night there would get splashed on the front page for sure.
    , @AndrewR
    It's all relative. 350k is an extraordinarily small population to have ten people shot in one night, although such a casualty count might be par for the course in Chicongo.
  33. @endicott coil
    Most Dominicans are only marginally less black than Eric Garner. They are, however, generally willing to work harder than American blacks and are often somewhat, if not hugely, smarter. And they are willing to endure more in the way of underhousing.

    Any other city, and I would have said “Mexican”.

  34. @Reg Cæsar

    Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot
     
    Rockford has 150,000 residents, with 200,000 more in the suburbs. Only someone in Chicago would think of that as a "small town".

    Now Rockford, Michigan and Rockford, Minnesota are small towns.

    Point granted. I’m from where the city of Alexandria is not unusually called a small town, and its more populous than Rockford proper. Ten shot in one night there would get splashed on the front page for sure.

  35. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Blah
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/family-michigan-teen-shot-dead-traffic-stop-sues/story?id=34533142

    Show them this one.

    “Pulled you over because you flashed me,” Frost can be heard on the video. “I didn’t have my brights on.”

    “Yes, you did, sir,” Guilford says.

    “Nope, I didn’t, partner,” Frost replies.

    So a fight subsequently breaks out between these guys and Guilford gets shot. This sounded like an argument between a couple of kindergarten kids only now one of them is six feet under.

  36. @bomag
    This NYT story breaks from the herd for a little while by considering that discrimination doesn't explain this disparate impact. But then it runs back to the herd and muses that:

    the deeper you look, the more it appears that the race problem revealed by the statistics reflects a larger problem: the structure of our society, our laws and policies.

    Blah. I guess we can't consider too much truth at one time.

    The guy calmly pointing out that this particular friendless old lady isn’t a witch can be forgiven for surrounding his argument with some boilerplate about how of course witches are a threat to us all, the devil’s ways are insidious, etc.

  37. @Boomstick
    The actual percentage of murders committed by blacks is probably higher than the reported 52% by a fairly substantial margin.

    About a third of the murders in the US are not cleared. The unsolved homicides are disproportionately urban and black, and probably committed by other blacks. In Chicago no suspect is arrested in two thirds of the homicides. It's about the same in Detroit and Atlanta and New Orleans, all high bodycount cities that collectively have a significant effect of the nationwide statistics. The unsolved homicides are mostly the result of anonymous black urban street violence. In Chicago 77% of the victims are black, and it's a good bet that most of the perps who killed them but whose race is unknown are also black. In contrast about 4% of the victims are white.

    I suspect the actual percentage of murders committed by blacks nationwide is closer to 60%, maybe more.

    http://heyjackass.com/

    The FBI homicide report has some algorithm for guessing the race of unknown murderers based on statistics for the known ones. I don’t know if they got this right, but I suspect they did about as well as could be done with the data they had.

    The police shooting data in that report is known to be an undercount; I think the Washington post and Guardian have their own more complete counts. I think the other murders aren’t likely to be undercounts, but I may be missing something–I’m definitely no expert.

    • Replies: @Boomstick
    I don't think they do use an estimation for the race of the offender, and instead rely on the race reported by the reporting authorities.

    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls

    "NOTE: This table is based on incidents where some information about the offender is known by law enforcement; therefore, when the offender age, sex, and race are all reported as unknown, these data are excluded from the table."
  38. @Anonymous
    If 'economists' are this obviously just so full of shit when pontificating about a subject which is not their 'natural' remit - and which they haven't shrouded in deliberate levels of obfuscation and arcanery in order to deter the laity - just imagine how much they must lie and lie and lie, deceive, deceive and deceive when doing their own thing.

    Let's cut through all the bullshit.

    Blacks violently offend at many, many times the multiple of whites. This has been well known for centuries. It is a pattern repeated in just about every society studied at every historic time period studied. I offer no explanations, but that's just the way it is.

    Now, persons who violently offend are likely to encounter cops.

    Just stating the f*cking obvious.

    Isn’t that basically what the writer is saying? A simple model that fits the data passably well is that each arrest has some small probability of going wrong and ending up with the cops shooting someone, regardless of the races of the people involved. Blacks are about as likely to get shot as whites when they’re arrested, but blacks get arrested per capita a lot more often than whites, and that accounts for why they get shot by the cops more often.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Don't worry about Anon. Just another one of those ranting white nationalists that Steve seems to attract like rotting meat does flies.

    So why are we continuing this pointless war on drugs, given that it increases police encounters with blacks and therefore makes all these killings more likely? How is this a good use of public resources?
    , @Steve Sailer
    But blacks tend to screw up spectacularly more than whites do across a wide range of fraught situations so the interesting question is why blacks don't make up 50% rather than 30% of homicides by cops the way blacks make up 50% of homicide offenders?

    One guess is that the total of whites getting shot by cops is inflated by a higher white propensity to decide to go out via suicide-by-cop. That was my impression from reading about a few thousand killings in L.A. County in Jill Leovy's L.A. Times Homicide Blog, but I didn't try to count it up.

    One way to check that it to look at ages of blacks v. whites shot by cops. I think the white ages tend to be older, while blacks get shot a lot by cops at young ages whey they are full of life but not so much when they are older and tired of living.
  39. @Anon7
    Okay, this is the second time I've spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased. I know how hard it is to roll your own software.

    Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.

    Penalty for using, sorry, trying to use, that moniker. Best of luck.

  40. at least they look at the numbers, thats more than I expected from the NYT

  41. @WGG
    The BLM tards that held the Baltimore City Council hostage this week made a list of 19 demands including millions in handouts and carte blanche to commit "minor crimes"- not just misdemeanors but thefts as well. One of their state principles said "human life is always more important than property."

    I have heard this argument so many times from the hand wringing blacks that, "He just stole some jewelry, he didn't deserve to lose his life over it."

    Uh, yeah, probably not, but when he decided to fight the cop that was trying to arrest him, he sealed his own fate.

    "Well that cop should have just let him run off when he started to run/fight."

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. Whites see law-breaking and theft as always wrong and always deserving punishment from authorities. Blacks see theft as something everyone does- sometimes you get robbed and sometimes you get away with the loot. It's yin and yang, take the good with the bad- no need for cops.

    This is why both sides should be for separatism. Blacks will never be a majority in this country, therefore their utopian Detroit dreams will very rarely come to fruition. However, this particular brand of lawlessness is so potently detrimental to urban living (from a white perspective) that whites will always flee and dislike it. No compromise will make either side happy. Separation appears to be the only answer.

    Separation [of Whites from Blacks] appears to be the only answer.

    Apartheid in South Africa appears to have been an approach based on that point of view; but, however satisfactory it may have been, it could not survive the opposition from other Western nations operating under the theology of Liberalism.

    Section 8 housing is the weapon employed by American liberals to destroy the same kind of separation of the races otherwise achievable by White flight.

    White people may find themselves with nowhere else to run to, and sooner rather than later.

  42. “The military art, the very opposite of indiscriminate killing, consists of striking those people and things most likely to stop the enemy from continuing the war. Today, the specialization of weapons and tactics of war make it easier than ever to go after those whose death is most likely to stop the killing.”
    http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/submitted/Perry/repugnant.html

    You want the police to be militarized, which goes against the cable TV news expert narrative.

  43. Both the NYT article and your comment focus on percentages, but neither cites an absolute number of persons killed by cops. Wouldn’t it help to know that in evaluating the problem? I tried Googling and came up with a total of 623 for 2014, the last complete year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2014

    I don’t want to minimize the problem, but 623 does not sound like a terribly large number in a nation of more than 320 million people. I would venture to say that a large proportion of those 623 killings by cops involved criminals involved in serious crimes and very few involved people like Eric Gardner up in NYC or the 12-year old in Cleveland who was waving a plastic toy gun which looked awfully real. I decided to look up my old home town, Washington, D.C., and here is what Wikipedia says: “Washington was often described as the “murder capital” of the United States during the early 1990s.[107] The number of murders peaked in 1991 at 479, but the level of violence then began to decline significantly.[108] By 2012, Washington’s annual murder count dropped to 88, the lowest total since 1961;[109] though the number of homicides has since risen each year to over 100 in 2015.” For some reason, I couldn’t quickly locate a number of murders nation-wide.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    In my neighborhood, I can recall two killings by cops in the last 5 years. One was a clear suicide-by-cop where a guy planted himself down on a busy sidewalk and started shooting into the air and into the ground until the cops arrived and shot him. The other was the DEA agent who shot the 18-year-old violist while the cops were brawling with another guy. The kid's family eventually got $3 million.
  44. Steve, it’s only one example but the Kajieme Powell case in St Louis is certainly a counterpoint to your theory. I think the suicide-by-cop phenomenon deserves more study.

  45. @bomag
    This NYT story breaks from the herd for a little while by considering that discrimination doesn't explain this disparate impact. But then it runs back to the herd and muses that:

    the deeper you look, the more it appears that the race problem revealed by the statistics reflects a larger problem: the structure of our society, our laws and policies.

    Blah. I guess we can't consider too much truth at one time.

    I would concur with NOTA. An unfortunate fact of human psychology is that people often refuse to believe the truth unless it comes packaged with rhetoric that flatters their prejudices and dogmas.

    We see this phenomenon among all groups. The particulars of the prejudices widely vary but the overall phenomenon remains remarkably fixed.

  46. @ben tillman

    To understand how this can be, let us start with the statistics on police killings. According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population.
     
    No, it's not! It's 2.409 times 13.2%.

    At first I thought you were just being pedantic but then I noticed how the author had said “more than two and a half times” instead of just rounding up to 2.5.

    The NYT is supposed to be a reputable paper but clearly it’s ok to make mistakes in arithmetic that anyone who finished fifth grade should not be making as long as such a mistake advances the agenda.

  47. @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    "According to the F.B.I.’s Supplementary Homicide Report, 31.8 percent of people shot by the police were African-American, a proportion more than two and a half times the 13.2 percent of African-Americans in the general population."

    Don't New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not "more than two and a half".
    Or is it the FBI who can't do arithmetic?

    Akkkuracy is a tool of White Supremacy used to oppress numerically challenged People of Color.

  48. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I have ambivalent feelings about this. On the one hand I’m surprised there isn’t a higher percentage of blacks killed by cops seeing as many are highly violent and involved in hard-core crime. On the other hand it’s strange to realize American cops kill over a thousand people each year while the cops in places like Britain and Germany kill nearly zero-or actually zero-people. American police kill more people in one year than British cops have killed in the past one hundred years. There’s a general idea that if someone fights the cops with their fists then they deserve to die for the effrontery of doing so although the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns. They always give the same line after shooting someone, as provided to them by the union lawyer and is the standard response, that they were ‘in fear for their life’. In the Brown case it may have been unavoidable but Walter Scott was shot in the back while fleeing. It’s a good question as to how many people were killed for angering the police prior to the era of ubiquitous camera and surveillance phones.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns.

    So we shouldn't have any female police officers? Besides that, there's no reason a police officer should have to engage in fisticuffs with a suspect--it can go south for him too quickly. If someone wants to fight a cop, he has to understand the consequences.
    , @Anonymous
    Britain is, of course, an unarmed society.

    That is apart from villains such as Mark Duggan who happened to have guns.
    , @tbraton
    "On the other hand it’s strange to realize American cops kill over a thousand people each year while the cops in places like Britain and Germany kill nearly zero-or actually zero-people. "

    Actually, the total number of Americans killed by cops in 2014 was 623, not "over a thousand people each year." See my message #43 above. I don't have a breakdown, but I would bet that a substantial majority of those were hardened criminals caught in the act of committing a crime. BTW I made an exception for Eric Gardner in NYC who, for some reason, was wrestled to the ground for the "crime" of selling loose cigarettes. He wasn't shot but apparently died of asthma. I find it astounding that someone could lose his life over such a petty crime, but I draw a sharp distinction between the Gardner case and the shooting death of Michael Brown, which the evidence shows was a justified shooting.

    BTW if you apply the number of total Americans killed by cops in America in 2014, 623, to the population of the USA of around 320,000,000, you get a percentage of 0.0000019%. If you apply that percentage to the population of Washington, D.C. in 2014, 659,000, that means that you could expect an average of 1.28 persons killed by police in D.C., based on the national totals. That would be out of a total thus far in 2015 of over a 100 murders in D.C., which puts the cops killings in perspective. That was my point all along. Even one cop killing is too many, but America is not England or Germany.
  49. … suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing

    Any kind of genuine suicide is a much more a white thing. Whites are less likely to take risks and fight with police irrespective of the likely consequences.

  50. @Reg Cæsar

    Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot
     
    Rockford has 150,000 residents, with 200,000 more in the suburbs. Only someone in Chicago would think of that as a "small town".

    Now Rockford, Michigan and Rockford, Minnesota are small towns.

    It’s all relative. 350k is an extraordinarily small population to have ten people shot in one night, although such a casualty count might be par for the course in Chicongo.

  51. @Wilkey
    Think about it this way: say 100% of Americans with sickle cell anemia are black. That means blacks are 7.5x as likely as "the general population" to have sickle cell anemia. What it really means is that blacks are infinitely more likely than non-blacks to have sickle cell anemia.

    Your analysis doesn’t capture it, either. There is an implicit assumption that crime and disease should follow a Poisson distribution amongst the population, thus it is proper to divide by the total population.

    The next step would be to derive a baseline death-by-cop rate for each race by examining 100% White areas and 100% Black areas. Then we would have to correct for socioeconomics and “predator” effects and we are off to the races (pun intended).

    • Replies: @Dirk Dagger
    Why doesn't anyone care about the killed-by-police gender disparity? Seems like persons-who-think-they-are-male are dying at a slighty higher rate than the general population (possibly?). I'm not that good with statistics so I could be wrong.
  52. @The most deplorable one
    Steve, why are you obsessing with this stuff and not covering Alanis' re-release?

    It’s ironic, don’t you think?

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    Well, she is the most importantest female recording star evah and proved that money can be made by female performers.

    Forget about those pretenders like Janis and Chrissy and so on! No one as short as Edith can make money, I mean, get real!
  53. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @SFG
    It's ironic, don't you think?

    Well, she is the most importantest female recording star evah and proved that money can be made by female performers.

    Forget about those pretenders like Janis and Chrissy and so on! No one as short as Edith can make money, I mean, get real!

  54. @NOTA
    The FBI homicide report has some algorithm for guessing the race of unknown murderers based on statistics for the known ones. I don't know if they got this right, but I suspect they did about as well as could be done with the data they had.

    The police shooting data in that report is known to be an undercount; I think the Washington post and Guardian have their own more complete counts. I think the other murders aren't likely to be undercounts, but I may be missing something--I'm definitely no expert.

    I don’t think they do use an estimation for the race of the offender, and instead rely on the race reported by the reporting authorities.

    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls

    “NOTE: This table is based on incidents where some information about the offender is known by law enforcement; therefore, when the offender age, sex, and race are all reported as unknown, these data are excluded from the table.”

  55. Yes, yet again more ink and human capital is wasted trying to intellectualize around the obvious genetic differences. It is a staple of the times – especially the progressive cause. Equality of outcome is the goal but one that proves more impossible with each passing year.

    The progressive goal is to question and eradicate those institutions of society that they perceive to be racist/sexist/etc by arbitrary measures of “disparate impact” or “unequal outcome.” They concoct more convoluted theories with each passing moment to explain our differences as being the result of a rotten system or of individuals bent on the discrimination.

    But they fail, and forever will, because they address the problems without understanding the root causes. It will never end and the problems that plague society will never be solved by their endless purges and constant decimation of the pillars that support our country. It will not end until they have laid bare the entire structure of the country, and in the process destroyed what makes America great.

    Keep up the noticing Steve, maybe one day we can halt this “progress” before it’s too late.

  56. @Wilkey
    Don’t New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not “more than two and a half”.
    Or is it the FBI who can’t do arithmetic?


    The author is wrong but right, while you are right but wrong. Comparing rates of blacks killed by cops to "the general population" is pointless since the general population includes blacks. More useful would be to compare the rate of blacks killed by cops blacks that of the non-black population. That would mean taking the 2.409 figure and dividing it by 68.2/86.8. You get 2.409/0.785 = 3.066. Per capita, blacks are over 3x as likely as non-blacks to be killed by cops.

    The author wasn’t comparing the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of general population killed. He was comparing the rate of blacks killed to the rate of blacks in the general population.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "The author wasn’t comparing the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of general population killed. He was comparing the rate of blacks killed to the rate of blacks in the general population."

    Not a very useful comparison, though. As the example of sickle cell anemia indicates, what really matters is the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of non-blacks killed by cops. As extreme cases illustrate - like rates of sickle cell anemia - comparing Group X to a general population which includes Group X can lead to ridiculous conclusions.

    The same problem often happens with murder rates, in a way that favors blacks. Blacks are about 13% of the population but commit about 52% of murders, which leads people to understate how high black murder rates actually are. They commit murder at roughly 4x the rate of the "general population," but at a much higher rate compared to the non-black population:

    Divide the black share of murders by their share of the population: 52%/13% = 4
    Then divide non-black murders by their share of the population: 48%/87% = 0.55172

    Then divide the two: 4/0.55172 = 7.25. Blacks are over 7x as likely as non-blacks to commit murder. And even that's probably an understatement: in my experience, murders involving blacks seem far more likely than non-blacks to involve accomplices, while white murderers are more likely to work alone.
  57. What the Data Say

    Does the NYT no longer have a style guide?

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Moot point. If every word remained singular or plural from the language it came from, then agenda would be plural, and assets would be singular.
    , @Justpassingby

    What the Data Say

    Does the NYT no longer have a style guide?
     
    That datum point says, "yes."
  58. Nicholas Stix at VDARE argues that BLM is a political push to de-police the ghetto. I agree, and I understand WHY Blacks want the Ghetto to be de-policed. Black reproductive patterns in the ghetto and even among the middle class is single-mother based. Nationally it is over 70% and in the urban core over 90%. Only the elite, Barack Obama types have a nuclear family. Thus the emphasis on being not a provider but a bad, sexy, dominant, criminal type. The reaction of Black Actress Lauren London to the Boys in the Hood movie or Rihanna are indicative of what sort of Black man Black women overall prefer. And its not the boring provider.

    De-policing the Ghetto allows the “authentically Black” norms of criminal conduct to be well, conducted without police risk. Risk from other Black men of course is part of the course, and what Black people seem to be happy with overall. IF Black lives really mattered, of course, Black people would be pushing for:

    *Black women to spurn gangstas and rappers and blingy-criminal types and prefer boring providers.
    *Long prison sentences for young Black men involved in criminal activity to save those who are not involved — even in the hardest ghetto there are a significant amount of young Black men who would prefer a non-criminal life and mostly or entirely avoid criminal behavior and gangs.
    *Re-policing and lots of stop and frisk the way say, cancer patients don’t like chemo but prefer to live than die.

    I don’t see this changing in the short run, the political system is devoid of ordinary feedback to White concerns about Black criminal behavior, since Democrats depend on Black votes and turnout and the media/elites worship at the altar of PC.

    — Sidenote, I think Steve is onto something about the “Adventuring” pattern of WASPS. Rather than a Jewish conspiracy I think Cultural Marxism is the organic natural consequences of WASP elite adventuring/outmarrying like El Jebe Bush or a James Michener novel, coupled with the iterative desire among WASP elites to find a belief system to counter old-school Soviet Marxism in the Cold War. Mix the Edgar Rice Burroughs to DC Comics Adam Strange to Dances With Wolves/Avatar progression of “ordinary WASP guy finds himself in alien environment, marries princess and fights either bad tribesman or lately, his own people” with the desire to paint Soviet Communism and fuddy-duddy, boring, no-fun, Puritanical straight laced and you get something like Cultural Marxism/PC. I don’t think its a Soviet invention, rather something that sprang up naturally to replace nationalism and religion as both were found wanting after WWII. Yes Jews naturally fall into Adventuring copying WASPs which is pretty predictable once you figure Ashkenazi Jews are Northern Italian types mixed with ME DNA and lots of North Slav/German DNA too.

    Culturally we are too much in denial about what Black people actually want and what they actually do, to keep the bankrupt PC/Diversity/Cultural Marxist religion afloat. I think the political process won’t adjust as much as rupture, suddenly. Think of it as a discontinuous function or an earthquake fault that can’t move slightly. As Whites move rapidly into minority status and become openly discriminated against, I think a political rupture is in the works. Secession, internal-Soviet style secession (massive Black market criminality), who knows? But I don’t see any prospects for reform in a gradualist way which I personally would prefer. Given the fragility I see in our society and politics and population and economic/technological system.

    But people have to believe in something and right now that seems Original White Sin and Black redemption.

  59. @WGG
    The BLM tards that held the Baltimore City Council hostage this week made a list of 19 demands including millions in handouts and carte blanche to commit "minor crimes"- not just misdemeanors but thefts as well. One of their state principles said "human life is always more important than property."

    I have heard this argument so many times from the hand wringing blacks that, "He just stole some jewelry, he didn't deserve to lose his life over it."

    Uh, yeah, probably not, but when he decided to fight the cop that was trying to arrest him, he sealed his own fate.

    "Well that cop should have just let him run off when he started to run/fight."

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. Whites see law-breaking and theft as always wrong and always deserving punishment from authorities. Blacks see theft as something everyone does- sometimes you get robbed and sometimes you get away with the loot. It's yin and yang, take the good with the bad- no need for cops.

    This is why both sides should be for separatism. Blacks will never be a majority in this country, therefore their utopian Detroit dreams will very rarely come to fruition. However, this particular brand of lawlessness is so potently detrimental to urban living (from a white perspective) that whites will always flee and dislike it. No compromise will make either side happy. Separation appears to be the only answer.

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. …

    This is why both sides should be for separatism.

    Excellent comment, Mr. Grandson.

    A lot of the NYT\fellow traveller commentary was about how racist it was for majority black Ferguson to have a majority of white cops and (implicitly) for Michael Brown to have be stopped by a white cop. But, of course, in any integrated community, even if the police force exactly matches the racial demographics, everyone has to put up with being stopped by cops from another race. This “white cops” argument is really an argument against integration.

    “Disparate impact” school discipline mau-mauing is another issue like this. A fundamental disagreement on what behavior is acceptable.

    But hey, i–and i suspect 95% of whites–don’t have any need to be around blacks. So let’s just fix it with segregation.

    ~~~

    However, this is far from the only issue where separation is the solution.

    Even more important is “open borders”. There’s a group of people who love open borders–and relentlessly push it on us. I don’t want to deprive them of their desire to live amid “diversity”–have at it! But most folks do not want open borders–at all.

    Again separation is the answer. Let us “normals” have our own normal country, while the “cosmopolitan globalists” have their diversity utopia.

    Of course, the reason separation is not on the table is that both these groups–the blacks and the open borders cheerleaders–do not actually want *their own* nation. These folks don’t really want “racist” or “xenophobic” whites to go-their-own-way–which would seem to be the obvious win-win solution– … because their fundamental relationship to whites is parasitic. They want–in different ways–to feast off the high quality society that white people create. Essentially they want whites to be slaves–creating prosperity that can be looted, but unable to control their own destiny.

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    The hold that blacks have over whites is that whites can't get away from them. People like Jackson and Sharpton know that. If there was true freedom of association, the two races would move apart and barely see each other. Then it would be a case of "out of sight, out of mind". Far fewer whites would want their tax money going to help people they don't see much and who are no threat to them.
  60. @Anon7
    Okay, this is the second time I've spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased. I know how hard it is to roll your own software.

    Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.

    … apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased.

    Has happened to me a few times. Agree definitely worth fixing.

    In the interim, my suggestion–a subset of the more general “save your work” principle–is once you have a comment that starts heading toward being a “piece of work”, then move to using your email or other favorite editor. Advantage you’re in control–have the editing you’re used to, can send a copy to yourself, etc. etc.

    Other suggestion is do the “remember my info” and let unz.com populate these fields for you.

  61. “My impression is that suicide by cop is much more a white thing than a black thing.”

    The San Francisco Zebra killers meekly surrendered to the police. They whimpered in fear when guns were pointed at them. The poor dears, who had been walking up behind elderly white men and lone white women and shooting them in the back, were afraid of being shot.

    Lemaricus Davidson, the main perpetrator in the Christian-Newsom torture-murder case, did not resist when the police showed up. Davidson was in a house and had two firearms at the time.

  62. @Blah
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/family-michigan-teen-shot-dead-traffic-stop-sues/story?id=34533142

    Show them this one.

    This cop sounds like a jackass, but the kid drove this interaction into the ditch with his refusal of the cop’s request for license and registration.

    I can’t imagine the pain the parents are feeling–my youngest daughter’s first boyfriend (a few years back in HS) died of a drug overdose a month back at college; being even an arms length away from that, talking to his mom at the memorial, incredibly painful. Can’t imagine anything worse than losing your kid right as they enter adulthood.

    But … these parents screwed up. They raised a “give me your badge number” and pull out my cellphone to take video kid.

    Once of the very first things i told my boy while teaching him to drive–after “this is a 3500 pound killing machine”–is “don’t fight with cops on the street; you’ll get pulled over, occasionally because the cop’s being an a*hole; but don’t every get into a fight with a cop–he has a gun, you don’t; if the cop’s a dickhead … have your fight with him in the courtroom.”

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "But … these parents screwed up. They raised a “give me your badge number” and pull out my cellphone to take video kid."

    There's nothing wrong in asking for a badge number and video-recording an encounter with the police. The kid's mistake was in a.) Driving stoned, b.) not having his I.D. on him, and then c.) not copping to those facts with the officer.

    By the way, by his own admission, the deputy had pulled over several people that night prior to this incident for flashing their high-beams at him (because his own head-lights were too bright). Apparently warning an on-coming driver that you are blinding them is considered an infraction in Michigan, if that driver is a cop that is. The deputy claims that his high-beams were not on, but he could have been lying. Apparently it is not uncommon for some sheriff's deputies and state-troopers to drive around at night with thier high-beams on in order to drum up business.
  63. @Reg Cæsar
    Eric Garner was selling "loosies" because no one will hire a black man in NYC if he can get a Dominican for half as much. No one ever frames it that way.

    Eric Garner had a job with the NYC Park Department until he screwed up too many times. At least, according to his wife’s account.

  64. I’m not saying that the police in these specific cases are free of racial bias. I can’t answer that question.

    It’s more likely that the police were less racially bias than the black guys that got shot.

    African-Americans have a very large number of encounters with police officers.

    Apparently, blacks are failing to listen to “The Talk.”

    By the way, I’d like to see a study on the number of police officers shot by blacks.

  65. Except for blacks, like Michael Brown. They’re not responsible for anything.

    Michael Brown was only one perpetrator in that incident.

    Three other African-Americans — Dorian Johnson, Piaget Crenshaw and Tiffany Mitchell — aggravated the situation by telling the mass media repeatedly that they saw Brown standing still, raising his hands and trying to surrender when he was shot dead.

    None of those three saw the incident’s final gunshots. The hands-up yarn that those three told the mass media was a deliberate and malicious lie defaming Wilson — because he is a police officer and because he is White.

    And then their lies were supported by other, even worse liars in the neighborhood. The latter said they saw Michael Brown down on his knees and pleading for his life, when Wilson shot him to death. Some said even that they saw Brown lying motionless on the street when Wilson approached his motionless body and fired the final gunshots.

    None of us should ever forget how all our country’s Scientific Progressives supported all those liars in Ferguson. The Scientific Progressives furiously denounced as racists anybody who dared to express any skepticism about the liars.

    On the other hand, White police officer Wilson ultimately was exonerated by the grand jury because many African-American and bi-racial real witnesses did tell the truth courageously. Even Eric Holder’s US Justice Department was compelled to acknowledge their courage.

    Witness 102 is a 27-year-old bi-racial male. …. Brown … “charged” at Wilson. It was only then that Wilson fired five or six shots at Brown. …. Brown charged at Wilson again, and again Wilson fired about three or four rounds until Brown finally collapsed on the ground. Witness 102 was in disbelief that Wilson seemingly kept missing because Brown kept advancing forward. Witness 102 described Brown as a “threat,” moving at a “full charge”. Witness 102 stated that Wilson only fired shots when Brown as coming at Wilson.

    and

    Witness 103 is a 58-year-old black male. …. Witness 103 did not see Brown’s hands up. Witness 103 … saw Brown “moving fast” toward Wilson.

    and

    Witness 104 is a 26-year-old bi-racial [black mother, white father] female. …. Brown then turned around and “for a second” began to raise his hands as though he may have considered surrendering, but then quickly “balled up his fists” in a running position and “charged” at Wilson. Witness 104 described it as a “tackle run”, explaining that Brown “wasn’t going to stop.” Wilson fired his gun only as Brown charged at him, backing up as Brown came toward him.

    Witness 104 explained that there were three separate volleys of shots. Each time, Brown ran toward Wilson, Wilson fired, Brown paused, Wilson stopped firing, and then Brown charged again. The pattern continued until Brown fell to the ground ….. Wilson did not fire while Brown momentarily had his hands up. Witness 104 explained that it took some time for Wilson to fire, adding that she “would have fired sooner.”

    and

    Witness 105 is a 50-year-old black female. …. Witness 105 explained that Brown put his hands up “for a brief moment,” and then turned around and made a shuffling movement. Wilson told Brown to “get down,” but Brown did not comply. Instead, Brown put his hands down “in a running position.” Witness 105 could not tell whether Brown was “charging” at Wilson or whether his plan was to run past Wilson, but either way, Brown was running toward Wilson. According to Witness 105, Wilson only shot at Brown when Brown was moving toward him.

    and

    Witness 108 is a 74-year-old black male …. The police officer was “in the right” and “did what he had to do,” and …. he “would have fucking shot that boy too.” Wilson told Brown to “stop” or “get down” at least ten times, but instead Brown “charged” at Wilson.

    and

    Witness 109 is a 53-year-old black male. …. Brown ran away from Wilson but then kept coming toward Wilson. Wilson told Brown to stop and lie down, but Brown failed to comply. …. Wilson did not shoot to kill at first, but “he unloaded on him when [Brown] wouldn’t stop.”

    and

    Witness 113 is a 31-year-old black female. …. She saw Brown running toward Wilson, prompting Wilson to yell, “Freeze.” Brown failed to stop, and Wilson began shooting Brown.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/what_would_have_happened_in_a_trial_of_office_darren_wilson.html

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Good job. Some here should be reminded that blacks are not "the enemy". Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.
  66. @Reg Cæsar
    Eric Garner was selling "loosies" because no one will hire a black man in NYC if he can get a Dominican for half as much. No one ever frames it that way.

    Eric Garner was selling “loosies” because no one will hire a black man in NYC…

    Something tells me that Garner probably didn’t do well on job interviews or have any marketable skills or job references.

  67. @Rob McX
    A complete separation would bring out the truth about race. It would finally reveal how blacks would deal with the matter of justice and policing when left to their own devices. If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he's incarcerated. It would soon be revealed that the administration of justice by whites, far from being harsh on blacks, actually had a moderating influence.

    If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he’s incarcerated.

    Who would pay the taxes to fund these government workers?

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    There wouldn't be government jobs for them, unless it was necessary work, with people hired on merit. So no more ghetto lottery funds.
  68. After ‘hate speech’ is banned, what will be next?

    ‘Disdain speech’?

    Followed by

    ‘Dislike speech’?

    Then, ‘ambivalent speech’? And then ‘unenthusiastic(about PC) speech’?

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Reasonable question, but isn't "unenthusiastic about" already considered hate in the pc world?
  69. @snorlax
    What the Data Say

    Does the NYT no longer have a style guide?

    Moot point. If every word remained singular or plural from the language it came from, then agenda would be plural, and assets would be singular.

  70. @timothy
    A word of caution about the "justifiable homicide" stats (in particular the 31.8 figure.) The database is incomplete because it's based on voluntary info submissions to the FBI. It's definitely a large sample size, but I haven't seen any discussion about its representativeness.

    That said, the proportion of blacks killed by police in the FBI supplementary report has declined over the past few decades, which seems plausible to me.

    The Graniad has a little project called the Counted where tay are trying to monitor all police killings in the US

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/series/counted-us-police-killings

  71. @tbraton
    Both the NYT article and your comment focus on percentages, but neither cites an absolute number of persons killed by cops. Wouldn't it help to know that in evaluating the problem? I tried Googling and came up with a total of 623 for 2014, the last complete year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2014

    I don't want to minimize the problem, but 623 does not sound like a terribly large number in a nation of more than 320 million people. I would venture to say that a large proportion of those 623 killings by cops involved criminals involved in serious crimes and very few involved people like Eric Gardner up in NYC or the 12-year old in Cleveland who was waving a plastic toy gun which looked awfully real. I decided to look up my old home town, Washington, D.C., and here is what Wikipedia says: "Washington was often described as the "murder capital" of the United States during the early 1990s.[107] The number of murders peaked in 1991 at 479, but the level of violence then began to decline significantly.[108] By 2012, Washington's annual murder count dropped to 88, the lowest total since 1961;[109] though the number of homicides has since risen each year to over 100 in 2015." For some reason, I couldn't quickly locate a number of murders nation-wide.

    In my neighborhood, I can recall two killings by cops in the last 5 years. One was a clear suicide-by-cop where a guy planted himself down on a busy sidewalk and started shooting into the air and into the ground until the cops arrived and shot him. The other was the DEA agent who shot the 18-year-old violist while the cops were brawling with another guy. The kid’s family eventually got $3 million.

  72. @E. Rekshun
    If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he’s incarcerated.

    Who would pay the taxes to fund these government workers?

    There wouldn’t be government jobs for them, unless it was necessary work, with people hired on merit. So no more ghetto lottery funds.

  73. @Rob McX
    A complete separation would bring out the truth about race. It would finally reveal how blacks would deal with the matter of justice and policing when left to their own devices. If a black was shot by a cop, it would be a black cop. If he were handed a tough sentence by a judge, it would be a black judge, black prosecutor, black prison authorities dealing with him when he's incarcerated. It would soon be revealed that the administration of justice by whites, far from being harsh on blacks, actually had a moderating influence.

    So how does it work in Jamaica or the Bahamas? These are black run countries.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Presumably as I described it - tough justice, no whites to blame for it.
    , @bomag
    There are some Blacktopias out there. It is a distribution, with a mean-median-mode and a shift.
  74. @Anon7
    Okay, this is the second time I've spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased. I know how hard it is to roll your own software.

    Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.

    A modern comment system is supposed to use AJAX – so you don’t even leave the page.

  75. @NOTA
    Isn't that basically what the writer is saying? A simple model that fits the data passably well is that each arrest has some small probability of going wrong and ending up with the cops shooting someone, regardless of the races of the people involved. Blacks are about as likely to get shot as whites when they're arrested, but blacks get arrested per capita a lot more often than whites, and that accounts for why they get shot by the cops more often.

    Don’t worry about Anon. Just another one of those ranting white nationalists that Steve seems to attract like rotting meat does flies.

    So why are we continuing this pointless war on drugs, given that it increases police encounters with blacks and therefore makes all these killings more likely? How is this a good use of public resources?

    • Replies: @bomag
    So why are we continuing this pointless war on drugs, given that it increases police encounters ...

    Drugs are a proxy for other crime.

    I overheard a blurb from the radio in the background that less than five percent of the incarcerated are there for non-violent drug offenses.
    , @Anonymous
    The 'war on drugs' was, basically, 'started' because of the African-American 'crack 'n' crime' frenzy of the late 80s early 90s in which the black political caucuses - which seem to have a privileged ear to various dumb-ass presidents - begged, pleaded, grovelled, wept, wailed and gnashed teeth, to the President and Congress to 'do something'.

    Ridiculous as it seems now, those lobbyists were bandying about the term 'endangered species' to describe young black males.
    Anyone who took notice of Steve's famous graph can enjoy a private chuckle.
  76. @NOTA
    Isn't that basically what the writer is saying? A simple model that fits the data passably well is that each arrest has some small probability of going wrong and ending up with the cops shooting someone, regardless of the races of the people involved. Blacks are about as likely to get shot as whites when they're arrested, but blacks get arrested per capita a lot more often than whites, and that accounts for why they get shot by the cops more often.

    But blacks tend to screw up spectacularly more than whites do across a wide range of fraught situations so the interesting question is why blacks don’t make up 50% rather than 30% of homicides by cops the way blacks make up 50% of homicide offenders?

    One guess is that the total of whites getting shot by cops is inflated by a higher white propensity to decide to go out via suicide-by-cop. That was my impression from reading about a few thousand killings in L.A. County in Jill Leovy’s L.A. Times Homicide Blog, but I didn’t try to count it up.

    One way to check that it to look at ages of blacks v. whites shot by cops. I think the white ages tend to be older, while blacks get shot a lot by cops at young ages whey they are full of life but not so much when they are older and tired of living.

    • Replies: @Dirk Dagger
    A recent SBC caught on police body cam in Cleveland.
    , @Anonymous
    Steve,
    I remember a case from years back, in LA, in which a white nutter, but an amiable rather than malicious nutter, drove a military vehicle through the streets of LA. It was not a tank, or even light tank, but some sort of 'ferret' armored car type vehicle.
    The nutter was doing no harm whatsoever, it was just some sort of absurd stunt. Anyhow, the LAPD took exception to him, and commanded him to stop. Apparently he refused, whereupon the LAPD promptly shot him dead in a hail of heavy caliber gunfire.

    It all seemed rather sad and heavy-handed for some sort of warped 'joke' gone wrong.

    Do you remember it, Steve?
  77. @Mike Sylwester

    Except for blacks, like Michael Brown. They’re not responsible for anything.
     
    Michael Brown was only one perpetrator in that incident.

    Three other African-Americans --- Dorian Johnson, Piaget Crenshaw and Tiffany Mitchell -- aggravated the situation by telling the mass media repeatedly that they saw Brown standing still, raising his hands and trying to surrender when he was shot dead.

    None of those three saw the incident's final gunshots. The hands-up yarn that those three told the mass media was a deliberate and malicious lie defaming Wilson -- because he is a police officer and because he is White.

    And then their lies were supported by other, even worse liars in the neighborhood. The latter said they saw Michael Brown down on his knees and pleading for his life, when Wilson shot him to death. Some said even that they saw Brown lying motionless on the street when Wilson approached his motionless body and fired the final gunshots.

    None of us should ever forget how all our country's Scientific Progressives supported all those liars in Ferguson. The Scientific Progressives furiously denounced as racists anybody who dared to express any skepticism about the liars.

    On the other hand, White police officer Wilson ultimately was exonerated by the grand jury because many African-American and bi-racial real witnesses did tell the truth courageously. Even Eric Holder's US Justice Department was compelled to acknowledge their courage.


    Witness 102 is a 27-year-old bi-racial male. .... Brown … “charged” at Wilson. It was only then that Wilson fired five or six shots at Brown. …. Brown charged at Wilson again, and again Wilson fired about three or four rounds until Brown finally collapsed on the ground. Witness 102 was in disbelief that Wilson seemingly kept missing because Brown kept advancing forward. Witness 102 described Brown as a “threat,” moving at a “full charge”. Witness 102 stated that Wilson only fired shots when Brown as coming at Wilson.
     
    and

    Witness 103 is a 58-year-old black male. .... Witness 103 did not see Brown’s hands up. Witness 103 … saw Brown “moving fast” toward Wilson.
     
    and

    Witness 104 is a 26-year-old bi-racial [black mother, white father] female. .... Brown then turned around and “for a second” began to raise his hands as though he may have considered surrendering, but then quickly “balled up his fists” in a running position and “charged” at Wilson. Witness 104 described it as a “tackle run”, explaining that Brown “wasn’t going to stop.” Wilson fired his gun only as Brown charged at him, backing up as Brown came toward him.

    Witness 104 explained that there were three separate volleys of shots. Each time, Brown ran toward Wilson, Wilson fired, Brown paused, Wilson stopped firing, and then Brown charged again. The pattern continued until Brown fell to the ground ….. Wilson did not fire while Brown momentarily had his hands up. Witness 104 explained that it took some time for Wilson to fire, adding that she “would have fired sooner.”
     

    and

    Witness 105 is a 50-year-old black female. .... Witness 105 explained that Brown put his hands up “for a brief moment,” and then turned around and made a shuffling movement. Wilson told Brown to “get down,” but Brown did not comply. Instead, Brown put his hands down “in a running position.” Witness 105 could not tell whether Brown was “charging” at Wilson or whether his plan was to run past Wilson, but either way, Brown was running toward Wilson. According to Witness 105, Wilson only shot at Brown when Brown was moving toward him.
     
    and

    Witness 108 is a 74-year-old black male .... The police officer was “in the right” and “did what he had to do,” and …. he “would have fucking shot that boy too.” Wilson told Brown to “stop” or “get down” at least ten times, but instead Brown “charged” at Wilson.

     

    and

    Witness 109 is a 53-year-old black male. .... Brown ran away from Wilson but then kept coming toward Wilson. Wilson told Brown to stop and lie down, but Brown failed to comply. …. Wilson did not shoot to kill at first, but “he unloaded on him when [Brown] wouldn’t stop.”


     

    and

    Witness 113 is a 31-year-old black female. .... She saw Brown running toward Wilson, prompting Wilson to yell, “Freeze.” Brown failed to stop, and Wilson began shooting Brown.

     

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/what_would_have_happened_in_a_trial_of_office_darren_wilson.html

    Good job. Some here should be reminded that blacks are not “the enemy”. Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    • Replies: @E. Rekshun
    Some here should be reminded that blacks are not “the enemy”. Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Plenty? If they are fed up w/ crime, then they're not doing anything about it.
  78. @Boomstick
    The actual percentage of murders committed by blacks is probably higher than the reported 52% by a fairly substantial margin.

    About a third of the murders in the US are not cleared. The unsolved homicides are disproportionately urban and black, and probably committed by other blacks. In Chicago no suspect is arrested in two thirds of the homicides. It's about the same in Detroit and Atlanta and New Orleans, all high bodycount cities that collectively have a significant effect of the nationwide statistics. The unsolved homicides are mostly the result of anonymous black urban street violence. In Chicago 77% of the victims are black, and it's a good bet that most of the perps who killed them but whose race is unknown are also black. In contrast about 4% of the victims are white.

    I suspect the actual percentage of murders committed by blacks nationwide is closer to 60%, maybe more.

    http://heyjackass.com/

    What about average number of perps per dead body? I wouldn’t be surprised if there were more black homicide offenders per victim because blacks are more likely to kill as part of a gang (e.g., a drive-by shooting), while whites tend to kill in solitary fashion. That would increase the number of black homicide offenders relative to the number of victims of blacks.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Could it be possible that cops are more careful when faced with the choice of shooting a black suspect than a white one? There's going to be a hell of a lot more trouble if the body on the ground is a black one.
    , @Boomstick
    Could be. I'm not terribly conversant with gang sociology; to they have designated hit men, or do a broad spectrum of gang members engage in gunplay? There is the idea of a gang "shot caller" who designates when to shoot some rivals, to be carried out by another gang member, but I get the impression that there's a lot of dolts engaging in doltish violence as well.

    I think the murders whites commit are more likely to be domestic violence-type homicides, which have a high clearance rate.

    " Overall, black females were murdered by males at a rate (2.46 per 100,000) nearly two and
    a half times higher than white females (1.00 per 100,000)."

    http://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2014.pdf

    That's pretty good relative to the overall comparative murder rate.
  79. @bomag
    Your analysis doesn't capture it, either. There is an implicit assumption that crime and disease should follow a Poisson distribution amongst the population, thus it is proper to divide by the total population.

    The next step would be to derive a baseline death-by-cop rate for each race by examining 100% White areas and 100% Black areas. Then we would have to correct for socioeconomics and "predator" effects and we are off to the races (pun intended).

    Why doesn’t anyone care about the killed-by-police gender disparity? Seems like persons-who-think-they-are-male are dying at a slighty higher rate than the general population (possibly?). I’m not that good with statistics so I could be wrong.

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @bomag
    Indeed. With the continued application of drugs and social pressure, our properly androgynous future will anxiously clutch their purses to their bosom as they watch nice things disappear to those walking across open borders.
  80. @Steve Sailer
    But blacks tend to screw up spectacularly more than whites do across a wide range of fraught situations so the interesting question is why blacks don't make up 50% rather than 30% of homicides by cops the way blacks make up 50% of homicide offenders?

    One guess is that the total of whites getting shot by cops is inflated by a higher white propensity to decide to go out via suicide-by-cop. That was my impression from reading about a few thousand killings in L.A. County in Jill Leovy's L.A. Times Homicide Blog, but I didn't try to count it up.

    One way to check that it to look at ages of blacks v. whites shot by cops. I think the white ages tend to be older, while blacks get shot a lot by cops at young ages whey they are full of life but not so much when they are older and tired of living.

    A recent SBC caught on police body cam in Cleveland.

  81. @Steve Sailer
    What about average number of perps per dead body? I wouldn't be surprised if there were more black homicide offenders per victim because blacks are more likely to kill as part of a gang (e.g., a drive-by shooting), while whites tend to kill in solitary fashion. That would increase the number of black homicide offenders relative to the number of victims of blacks.

    Could it be possible that cops are more careful when faced with the choice of shooting a black suspect than a white one? There’s going to be a hell of a lot more trouble if the body on the ground is a black one.

  82. @Flip
    So how does it work in Jamaica or the Bahamas? These are black run countries.

    Presumably as I described it – tough justice, no whites to blame for it.

  83. @Wilkey
    Don’t New York Times reporters (and editors) have access to an abacus?
    31.8/13.2 = 2.409, which is not “more than two and a half”.
    Or is it the FBI who can’t do arithmetic?


    The author is wrong but right, while you are right but wrong. Comparing rates of blacks killed by cops to "the general population" is pointless since the general population includes blacks. More useful would be to compare the rate of blacks killed by cops blacks that of the non-black population. That would mean taking the 2.409 figure and dividing it by 68.2/86.8. You get 2.409/0.785 = 3.066. Per capita, blacks are over 3x as likely as non-blacks to be killed by cops.

    I see what you are saying here, and it is a good point to keep in mind.

    As written, though, the author slipped up a little bit.

    (I thought you were making a different point with your sickle cell reference.)

  84. @Flip
    So how does it work in Jamaica or the Bahamas? These are black run countries.

    There are some Blacktopias out there. It is a distribution, with a mean-median-mode and a shift.

  85. @jtgw
    Don't worry about Anon. Just another one of those ranting white nationalists that Steve seems to attract like rotting meat does flies.

    So why are we continuing this pointless war on drugs, given that it increases police encounters with blacks and therefore makes all these killings more likely? How is this a good use of public resources?

    So why are we continuing this pointless war on drugs, given that it increases police encounters …

    Drugs are a proxy for other crime.

    I overheard a blurb from the radio in the background that less than five percent of the incarcerated are there for non-violent drug offenses.

  86. The war on drugs illustrates this kind of racial bias. African-Americans are only slightly more likely to use drugs than whites. Yet, they are more than twice as likely to be arrested on drug-related charges. One reason is that drug sellers are being targeted more heavily than users.

    Well, users aren’t being targeted at all.

    Of course the writer knows this. Why does he write this crap?

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    Well, users aren’t being targeted at all.

    Of course the writer knows this.
     
    It's impossible to know something that isn't true. Users are indeed targeted.
  87. @Anonymous
    The author wasn't comparing the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of general population killed. He was comparing the rate of blacks killed to the rate of blacks in the general population.

    “The author wasn’t comparing the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of general population killed. He was comparing the rate of blacks killed to the rate of blacks in the general population.”

    Not a very useful comparison, though. As the example of sickle cell anemia indicates, what really matters is the rate of blacks killed by cops to the rate of non-blacks killed by cops. As extreme cases illustrate – like rates of sickle cell anemia – comparing Group X to a general population which includes Group X can lead to ridiculous conclusions.

    The same problem often happens with murder rates, in a way that favors blacks. Blacks are about 13% of the population but commit about 52% of murders, which leads people to understate how high black murder rates actually are. They commit murder at roughly 4x the rate of the “general population,” but at a much higher rate compared to the non-black population:

    Divide the black share of murders by their share of the population: 52%/13% = 4
    Then divide non-black murders by their share of the population: 48%/87% = 0.55172

    Then divide the two: 4/0.55172 = 7.25. Blacks are over 7x as likely as non-blacks to commit murder. And even that’s probably an understatement: in my experience, murders involving blacks seem far more likely than non-blacks to involve accomplices, while white murderers are more likely to work alone.

  88. @snorlax
    What the Data Say

    Does the NYT no longer have a style guide?

    What the Data Say

    Does the NYT no longer have a style guide?

    That datum point says, “yes.”

  89. @AnotherDad
    This cop sounds like a jackass, but the kid drove this interaction into the ditch with his refusal of the cop's request for license and registration.

    I can't imagine the pain the parents are feeling--my youngest daughter's first boyfriend (a few years back in HS) died of a drug overdose a month back at college; being even an arms length away from that, talking to his mom at the memorial, incredibly painful. Can't imagine anything worse than losing your kid right as they enter adulthood.

    But ... these parents screwed up. They raised a "give me your badge number" and pull out my cellphone to take video kid.

    Once of the very first things i told my boy while teaching him to drive--after "this is a 3500 pound killing machine"--is "don't fight with cops on the street; you'll get pulled over, occasionally because the cop's being an a*hole; but don't every get into a fight with a cop--he has a gun, you don't; if the cop's a dickhead ... have your fight with him in the courtroom."

    “But … these parents screwed up. They raised a “give me your badge number” and pull out my cellphone to take video kid.”

    There’s nothing wrong in asking for a badge number and video-recording an encounter with the police. The kid’s mistake was in a.) Driving stoned, b.) not having his I.D. on him, and then c.) not copping to those facts with the officer.

    By the way, by his own admission, the deputy had pulled over several people that night prior to this incident for flashing their high-beams at him (because his own head-lights were too bright). Apparently warning an on-coming driver that you are blinding them is considered an infraction in Michigan, if that driver is a cop that is. The deputy claims that his high-beams were not on, but he could have been lying. Apparently it is not uncommon for some sheriff’s deputies and state-troopers to drive around at night with thier high-beams on in order to drum up business.

  90. @Pat Casey

    My impression is that suicide-by-cop is much more a white thing than a black thing, so a lot of police killings are of suicidal white guys, which reduces the black share of total victims of cops.
     
    My family knew a tragedy this year that supports that impression: http://www.rrstar.com/article/20150516/NEWS/150519531

    My cousin's husband had an alcohol-fueled episode of bipolar insanity and opened fire on the cops who were called to the house after he had stripped down and started stalking the property with an AR-15. Pretty certainly it was a suicide by cop. (Strangely, in the small town of Rockford, Ill on that single night, he was one of ten people shot.) After that I looked into it a bit. From Wikipedias "Suicide by cop" page:


    Some of the first research into suicide by cop was completed by Sgt. Rick Parent of the Delta Police Department. Parent's research of 843 police shootings determined that about 50% were victim precipitated homicide. Police defined victim precipitated homicide as "an incident in which an individual bent on self-destruction, engages in life threatening and criminal behavior to force law enforcement officers to kill them."
     
    50 percent--that's very interesting.

    “Police defined victim precipitated homicide as “an incident in which an individual bent on self-destruction, engages in life threatening and criminal behavior to force law enforcement officers to kill them.””

    Of course, some policemen have a fairly low threshold as to what constitutes threatening behavior. Perhaps suicide-by-cop became popular because of its efficacy.

  91. @Steve Sailer
    What about average number of perps per dead body? I wouldn't be surprised if there were more black homicide offenders per victim because blacks are more likely to kill as part of a gang (e.g., a drive-by shooting), while whites tend to kill in solitary fashion. That would increase the number of black homicide offenders relative to the number of victims of blacks.

    Could be. I’m not terribly conversant with gang sociology; to they have designated hit men, or do a broad spectrum of gang members engage in gunplay? There is the idea of a gang “shot caller” who designates when to shoot some rivals, to be carried out by another gang member, but I get the impression that there’s a lot of dolts engaging in doltish violence as well.

    I think the murders whites commit are more likely to be domestic violence-type homicides, which have a high clearance rate.

    ” Overall, black females were murdered by males at a rate (2.46 per 100,000) nearly two and
    a half times higher than white females (1.00 per 100,000).”

    http://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2014.pdf

    That’s pretty good relative to the overall comparative murder rate.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    ” Overall, black females were murdered by males at a rate (2.46 per 100,000) nearly two and a half times higher than white females (1.00 per 100,000).”
     
    That would be nearly one and a half times higher than white females
  92. @Boomstick
    Could be. I'm not terribly conversant with gang sociology; to they have designated hit men, or do a broad spectrum of gang members engage in gunplay? There is the idea of a gang "shot caller" who designates when to shoot some rivals, to be carried out by another gang member, but I get the impression that there's a lot of dolts engaging in doltish violence as well.

    I think the murders whites commit are more likely to be domestic violence-type homicides, which have a high clearance rate.

    " Overall, black females were murdered by males at a rate (2.46 per 100,000) nearly two and
    a half times higher than white females (1.00 per 100,000)."

    http://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2014.pdf

    That's pretty good relative to the overall comparative murder rate.

    ” Overall, black females were murdered by males at a rate (2.46 per 100,000) nearly two and a half times higher than white females (1.00 per 100,000).”

    That would be nearly one and a half times higher than white females

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    That would be nearly one and a half times higher than white females

     

    Or two-and-a-half times as high.
  93. One reason is that drug sellers are being targeted more heavily than users.

    Does the author have a problem with that, outside of the fact that it results in blacks being put in prison? It seems obvious that drug sellers bear more criminal responsibility than drug users. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone suggest otherwise.

    • Replies: @(((Owen)))
    "It seems obvious that drug sellers bear more criminal responsibility than drug users. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone suggest otherwise."

    Drug sellers are just engaging in ordinary commercial conduct. They'd be happy to sell widgets if they could make money standing around on street corners that way.

    Drug users are the ones that create demand for the product and choose what to consume. They are the ones that create the drug sellers by offering them money to sell drugs.

    In fact, the drug users are the only ones responsible for the market activity. The drug sellers are just following their lead.

    And the idea of prosecuting drug sellers is just wrong-headed. There are always more waiting to replace any that you arrest as long as there is money in the market. There's no reason to focus on drug sellers except incompetence or corruption in the law enforcement institutions.

    If you arrest the drug users, the market dries up. The proof that the War On Drugs is not serious is that we aren't putting millions of casual drug users in prison. That's the only way we would ever drastically reduce drug use.
  94. @anonymous
    I have ambivalent feelings about this. On the one hand I'm surprised there isn't a higher percentage of blacks killed by cops seeing as many are highly violent and involved in hard-core crime. On the other hand it's strange to realize American cops kill over a thousand people each year while the cops in places like Britain and Germany kill nearly zero-or actually zero-people. American police kill more people in one year than British cops have killed in the past one hundred years. There's a general idea that if someone fights the cops with their fists then they deserve to die for the effrontery of doing so although the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns. They always give the same line after shooting someone, as provided to them by the union lawyer and is the standard response, that they were 'in fear for their life'. In the Brown case it may have been unavoidable but Walter Scott was shot in the back while fleeing. It's a good question as to how many people were killed for angering the police prior to the era of ubiquitous camera and surveillance phones.

    the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns.

    So we shouldn’t have any female police officers? Besides that, there’s no reason a police officer should have to engage in fisticuffs with a suspect–it can go south for him too quickly. If someone wants to fight a cop, he has to understand the consequences.

    • Replies: @anonymous

    So we shouldn’t have any female police officers?
     
    No, we shouldn't. They're mostly worthless wastes of my taxpaying money.
  95. @Anon
    After 'hate speech' is banned, what will be next?

    'Disdain speech'?

    Followed by

    'Dislike speech'?

    Then, 'ambivalent speech'? And then 'unenthusiastic(about PC) speech'?

    Reasonable question, but isn’t “unenthusiastic about” already considered hate in the pc world?

  96. Anothe big assumption liberal journalists make is assuming that a white or hispanic cop who is racist is more likely to deliberately shoot a black man than one who is less racist. In a white society where racism is regarded as a serious moral sin, many racist white cops probably have more hang ups about shooting black guys than officers with less racial prejudice.

  97. @Dirk Dagger
    Why doesn't anyone care about the killed-by-police gender disparity? Seems like persons-who-think-they-are-male are dying at a slighty higher rate than the general population (possibly?). I'm not that good with statistics so I could be wrong.

    Indeed. With the continued application of drugs and social pressure, our properly androgynous future will anxiously clutch their purses to their bosom as they watch nice things disappear to those walking across open borders.

  98. @anonymous
    I have ambivalent feelings about this. On the one hand I'm surprised there isn't a higher percentage of blacks killed by cops seeing as many are highly violent and involved in hard-core crime. On the other hand it's strange to realize American cops kill over a thousand people each year while the cops in places like Britain and Germany kill nearly zero-or actually zero-people. American police kill more people in one year than British cops have killed in the past one hundred years. There's a general idea that if someone fights the cops with their fists then they deserve to die for the effrontery of doing so although the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns. They always give the same line after shooting someone, as provided to them by the union lawyer and is the standard response, that they were 'in fear for their life'. In the Brown case it may have been unavoidable but Walter Scott was shot in the back while fleeing. It's a good question as to how many people were killed for angering the police prior to the era of ubiquitous camera and surveillance phones.

    Britain is, of course, an unarmed society.

    That is apart from villains such as Mark Duggan who happened to have guns.

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one

    That is apart from villains such as Mark Duggan who happened to have guns.
     
    I think the narrative is that the guns found the villains and then commenced their reigns of terror by proxy as it were..
  99. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @jtgw
    Don't worry about Anon. Just another one of those ranting white nationalists that Steve seems to attract like rotting meat does flies.

    So why are we continuing this pointless war on drugs, given that it increases police encounters with blacks and therefore makes all these killings more likely? How is this a good use of public resources?

    The ‘war on drugs’ was, basically, ‘started’ because of the African-American ‘crack ‘n’ crime’ frenzy of the late 80s early 90s in which the black political caucuses – which seem to have a privileged ear to various dumb-ass presidents – begged, pleaded, grovelled, wept, wailed and gnashed teeth, to the President and Congress to ‘do something’.

    Ridiculous as it seems now, those lobbyists were bandying about the term ‘endangered species’ to describe young black males.
    Anyone who took notice of Steve’s famous graph can enjoy a private chuckle.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Criminalization of drugs long predates the 1980s, but devoting so many public resources to stamp out the illegal drug trade may well be more recent. But can we agree that it has not solved the problem? And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?
  100. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    But blacks tend to screw up spectacularly more than whites do across a wide range of fraught situations so the interesting question is why blacks don't make up 50% rather than 30% of homicides by cops the way blacks make up 50% of homicide offenders?

    One guess is that the total of whites getting shot by cops is inflated by a higher white propensity to decide to go out via suicide-by-cop. That was my impression from reading about a few thousand killings in L.A. County in Jill Leovy's L.A. Times Homicide Blog, but I didn't try to count it up.

    One way to check that it to look at ages of blacks v. whites shot by cops. I think the white ages tend to be older, while blacks get shot a lot by cops at young ages whey they are full of life but not so much when they are older and tired of living.

    Steve,
    I remember a case from years back, in LA, in which a white nutter, but an amiable rather than malicious nutter, drove a military vehicle through the streets of LA. It was not a tank, or even light tank, but some sort of ‘ferret’ armored car type vehicle.
    The nutter was doing no harm whatsoever, it was just some sort of absurd stunt. Anyhow, the LAPD took exception to him, and commanded him to stop. Apparently he refused, whereupon the LAPD promptly shot him dead in a hail of heavy caliber gunfire.

    It all seemed rather sad and heavy-handed for some sort of warped ‘joke’ gone wrong.

    Do you remember it, Steve?

  101. @ben tillman

    ” Overall, black females were murdered by males at a rate (2.46 per 100,000) nearly two and a half times higher than white females (1.00 per 100,000).”
     
    That would be nearly one and a half times higher than white females

    That would be nearly one and a half times higher than white females

    Or two-and-a-half times as high.

  102. @jtgw
    Good job. Some here should be reminded that blacks are not "the enemy". Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Some here should be reminded that blacks are not “the enemy”. Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Plenty? If they are fed up w/ crime, then they’re not doing anything about it.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    They're not doing anything are they? Wasn't it the testimony of many blacks that ultimately exonerated Officer Wilson? Your attitude shows the risks of this whole "race realist" approach. Most people simply cannot think of race in other than categorical terms. All I here in this place is "blacks are like this" and "whites are like that". There's no appreciation of the fact that both blacks and whites cover a wide range of personalities and behaviors.
  103. @anonymous
    I have ambivalent feelings about this. On the one hand I'm surprised there isn't a higher percentage of blacks killed by cops seeing as many are highly violent and involved in hard-core crime. On the other hand it's strange to realize American cops kill over a thousand people each year while the cops in places like Britain and Germany kill nearly zero-or actually zero-people. American police kill more people in one year than British cops have killed in the past one hundred years. There's a general idea that if someone fights the cops with their fists then they deserve to die for the effrontery of doing so although the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns. They always give the same line after shooting someone, as provided to them by the union lawyer and is the standard response, that they were 'in fear for their life'. In the Brown case it may have been unavoidable but Walter Scott was shot in the back while fleeing. It's a good question as to how many people were killed for angering the police prior to the era of ubiquitous camera and surveillance phones.

    “On the other hand it’s strange to realize American cops kill over a thousand people each year while the cops in places like Britain and Germany kill nearly zero-or actually zero-people. ”

    Actually, the total number of Americans killed by cops in 2014 was 623, not “over a thousand people each year.” See my message #43 above. I don’t have a breakdown, but I would bet that a substantial majority of those were hardened criminals caught in the act of committing a crime. BTW I made an exception for Eric Gardner in NYC who, for some reason, was wrestled to the ground for the “crime” of selling loose cigarettes. He wasn’t shot but apparently died of asthma. I find it astounding that someone could lose his life over such a petty crime, but I draw a sharp distinction between the Gardner case and the shooting death of Michael Brown, which the evidence shows was a justified shooting.

    BTW if you apply the number of total Americans killed by cops in America in 2014, 623, to the population of the USA of around 320,000,000, you get a percentage of 0.0000019%. If you apply that percentage to the population of Washington, D.C. in 2014, 659,000, that means that you could expect an average of 1.28 persons killed by police in D.C., based on the national totals. That would be out of a total thus far in 2015 of over a 100 murders in D.C., which puts the cops killings in perspective. That was my point all along. Even one cop killing is too many, but America is not England or Germany.

  104. @Harry Baldwin
    the cops are paid to be tough guys who can handle others physically without recourse to using their guns.

    So we shouldn't have any female police officers? Besides that, there's no reason a police officer should have to engage in fisticuffs with a suspect--it can go south for him too quickly. If someone wants to fight a cop, he has to understand the consequences.

    So we shouldn’t have any female police officers?

    No, we shouldn’t. They’re mostly worthless wastes of my taxpaying money.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    A lot of cops I know feel that women cops have their purpose, such as in handling domestic calls, dealing with grieving families, or interviewing female victims of sexual assault.

    Female firefighters, I would agree, serve no purpose and are a waste of the taxpayers' money.

  105. @pon dos

    The war on drugs illustrates this kind of racial bias. African-Americans are only slightly more likely to use drugs than whites. Yet, they are more than twice as likely to be arrested on drug-related charges. One reason is that drug sellers are being targeted more heavily than users.
     
    Well, users aren't being targeted at all.

    Of course the writer knows this. Why does he write this crap?

    Well, users aren’t being targeted at all.

    Of course the writer knows this.

    It’s impossible to know something that isn’t true. Users are indeed targeted.

  106. It seems obvious that drug sellers bear more criminal responsibility than drug users. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone suggest otherwise.

    Libs (and libertarians) do it all the time, they’ll tell anyone who’ll listen that American demand for illegal drugs is to blame for the drug cartels’ behavior, violence in Mexico, etc.

    Anothe big assumption liberal journalists make is assuming that a white or hispanic cop who is racist is more likely to deliberately shoot a black man than one who is less racist. In a white society where racism is regarded as a serious moral sin, many racist white cops probably have more hang ups about shooting black guys than officers with less racial prejudice.

    Baked into the liberal cake. They could never admit that racism could lead to good outcomes, on any level (except maybe drawing the righteous, purifying ire of liberals).

  107. What the Data Say

    Does the NYT no longer have a style guide?

    Didn’t you know? The ‘spergs have spoken, and they want data to be a real plural (Derb knows rice “are” next).

    – Sidenote, I think Steve is onto something about the “Adventuring” pattern of WASPS. Rather than a Jewish conspiracy I think Cultural Marxism is

    Let me translate that from Whiskey: “the Jews are blameless, it’s definitely always someone else’s fault. The rest is just details.”

  108. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doornan of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Anonymous
    Britain is, of course, an unarmed society.

    That is apart from villains such as Mark Duggan who happened to have guns.

    That is apart from villains such as Mark Duggan who happened to have guns.

    I think the narrative is that the guns found the villains and then commenced their reigns of terror by proxy as it were..

  109. @Anon7
    Okay, this is the second time I've spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email. I was returned to the previous page with my comment erased. I know how hard it is to roll your own software.

    Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.

    Okay, this is the second time I’ve spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email…Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.

    There’s really nothing to fix. This is partly to encourage people to use the “Remember My Information” option, which would also allow you to use Agree/Disagree buttons. If you don’t want to use that option and also don’t bother to remember your authenticating email and *also* don’t bother to save the text of your comment, I can’t much help you.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    "This is partly to encourage people to use the “Remember My Information” option, which would also allow you to use Agree/Disagree buttons. "

    I don't whether it is just me, but, when I started posting here in July, I used to check off the "Remember My Information" box and the "Email Replies to my Comment" box. For some reason, the second check-off continued to be retained, but the "Remember My Information" check-off would not. So I had to check-off that box every time. Finally, it became such a nuisance that I left the box unchecked. Is there a reason for the different reactions to the check-offs? BTW I am still able to utilize the "Agree/Disagree" option even when I haven't checked off the "Remember My Information" box.
  110. @Ron Unz

    Okay, this is the second time I’ve spent too much time writing a comment, pressed publish, and was sent to a screen telling me that apparently I failed to precisely match my handle with my email...Not that my comments are that great, but still. Pls fix.
     
    There's really nothing to fix. This is partly to encourage people to use the "Remember My Information" option, which would also allow you to use Agree/Disagree buttons. If you don't want to use that option and also don't bother to remember your authenticating email and *also* don't bother to save the text of your comment, I can't much help you.

    “This is partly to encourage people to use the “Remember My Information” option, which would also allow you to use Agree/Disagree buttons. ”

    I don’t whether it is just me, but, when I started posting here in July, I used to check off the “Remember My Information” box and the “Email Replies to my Comment” box. For some reason, the second check-off continued to be retained, but the “Remember My Information” check-off would not. So I had to check-off that box every time. Finally, it became such a nuisance that I left the box unchecked. Is there a reason for the different reactions to the check-offs? BTW I am still able to utilize the “Agree/Disagree” option even when I haven’t checked off the “Remember My Information” box.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    I don’t whether it is just me, but, when I started posting here in July, I used to check off the “Remember My Information” box and the “Email Replies to my Comment” box. For some reason, the second check-off continued to be retained, but the “Remember My Information” check-off would not. So I had to check-off that box every time. Finally, it became such a nuisance that I left the box unchecked. Is there a reason for the different reactions to the check-offs? BTW I am still able to utilize the “Agree/Disagree” option even when I haven’t checked off the “Remember My Information” box.
     
    It might be a bit confusing. The "Remember" checkbox only needs to be used once to permanently remember all the other information, or checked again if you later want to change/update it. Since your information is already "remembered", your Agree/Disagree buttons are working.
  111. @Anonymous
    The 'war on drugs' was, basically, 'started' because of the African-American 'crack 'n' crime' frenzy of the late 80s early 90s in which the black political caucuses - which seem to have a privileged ear to various dumb-ass presidents - begged, pleaded, grovelled, wept, wailed and gnashed teeth, to the President and Congress to 'do something'.

    Ridiculous as it seems now, those lobbyists were bandying about the term 'endangered species' to describe young black males.
    Anyone who took notice of Steve's famous graph can enjoy a private chuckle.

    Criminalization of drugs long predates the 1980s, but devoting so many public resources to stamp out the illegal drug trade may well be more recent. But can we agree that it has not solved the problem? And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "But can we agree that it has not solved the problem?"

    Depends. Do you or I have any fracking clue what "the problem" would be in the absence of criminalization? I've known plenty of people who didn't seem inclined to use illegal drugs who nevertheless got hooked after exposure to prescription painkillers, and I can fully understand the allure of those.


    "And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?"

    How do you know that "the associated violence" wouldn't find other outlets? First, drug addicts often find holding down a normal job either extremely or undesirable. They would be out causing trouble of some kind. Second, remove the income the criminal element earns from the drug trade and it's safe to say that these people would still want and need to earn their income from some other source, presumably illegal.
    , @Anonymous
    I just repeat what I said:

    During the murderous days of the late 80s early 90s Afram crack epidemic - when black mostly wholesale slaughtered black in America's inner city badlands, what ever vestige of black leadership that exisisted more or less demanded a tough federal response.

    Sorry, but I can't understand your argument - do you really, seriously want those times to return? I can't believe 'decriminalizing' crack would have any other effect.
  112. @E. Rekshun
    Some here should be reminded that blacks are not “the enemy”. Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Plenty? If they are fed up w/ crime, then they're not doing anything about it.

    They’re not doing anything are they? Wasn’t it the testimony of many blacks that ultimately exonerated Officer Wilson? Your attitude shows the risks of this whole “race realist” approach. Most people simply cannot think of race in other than categorical terms. All I here in this place is “blacks are like this” and “whites are like that”. There’s no appreciation of the fact that both blacks and whites cover a wide range of personalities and behaviors.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Perhaps, but any sane response to this world must be based on 'generality'.
    , @E. Rekshun
    I should have been more clear - to few of them (blacks) are doing anything worthwhile about (black on black) crime; and for that I don't care. None of them (blacks) are doing anything about the very high rates of black on White crime and, in fact, many of them explicitly encourage it or it lease subtly condone it.


    Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Again, plenty?

    Anyway, it's their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies committing the crime (usually against their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies).

  113. In Ferguson, suicide by cop occurred when Michael Brown informed a police officer that he was a ‘pussy’, then charged him after moments earlier getting shot trying to pull said cop’s gun off him.

  114. @jtgw
    Criminalization of drugs long predates the 1980s, but devoting so many public resources to stamp out the illegal drug trade may well be more recent. But can we agree that it has not solved the problem? And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?

    “But can we agree that it has not solved the problem?”

    Depends. Do you or I have any fracking clue what “the problem” would be in the absence of criminalization? I’ve known plenty of people who didn’t seem inclined to use illegal drugs who nevertheless got hooked after exposure to prescription painkillers, and I can fully understand the allure of those.

    “And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?”

    How do you know that “the associated violence” wouldn’t find other outlets? First, drug addicts often find holding down a normal job either extremely or undesirable. They would be out causing trouble of some kind. Second, remove the income the criminal element earns from the drug trade and it’s safe to say that these people would still want and need to earn their income from some other source, presumably illegal.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Doesn't anyone remember that we tried this before with Prohibition? There was a drug, alcohol, in widespread use that was blamed for all sorts of social problems. But prohibition only introduced new problems, without really fixing the old ones. And when prohibition was lifted, those new problems disappeared. What makes other drugs so different?
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Depends. Do you or I have any fracking clue what “the problem” would be in the absence of criminalization? I’ve known plenty of people who didn’t seem inclined to use illegal drugs who nevertheless got hooked after exposure to prescription painkillers, and I can fully understand the allure of those."

    And thanks to law enforcement cracking down on prescription opiates, a lot of people who used to be additcted to those are now addicted to heroin. And as an added benefit, they might now have hepatitus or AIDS too.

    "How do you know that “the associated violence” wouldn’t find other outlets? First, drug addicts often find holding down a normal job either extremely or undesirable. They would be out causing trouble of some kind. Second, remove the income the criminal element earns from the drug trade and it’s safe to say that these people would still want and need to earn their income from some other source, presumably illegal."

    So what's your solution? You seem to be writing them off as hopeless hard-cases. I'm not saying that you are necessarily wrong on that account, at least in many cases. But then that would seem to imply that they will always be a problem no matter what. What do you propose to do with them? Exterminate them?

    How about just letting them buy some drugs which they can use to amuse and/or anesthetize themselves.
  115. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @jtgw
    Criminalization of drugs long predates the 1980s, but devoting so many public resources to stamp out the illegal drug trade may well be more recent. But can we agree that it has not solved the problem? And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?

    I just repeat what I said:

    During the murderous days of the late 80s early 90s Afram crack epidemic – when black mostly wholesale slaughtered black in America’s inner city badlands, what ever vestige of black leadership that exisisted more or less demanded a tough federal response.

    Sorry, but I can’t understand your argument – do you really, seriously want those times to return? I can’t believe ‘decriminalizing’ crack would have any other effect.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Crack was never legal. Criminalization of cocaine and other drugs dates back long before the crack epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s. So your argument is a red herring.
  116. @jtgw
    They're not doing anything are they? Wasn't it the testimony of many blacks that ultimately exonerated Officer Wilson? Your attitude shows the risks of this whole "race realist" approach. Most people simply cannot think of race in other than categorical terms. All I here in this place is "blacks are like this" and "whites are like that". There's no appreciation of the fact that both blacks and whites cover a wide range of personalities and behaviors.

    Perhaps, but any sane response to this world must be based on ‘generality’.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Not if it results in bigotry and prejudice. What I see here is prejudice and ill-will directed against blacks as a whole, which dehumanizes them and prevents blacks and whites from working out common interests and solutions to problems.
  117. @jtgw
    They're not doing anything are they? Wasn't it the testimony of many blacks that ultimately exonerated Officer Wilson? Your attitude shows the risks of this whole "race realist" approach. Most people simply cannot think of race in other than categorical terms. All I here in this place is "blacks are like this" and "whites are like that". There's no appreciation of the fact that both blacks and whites cover a wide range of personalities and behaviors.

    I should have been more clear – to few of them (blacks) are doing anything worthwhile about (black on black) crime; and for that I don’t care. None of them (blacks) are doing anything about the very high rates of black on White crime and, in fact, many of them explicitly encourage it or it lease subtly condone it.

    Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Again, plenty?

    Anyway, it’s their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies committing the crime (usually against their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies).

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Except you're full of it. If blacks were doing nothing about black on white crime, why did those black witnesses come forward to help exonerate Officer Wilson? Again, mean-spirited and divisive rhetoric is what I'm seeing as the product of "race realism" here. Please, somebody prove me wrong.
    , @NOTA
    This Pew article shows 67% of blacks saying crime in their neighborhood is a big problem. From reading the survey data, it looks like a lot of blacks are both worried about crime and have little faith in the local cops. Just because you're scared of the local thugs doesn't mean you're not also scared of the local cops.
  118. @Anonymous
    I just repeat what I said:

    During the murderous days of the late 80s early 90s Afram crack epidemic - when black mostly wholesale slaughtered black in America's inner city badlands, what ever vestige of black leadership that exisisted more or less demanded a tough federal response.

    Sorry, but I can't understand your argument - do you really, seriously want those times to return? I can't believe 'decriminalizing' crack would have any other effect.

    Crack was never legal. Criminalization of cocaine and other drugs dates back long before the crack epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s. So your argument is a red herring.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    So, you want crack to be 'legalized' do you not?
  119. @Anonymous
    Perhaps, but any sane response to this world must be based on 'generality'.

    Not if it results in bigotry and prejudice. What I see here is prejudice and ill-will directed against blacks as a whole, which dehumanizes them and prevents blacks and whites from working out common interests and solutions to problems.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    If there was any possibility, at all, of blacks and whites 'working out common interests and finding solutions to problems', it would have been done centuries ago.
  120. @tbraton
    "This is partly to encourage people to use the “Remember My Information” option, which would also allow you to use Agree/Disagree buttons. "

    I don't whether it is just me, but, when I started posting here in July, I used to check off the "Remember My Information" box and the "Email Replies to my Comment" box. For some reason, the second check-off continued to be retained, but the "Remember My Information" check-off would not. So I had to check-off that box every time. Finally, it became such a nuisance that I left the box unchecked. Is there a reason for the different reactions to the check-offs? BTW I am still able to utilize the "Agree/Disagree" option even when I haven't checked off the "Remember My Information" box.

    I don’t whether it is just me, but, when I started posting here in July, I used to check off the “Remember My Information” box and the “Email Replies to my Comment” box. For some reason, the second check-off continued to be retained, but the “Remember My Information” check-off would not. So I had to check-off that box every time. Finally, it became such a nuisance that I left the box unchecked. Is there a reason for the different reactions to the check-offs? BTW I am still able to utilize the “Agree/Disagree” option even when I haven’t checked off the “Remember My Information” box.

    It might be a bit confusing. The “Remember” checkbox only needs to be used once to permanently remember all the other information, or checked again if you later want to change/update it. Since your information is already “remembered”, your Agree/Disagree buttons are working.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    It's no big deal since it doesn't appear to affect anything. But I have been puzzled why the box labeled "Email Replies to my Comment" remains checked but the box labeled "Remember My Information" resumes its unchecked status once the message has been posted. For example, just for kicks, I checked the "Remember" box before sending the last message but find it's now unchecked as I prepare this response.
  121. @Wilkey
    "But can we agree that it has not solved the problem?"

    Depends. Do you or I have any fracking clue what "the problem" would be in the absence of criminalization? I've known plenty of people who didn't seem inclined to use illegal drugs who nevertheless got hooked after exposure to prescription painkillers, and I can fully understand the allure of those.


    "And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?"

    How do you know that "the associated violence" wouldn't find other outlets? First, drug addicts often find holding down a normal job either extremely or undesirable. They would be out causing trouble of some kind. Second, remove the income the criminal element earns from the drug trade and it's safe to say that these people would still want and need to earn their income from some other source, presumably illegal.

    Doesn’t anyone remember that we tried this before with Prohibition? There was a drug, alcohol, in widespread use that was blamed for all sorts of social problems. But prohibition only introduced new problems, without really fixing the old ones. And when prohibition was lifted, those new problems disappeared. What makes other drugs so different?

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Part of the problem I think is that hardly anyone can remember when some drugs were legal. Cocaine was banned in 1914, for example. Marijuana was banned more recently 1970, and I think most sensible people now realize that it should be legalized again, but still, that's a while ago. People think of drug criminalization as just part of the landscape, and few are ready to entertain the idea that maybe drug problems could be better dealt with as a medical issue, rather than a criminal one.

    I guess we need baby steps. First legalize marijuana, and when the world doesn't end people will be willing to extend this to other drugs.
  122. @E. Rekshun
    I should have been more clear - to few of them (blacks) are doing anything worthwhile about (black on black) crime; and for that I don't care. None of them (blacks) are doing anything about the very high rates of black on White crime and, in fact, many of them explicitly encourage it or it lease subtly condone it.


    Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Again, plenty?

    Anyway, it's their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies committing the crime (usually against their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies).

    Except you’re full of it. If blacks were doing nothing about black on white crime, why did those black witnesses come forward to help exonerate Officer Wilson? Again, mean-spirited and divisive rhetoric is what I’m seeing as the product of “race realism” here. Please, somebody prove me wrong.

    • Replies: @E. Rekshun
    "You can't handle the truth!"
  123. @jtgw
    Doesn't anyone remember that we tried this before with Prohibition? There was a drug, alcohol, in widespread use that was blamed for all sorts of social problems. But prohibition only introduced new problems, without really fixing the old ones. And when prohibition was lifted, those new problems disappeared. What makes other drugs so different?

    Part of the problem I think is that hardly anyone can remember when some drugs were legal. Cocaine was banned in 1914, for example. Marijuana was banned more recently 1970, and I think most sensible people now realize that it should be legalized again, but still, that’s a while ago. People think of drug criminalization as just part of the landscape, and few are ready to entertain the idea that maybe drug problems could be better dealt with as a medical issue, rather than a criminal one.

    I guess we need baby steps. First legalize marijuana, and when the world doesn’t end people will be willing to extend this to other drugs.

    • Replies: @bomag
    But things are different. Alcohol is bad enough; but hard drugs are worse. The delivery and potency, the avenues for damage, are different today than 1914.

    Europe experimented with lax drug laws, and they backed away. It just brought on more chaos from that sector. Society needs to reign in the darker impulses.
    , @JimL
    Marijuana has been illegal since at least the 1930s, which is when i beleive the anti-weed propaganda piece "Reffer Madness" came out
  124. @jtgw
    Part of the problem I think is that hardly anyone can remember when some drugs were legal. Cocaine was banned in 1914, for example. Marijuana was banned more recently 1970, and I think most sensible people now realize that it should be legalized again, but still, that's a while ago. People think of drug criminalization as just part of the landscape, and few are ready to entertain the idea that maybe drug problems could be better dealt with as a medical issue, rather than a criminal one.

    I guess we need baby steps. First legalize marijuana, and when the world doesn't end people will be willing to extend this to other drugs.

    But things are different. Alcohol is bad enough; but hard drugs are worse. The delivery and potency, the avenues for damage, are different today than 1914.

    Europe experimented with lax drug laws, and they backed away. It just brought on more chaos from that sector. Society needs to reign in the darker impulses.

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Do you have a reference about Europe? I never heard of this before.

    No one is saying society shouldn't reign in its "darker impulses". While I think all drugs should be legal, actual bad behavior should be punished. But even if you think that "hard drugs" should be criminalized to prevent bad behavior, you must agree that marijuana should not be counted as a hard drug. The overwhelming evidence is that, if anything, it is less harmful than alcohol. I don't think you can consistently argue that alcohol should be legal, despite all its well-known harmful effects, while marijuana should be illegal.
    , @Boomstick
    Maybe you could decriminalize downers like pot while keeping uppers criminal. Coked out or meth'd out dingbats who are paranoid and violent after a six-day bender are more dangerous than some inept pot-head.

    Keep our criminal classes sedated!
  125. @AnotherDad

    This is a fundamental disagreement in how civilization should be structured. ...

    This is why both sides should be for separatism.
     
    Excellent comment, Mr. Grandson.

    A lot of the NYT\fellow traveller commentary was about how racist it was for majority black Ferguson to have a majority of white cops and (implicitly) for Michael Brown to have be stopped by a white cop. But, of course, in any integrated community, even if the police force exactly matches the racial demographics, everyone has to put up with being stopped by cops from another race. This "white cops" argument is really an argument against integration.

    "Disparate impact" school discipline mau-mauing is another issue like this. A fundamental disagreement on what behavior is acceptable.

    But hey, i--and i suspect 95% of whites--don't have any need to be around blacks. So let's just fix it with segregation.

    ~~~

    However, this is far from the only issue where separation is the solution.


    Even more important is "open borders". There's a group of people who love open borders--and relentlessly push it on us. I don't want to deprive them of their desire to live amid "diversity"--have at it! But most folks do not want open borders--at all.

    Again separation is the answer. Let us "normals" have our own normal country, while the "cosmopolitan globalists" have their diversity utopia.

    Of course, the reason separation is not on the table is that both these groups--the blacks and the open borders cheerleaders--do not actually want *their own* nation. These folks don't really want "racist" or "xenophobic" whites to go-their-own-way--which would seem to be the obvious win-win solution-- ... because their fundamental relationship to whites is parasitic. They want--in different ways--to feast off the high quality society that white people create. Essentially they want whites to be slaves--creating prosperity that can be looted, but unable to control their own destiny.

    The hold that blacks have over whites is that whites can’t get away from them. People like Jackson and Sharpton know that. If there was true freedom of association, the two races would move apart and barely see each other. Then it would be a case of “out of sight, out of mind”. Far fewer whites would want their tax money going to help people they don’t see much and who are no threat to them.

  126. @Ron Unz

    I don’t whether it is just me, but, when I started posting here in July, I used to check off the “Remember My Information” box and the “Email Replies to my Comment” box. For some reason, the second check-off continued to be retained, but the “Remember My Information” check-off would not. So I had to check-off that box every time. Finally, it became such a nuisance that I left the box unchecked. Is there a reason for the different reactions to the check-offs? BTW I am still able to utilize the “Agree/Disagree” option even when I haven’t checked off the “Remember My Information” box.
     
    It might be a bit confusing. The "Remember" checkbox only needs to be used once to permanently remember all the other information, or checked again if you later want to change/update it. Since your information is already "remembered", your Agree/Disagree buttons are working.

    It’s no big deal since it doesn’t appear to affect anything. But I have been puzzled why the box labeled “Email Replies to my Comment” remains checked but the box labeled “Remember My Information” resumes its unchecked status once the message has been posted. For example, just for kicks, I checked the “Remember” box before sending the last message but find it’s now unchecked as I prepare this response.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    It’s no big deal since it doesn’t appear to affect anything. But I have been puzzled why the box labeled “Email Replies to my Comment” remains checked but the box labeled “Remember My Information” resumes its unchecked status once the message has been posted.
     
    Admittedly, it's a bit confusing, but I don't see any ideal solution. The Name, Email, Website, Email-Reply checkbox, etc. are the information saved when you use the "Remember" option, so that's why the last is checked. However, once the info is permanently "remembered" it doesn't need to keep "remembering" it again every time, so the "Remember" box is normally unchecked. However, if you want to change/update your info, you can check that box. That seems like the least-bad method to give people the option of updating their remembered info when they want to, while preventing them from accidentally changing something and messing things up.

    The key thing is that your info only needs to be "remembered" once...
  127. @jtgw
    Except you're full of it. If blacks were doing nothing about black on white crime, why did those black witnesses come forward to help exonerate Officer Wilson? Again, mean-spirited and divisive rhetoric is what I'm seeing as the product of "race realism" here. Please, somebody prove me wrong.

    “You can’t handle the truth!”

  128. @E. Rekshun
    I should have been more clear - to few of them (blacks) are doing anything worthwhile about (black on black) crime; and for that I don't care. None of them (blacks) are doing anything about the very high rates of black on White crime and, in fact, many of them explicitly encourage it or it lease subtly condone it.


    Plenty of them are as fed up with crime as whites are.

    Again, plenty?

    Anyway, it's their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies committing the crime (usually against their own sons, brothers, fathers, uncles, cousins, and baby-daddies).

    This Pew article shows 67% of blacks saying crime in their neighborhood is a big problem. From reading the survey data, it looks like a lot of blacks are both worried about crime and have little faith in the local cops. Just because you’re scared of the local thugs doesn’t mean you’re not also scared of the local cops.

  129. @tbraton
    It's no big deal since it doesn't appear to affect anything. But I have been puzzled why the box labeled "Email Replies to my Comment" remains checked but the box labeled "Remember My Information" resumes its unchecked status once the message has been posted. For example, just for kicks, I checked the "Remember" box before sending the last message but find it's now unchecked as I prepare this response.

    It’s no big deal since it doesn’t appear to affect anything. But I have been puzzled why the box labeled “Email Replies to my Comment” remains checked but the box labeled “Remember My Information” resumes its unchecked status once the message has been posted.

    Admittedly, it’s a bit confusing, but I don’t see any ideal solution. The Name, Email, Website, Email-Reply checkbox, etc. are the information saved when you use the “Remember” option, so that’s why the last is checked. However, once the info is permanently “remembered” it doesn’t need to keep “remembering” it again every time, so the “Remember” box is normally unchecked. However, if you want to change/update your info, you can check that box. That seems like the least-bad method to give people the option of updating their remembered info when they want to, while preventing them from accidentally changing something and messing things up.

    The key thing is that your info only needs to be “remembered” once…

    • Replies: @tbraton
    "The key thing is that your info only needs to be “remembered” once…"

    Thanks. I got it now.
  130. @bomag
    But things are different. Alcohol is bad enough; but hard drugs are worse. The delivery and potency, the avenues for damage, are different today than 1914.

    Europe experimented with lax drug laws, and they backed away. It just brought on more chaos from that sector. Society needs to reign in the darker impulses.

    Do you have a reference about Europe? I never heard of this before.

    No one is saying society shouldn’t reign in its “darker impulses”. While I think all drugs should be legal, actual bad behavior should be punished. But even if you think that “hard drugs” should be criminalized to prevent bad behavior, you must agree that marijuana should not be counted as a hard drug. The overwhelming evidence is that, if anything, it is less harmful than alcohol. I don’t think you can consistently argue that alcohol should be legal, despite all its well-known harmful effects, while marijuana should be illegal.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Actually, he's wrong. Usage didn't move much, but the pathologies attendant to drug use decreased significantly.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
  131. @Ron Unz

    It’s no big deal since it doesn’t appear to affect anything. But I have been puzzled why the box labeled “Email Replies to my Comment” remains checked but the box labeled “Remember My Information” resumes its unchecked status once the message has been posted.
     
    Admittedly, it's a bit confusing, but I don't see any ideal solution. The Name, Email, Website, Email-Reply checkbox, etc. are the information saved when you use the "Remember" option, so that's why the last is checked. However, once the info is permanently "remembered" it doesn't need to keep "remembering" it again every time, so the "Remember" box is normally unchecked. However, if you want to change/update your info, you can check that box. That seems like the least-bad method to give people the option of updating their remembered info when they want to, while preventing them from accidentally changing something and messing things up.

    The key thing is that your info only needs to be "remembered" once...

    “The key thing is that your info only needs to be “remembered” once…”

    Thanks. I got it now.

  132. @Wilkey
    "But can we agree that it has not solved the problem?"

    Depends. Do you or I have any fracking clue what "the problem" would be in the absence of criminalization? I've known plenty of people who didn't seem inclined to use illegal drugs who nevertheless got hooked after exposure to prescription painkillers, and I can fully understand the allure of those.


    "And can we also agree that the illegal drug trade and its associated gang violence would not exist if drugs were legal?"

    How do you know that "the associated violence" wouldn't find other outlets? First, drug addicts often find holding down a normal job either extremely or undesirable. They would be out causing trouble of some kind. Second, remove the income the criminal element earns from the drug trade and it's safe to say that these people would still want and need to earn their income from some other source, presumably illegal.

    “Depends. Do you or I have any fracking clue what “the problem” would be in the absence of criminalization? I’ve known plenty of people who didn’t seem inclined to use illegal drugs who nevertheless got hooked after exposure to prescription painkillers, and I can fully understand the allure of those.”

    And thanks to law enforcement cracking down on prescription opiates, a lot of people who used to be additcted to those are now addicted to heroin. And as an added benefit, they might now have hepatitus or AIDS too.

    “How do you know that “the associated violence” wouldn’t find other outlets? First, drug addicts often find holding down a normal job either extremely or undesirable. They would be out causing trouble of some kind. Second, remove the income the criminal element earns from the drug trade and it’s safe to say that these people would still want and need to earn their income from some other source, presumably illegal.”

    So what’s your solution? You seem to be writing them off as hopeless hard-cases. I’m not saying that you are necessarily wrong on that account, at least in many cases. But then that would seem to imply that they will always be a problem no matter what. What do you propose to do with them? Exterminate them?

    How about just letting them buy some drugs which they can use to amuse and/or anesthetize themselves.

  133. Maybe the NYT realised their campaign to drum up democrat votes by inciting racial hostility was getting 100s of black people killed.

    I wonder if this is part of what happened in the 60s too – the media getting thousands of black people killed by accident?

  134. @Harry Baldwin
    One reason is that drug sellers are being targeted more heavily than users.

    Does the author have a problem with that, outside of the fact that it results in blacks being put in prison? It seems obvious that drug sellers bear more criminal responsibility than drug users. I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest otherwise.

    “It seems obvious that drug sellers bear more criminal responsibility than drug users. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone suggest otherwise.”

    Drug sellers are just engaging in ordinary commercial conduct. They’d be happy to sell widgets if they could make money standing around on street corners that way.

    Drug users are the ones that create demand for the product and choose what to consume. They are the ones that create the drug sellers by offering them money to sell drugs.

    In fact, the drug users are the only ones responsible for the market activity. The drug sellers are just following their lead.

    And the idea of prosecuting drug sellers is just wrong-headed. There are always more waiting to replace any that you arrest as long as there is money in the market. There’s no reason to focus on drug sellers except incompetence or corruption in the law enforcement institutions.

    If you arrest the drug users, the market dries up. The proof that the War On Drugs is not serious is that we aren’t putting millions of casual drug users in prison. That’s the only way we would ever drastically reduce drug use.

  135. @bomag
    But things are different. Alcohol is bad enough; but hard drugs are worse. The delivery and potency, the avenues for damage, are different today than 1914.

    Europe experimented with lax drug laws, and they backed away. It just brought on more chaos from that sector. Society needs to reign in the darker impulses.

    Maybe you could decriminalize downers like pot while keeping uppers criminal. Coked out or meth’d out dingbats who are paranoid and violent after a six-day bender are more dangerous than some inept pot-head.

    Keep our criminal classes sedated!

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    They've kind of sort of done that.
  136. @Boomstick
    Maybe you could decriminalize downers like pot while keeping uppers criminal. Coked out or meth'd out dingbats who are paranoid and violent after a six-day bender are more dangerous than some inept pot-head.

    Keep our criminal classes sedated!

    They’ve kind of sort of done that.

  137. @jtgw
    Crack was never legal. Criminalization of cocaine and other drugs dates back long before the crack epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s. So your argument is a red herring.

    So, you want crack to be ‘legalized’ do you not?

    • Replies: @jtgw
    Drug control is like gun control. In both cases, it's not the things in themselves that are the problem, but their misuse. So yeah, don't make possession of crack or other drugs a criminal offense. Make murder, rape and robbery an offense, since they actually harm other people.
  138. @jtgw
    Not if it results in bigotry and prejudice. What I see here is prejudice and ill-will directed against blacks as a whole, which dehumanizes them and prevents blacks and whites from working out common interests and solutions to problems.

    If there was any possibility, at all, of blacks and whites ‘working out common interests and finding solutions to problems’, it would have been done centuries ago.

  139. @anonymous

    So we shouldn’t have any female police officers?
     
    No, we shouldn't. They're mostly worthless wastes of my taxpaying money.

    A lot of cops I know feel that women cops have their purpose, such as in handling domestic calls, dealing with grieving families, or interviewing female victims of sexual assault.

    Female firefighters, I would agree, serve no purpose and are a waste of the taxpayers’ money.

  140. “After all, police officers decide whom to stop or arrest.” Of course, this is just a racially tainted, arbitrary process. Another troubling part of our biased system as evidenced by the inexplicable death of that gentle giant from Ferguson, MO.

  141. @Anonymous
    So, you want crack to be 'legalized' do you not?

    Drug control is like gun control. In both cases, it’s not the things in themselves that are the problem, but their misuse. So yeah, don’t make possession of crack or other drugs a criminal offense. Make murder, rape and robbery an offense, since they actually harm other people.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Good.

    Now I finally understand.
    You wish crack cocaine to be legal.
    , @The most deplorable one
    The problem is that genetics plays a big part in a multi-racial society and very few seem aware of it.

    No only are there mean IQ differences there are differences in the ability to metabolize drugs like alcohol, prescription medicines and currently illegal drugs and these differences result in differing levels of societal disruption by those differing racial groups with respect to drugs.
  142. @jtgw
    Drug control is like gun control. In both cases, it's not the things in themselves that are the problem, but their misuse. So yeah, don't make possession of crack or other drugs a criminal offense. Make murder, rape and robbery an offense, since they actually harm other people.

    Good.

    Now I finally understand.
    You wish crack cocaine to be legal.

  143. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @jtgw
    Drug control is like gun control. In both cases, it's not the things in themselves that are the problem, but their misuse. So yeah, don't make possession of crack or other drugs a criminal offense. Make murder, rape and robbery an offense, since they actually harm other people.

    The problem is that genetics plays a big part in a multi-racial society and very few seem aware of it.

    No only are there mean IQ differences there are differences in the ability to metabolize drugs like alcohol, prescription medicines and currently illegal drugs and these differences result in differing levels of societal disruption by those differing racial groups with respect to drugs.

  144. @jtgw
    Part of the problem I think is that hardly anyone can remember when some drugs were legal. Cocaine was banned in 1914, for example. Marijuana was banned more recently 1970, and I think most sensible people now realize that it should be legalized again, but still, that's a while ago. People think of drug criminalization as just part of the landscape, and few are ready to entertain the idea that maybe drug problems could be better dealt with as a medical issue, rather than a criminal one.

    I guess we need baby steps. First legalize marijuana, and when the world doesn't end people will be willing to extend this to other drugs.

    Marijuana has been illegal since at least the 1930s, which is when i beleive the anti-weed propaganda piece “Reffer Madness” came out

  145. @jtgw
    Do you have a reference about Europe? I never heard of this before.

    No one is saying society shouldn't reign in its "darker impulses". While I think all drugs should be legal, actual bad behavior should be punished. But even if you think that "hard drugs" should be criminalized to prevent bad behavior, you must agree that marijuana should not be counted as a hard drug. The overwhelming evidence is that, if anything, it is less harmful than alcohol. I don't think you can consistently argue that alcohol should be legal, despite all its well-known harmful effects, while marijuana should be illegal.

    Actually, he’s wrong. Usage didn’t move much, but the pathologies attendant to drug use decreased significantly.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2