William M. Briggs

Statistician to the Stars!

Black And White Homicide Rates: Who’s Killing Whom?

Due to current events, this post, which needs updating in its numbers, which awaits the FBI updates, is highly relevant. This post first ran 27 January 2013.

Blacks who commit homicide do so at a rate about 7.5 times larger than whites who commit homicide. The trend in black homicide correlates well with the change in overall homicide. This disparity also exists for other crimes: blacks commit them at about 7-10 times the rates of whites.

Going on a suggestion made by reader JH when we first examined the homicide statistics1, I put both races together on one plot to make comparisons fair.

First is the homicide rate for Blacks and Whites, over-plotted with the homicide victim rate for both groups, finally over-plotted with the overall homicide rate (taken from the post on guns and homicides).

Figure 1

Figure 1

Note that the blue line is scaled to the right vertical axis, and is the overall homicide rate (as estimated by the FBI and Census). The black lines are killers, and the red victims. The dashed are Blacks, the solid Whites. (See this post for separate pictures of each race, where the general decline of White homicide rates, and its slight upward bump in 1990 is more visible.)

Obviously, the overall homicide rate correlates nicely with the Black rates. In an odd coincidence, according to the FBI the number of Black victims is almost identical to the number of White victims.

Whatever is happening in Black populations is largely responsible for the decline in homicide rates.

One thing is more or less constant: the rates for Black killers are much higher than for White killers, as this picture which shows the ratio of rates demonstrates:

Figure 2

Figure 2

Rates bob around, but average out to about 7.5 times higher.

Perhaps the difference lies in who is killing whom. Lumping all the Black and White homicides together, here are the percentages of Blacks killing Whites and White killing Blacks:

Figure 3

Figure 3

Racial animosity is on the rise, homicidally speaking. This will come as no surprise to anybody who isn’t an NPR listener. More Blacks kill Whites than the reverse, which strangely is exactly what you don’t hear on TV. Update Perhaps this trend will escalate, given the media’s glee in stoking racial discontent.

Lastly, here are the percentages for the races killing each other:

Figure 4

Figure 4

Fairly self-explanatory.

Update Fig. 2 with new axes limits.

Fig. 2b

Fig. 2b

Update Breakdown of male (Figure A1) and female (Figure A2) Black and White homicide rates. Note the change in scale between the sexes. Males are about 10 times as homicidal as females.

Figure A1

Figure A1

Figure A2

Figure A2

The ratio of Black to White, by sex and age group, is also interesting.

Figure A3

Figure A3

Figure A4

Figure A4

Black males maintain a consistent edge over White males, homicidally speaking, regardless of age group. Though the gap is closing, or at least leveling off, for females.


—————————————————————————-

1The data are from the FBI (details here), the Census Bureau, and the Department of Justice (details here). For W/B,B/W homicides, see htus8008f19.csv in the DOJ link.

89 Comments

  1. Briggs,
    White and Black, or Black and non-Black? I link below to a fascinating collection of reports from the Chicago Police Department, and organization which appears to have some interest in terminal affairs.

    I suspect that there is a lot to work with there, for example the departed (murdered) in Chicago tend to be predominantly folks who have been guests of the Judicial System at an earlier point. Most have been sent on their way by handgun.

    One might ask what might be the annual local consumption of ammunition in the calibers preferred, (these guys are well known to be lousy shots – maybe a matter of seeing too many movies demonstrating an especially ineffective method for grasping a handgun), how many shots were required to dispatch the departed, collateral woundings and killings, numbers dispatched per event, and perhaps more importantly, percent of the killer/killee cohort as a part of the local population.

    I was fortunate to sit through a course in criminology in 1963 and to hear that the 18-27 male cohort was the author(?) of most of the crime in the US. The larger this cohort was the more crime.

    The lecturer, who was fond of the term “adjudicated”, suggested that some smart politician would recognize an oncoming reduction in the numbers of the miscreant containing cohort, devise some scheme to “reduce” crime and then when the stunted cohort came of age, take credit for his/her success.

    I cannot recommend to highly a look at say the 2011 Chicago Murder Analysis Report which can be found at the above link, not the least because of the discontinuity between the content and the attractive cover.

    One last bit. It does appear that more murders are the result of the activities of the local shooting clubs than any other cause. I wonder if the NRA has considered inviting their application for membership. It could be that with a little instruction and target practice, they might reduce the rate of collateral murders, and increase the percentage of forced departures of prior guests of the justice system.

    It is clearly another example of how informative looking into something can be.

    https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/News/Statistical%20Reports/Murder%20Reports

  2. Upstream from the linked page is a broader listing of publications of the Chicago Police Department including “Crime at a Glance.”

    No-one could say these guys aren’t droll.

  3. I would expect better data presentation from you than this, Matt.

    Figure 2 should include the origin, so you can judge visually whether these results represent a roughly constant or a wildly varying ratio.

    Figures 3 and 4 are misleading. If you care about inter-racial homicide, what really matters is whether the overall rate is going up or down, not how that compares to the overall homicide rate, which is dominated by black-on-black killing. The last figure (Fig 4) seems especially useless, because it suggests visually that there’s a mirror relationship between white-on-white killing and black-on-black killing. But, surely that’s another artifact of the fact that these stats are all dominated by black-on-black killing. When that goes down significantly, the percentages of the other categories will all rise, but that says nothing interesting about them at all.

  4. Oh, I wondered why there was an inverse correlation between black-black and white-white murders, if they are % of all murders, dominated by black-black then of course they look inversely correlated.

    And does white mean actual caucasian, or are hispanic being grouped in with that group? What about asian? It would also be interesting to see African American (used as African’s who are naturalized citizens) vs American blacks (used as American with some fraction of African), but I suppose that data isn’t gathered.

  5. This report was last updated in 2005, but it’s still interesting.
    http://colorofcrime.com/

  6. An increasing white on black and black on white might correlate with increased intermarriage. That makes more black-white in-laws. Since most murders are family related …

  7. Mathematician “La Griffe du Lion” has written a number of related pieces.
    See the links below.

    Why Most Serial Killers are White Men
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/serial.htm

    Politics, Imprisonment and Race
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/prison.htm

    Racial Disparities in School Discipline
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/discipline.htm

    Aggressiveness, Criminality and Sex Drive by Race, Gender and Ethnicity
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/fuzzy.htm

    The Color of Death Row
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/DP.htm

    Crime in the Hood
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/hood.htm

  8. Briggs

    January 27, 2013 at 6:03 pm

    Tom P,

    There’s a good reason R has the defaults axes it does; Fig. 2 is plotted with these defaults. A quick glance at Fig. 1 and then at Fig. 2 shows that these series are roughly similar for Blacks. There is a little more noise in 2, true, but the only conclusion I made, and the one I don’t think you dispute, is that Blacks commit homicide at a much higher rates than Whites. True?

    Figs. 3 and 4 are lifted directly from the table I pointed to. If you think these “especially useless” I suggest emailing the DOJ and telling them to stop compiling this data.

    But then your statement “what really matters is whether the overall rate is going up or down” is false. Suppose the Black and White homicide were perfectly flat, and even equal. It could be that Blacks just kill blacks or that they kill only Whites, and vice versa, or it could be that Blacks only kill Whites and vice versa. There’s no way to tell who is killing whom just looking at the overall rate.

  9. Ferguson.
    Fascinating link.

    Briggs.
    Could you elaborate a tad more on why figure 2 is ok? I also would have preferred a axis starting at 0 (and stopping at 10) for data going from roughly 6 to 9.

  10. Briggs

    January 27, 2013 at 6:35 pm

    Bill S,

    Sure. Why stop at 10? Why not 20? Or 100? Or, since the range can be infinite (only Blacks could be killers, say), why not as high as we can go?

    Plus, since I only want to establish that the rate is about 7 times higher, I’ve done that with this chart. At least, I don’t think I hear anybody (not just here, but anywhere) claiming anything different.

    But, in the sake of domestic harmony, see above shortly for an update.

  11. Replaced my own brake pads before reading latest blog.
    Decided 56 year old pencil pushers should not do that.
    Using Crown Royal to ease the ache in lower back.
    Do not claim full faculties.
    But the question is honest. I would use 1 to roughly 110% of peak because the data is a ratio.
    But what I do is based on experience presenting data to customers. I was hoping you knew some rules on presenting statistical data and would elaborate.

  12. Briggs

    January 27, 2013 at 7:46 pm

    Bill S,

    Trade you graphing secrets for a shot of that Crown Royal.

  13. Matt,

    I read recently (don’t have a link inhand) that when accounting for single parenthood, blacks ad whites commit murder at the same rate. Thoughts?

  14. Briggs

    January 27, 2013 at 8:40 pm

    Swade016,

    Sounds plausible, anyway. Data?

    What I’d like to find are the same stats above, but going back pre-WW II. Then we’d have some better indication of how social policy influenced the numbers.

  15. Ye Olde Statistician

    January 27, 2013 at 10:45 pm

    The rule of thumb for scaling recommended by Joiner was that the window of the time series be 1.5 to 2.0 times the range of the data. It’s an aesthetic choice: random variation looks random, assignable variation looks assignable. On Shewhart control charts, the control limits ought to be about an inch apart. (Lit. “rule of thumb”) This is useful in industrial situations so that one does not spook the herd.

  16. It would be interesting to see the effect of punishment policies on crime severity. With 3 strikes law and death penalty one might be incline to eliminate witness if things goes bad. Though a vast majority of killings are gangs related.

  17. Related to the underlying reasons for the trends noted:

    Violence—Suicide is Contagious: http://www.micronesiaproject.org/2010/11/i-somehow-feel-that-i.html

    Violence is Contagious: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/violence-is-contagious/

    Bystanders effect on interpersonal violence makes a difference: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1298601

    Watching violence—especially by youth with developing brain neurology—leads to desensitization to violence: http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/aggr/articles/Huesmann/2007.Huesmann&Kirwil.WhyObservingViol.CambridgePress.pdf
    …but then, that knowledge is nothing new: http://killology.com/book_stop_summary.htm

    http://www.killology.com/ is a website by a retired military officer dedicated to the psychological effects of having to kill [e.g. by policy or military] and related effects. Humans appear to be “hard-wired” such that the act of one human killing another human appears to be intrinsically distasteful & instinctively unnatural under any circumstance, including unquestionably legitimate situations such as in various self-defense scenarios. This has been observed in a number of military engagements (especially in WW-II, and via archeological & re-enactments of US Civil War engagements) – the findings led to means of desensitizing military recruits between WW-II and the Vietnam conflict. Many of those de-sensitization techniques have found their way into numerous video games and television shows. Anyone interested in this would benefit by reading, “On Killing, : The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society” by Dave Grossman (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0316330116/qid=973195800/104-1614587-2282360 ).

  18. “It would be interesting to see the effect of punishment policies on crime severity. With 3 strikes law and death penalty one might be incline to eliminate witness if things goes bad. Though a vast majority of killings are gangs related.”

    If you want to look at the effects of severe punishments on murders, see Singapore, Saudi Arabia, or Bahrain.

  19. Tom P, Bill S, Ye Olde Statistician, Briggs

    About the plot thing,

    R returns “statistically significant” plots, that is, it maximizes the area of the plot since it cannot possibly know what is significant for our field of study.

    But this is subjective not just to the field of research but to the researchers themselves. So it is up to the researchers to set the limits so that the plot makes the researchers point.

    In short, plots can say more about the researchers than about the research itself! And, in this sense, there is no bad plots, only opinions that you might share or not.

  20. Gene Callahan

    July 16, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    “Blacks who commit homicide do so at a rate about 7.5 times larger than whites who commit homicide.”

    Before you call others “dumb,” you should notice that “blacks who commit homicide” and “whites commit homicide” both do so at a rate of 100%.

  21. Sylvain Allard

    July 16, 2013 at 2:38 pm

    Briggs,

    Do you intend to mean that since blacks kill more people that makes it ok to kill black people?

    I have a few question about the data:

    Do they represent the people arrested or convicted?

    They are many study that shows bias in conviction rate by either race of the victim or murderer.

    If you can access it

    http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/1228652.pdf?acceptTC=true

    This for death sentences:

    Victim:

    Georgia Florida Illinois

    BKW 20.1 13.7 7.5
    WKW 5.7 5.2 1.9
    bkb 0.8 0.7 0.6
    wkb 2.9 4.3 0

    So, in Florida, if the victim is white (27%) there is more chance that the killer will be put on death row than if the victim is black (7%). And if the murderer is black (16%) he has less chances to be put on death row than if is white(27%), because he killed more black people.

  22. Its interesting that during this entire Trayvon Martin trial that no mention of what happens when a white person passes through a black neighborhood. Black on white killing happens for many reasons, the primary being during the commission of another crime. But many whites are killed in the exact same manner that this kid was killed. But to hear the media talk about it, this never happens, or happens only to black people. They claim to be upset that more blacks are in prison than whites but their neighborhoods are all but combat zones.
    Maybe we should try for a bit of balance and fairness in reporting what is going on.

  23. Sylvain Allard

    July 16, 2013 at 6:15 pm

    Carlo C,

    Do the black who kill white go free after the trial?

    The data I presented before shows that there is more value given to a white victim.

  24. Carlo C.,

    You remind me why I stopped “hangin'” with the modern liberals. You are too in love with the propaganda that has been around since before I was born!!!

    You state a conclusion without presenting ANY data to explain it, yet expect us to accept that Whites are given more value due to BIAS of the SYSTEM or the GUBMINT. Why is this your assumption???

    Let us look at the basics. Most murders happen in areas like Chicago with HIGH murder rates. In these areas we have the MAN, the SYSTEM, the Courts, Judges, Prosecutors, Attorneys, Court Recorders… majority Democrats and leftards. Yes, the people you appear to align with are overseeing this apparently UNJUST system that gives low value to the black.

    Please explain this. If you cannot just ask and I will explain it to you.

  25. Sylvain Allard

    July 17, 2013 at 9:57 am

    @kuhnkat,

    I think you were mistaken in Identiy.

    Anyhow, I have provided data that show that if the victim is white, it is 4 times more likely that the murdurer will be put on death row. And if the killer of a white victim is black then he is more likely to be put on death row, than if he is white.

    So yes, this demonstrate that there is more value given to a white life than a blac life.

  26. @SylvainAllard Or, it could just be that racial agitators have sufficiently intimidated the justice system that they are now less likely to execute a black murderer just to avoid the knee-jerk charges of racism that they know they can expect.

  27. Sylvain Allard

    July 17, 2013 at 11:12 am

    TomP,

    The study the data come from list black as having killed about 131 white persons and 96 black.

    While the white killed 234 white persons and 11 blacks.

    When you compare black people killing white and white killing white. Black are condemn to death a higher rate than white.

    So your claim is incorrect.

  28. Sylvain,

    You showed that the same people whom the blacks vote for repetitively put blacks in jail at a high rate and sentence them to death at a higher rate than whites. Many of those same people are black and Hispanic doing what you seem to think is a dirty deed against blacks.

    Sadly you also do not consider that most states do NOT allow the death penalty anymore so that skews the data. You also apparently are so BIASED that you can not entertain the idea that the sentences are actually JUST!!! That Blacks are actually given so much leeway in their previous encounters with the law that they continue reoffending until the court has no choice but to give them the maximum sentences.

    Your BIAS blinds you to real possibilities that you MUST research before you can come to the conclusions you try and pass off as fact.

  29. Sylvain Allard

    July 17, 2013 at 10:16 pm

    @Kuhnkat,

    The biggest bias that I showed is that when victim is black, the chances of seeing the murderer go free is much higher, than when a white is the victim.

    My claim is supported by the first paper that I linked to, and in this one:

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15324834basp0301_2#.UedXmc-1bb0

    “Abstract

    Two experiments were conducted to investigate how racial bias affects juror decision making. Three sources of bias were studied: (1) prior probabilities of guilt, (2) distortion of the meaning of evidence, and (3) differential weighting of information. A paired comparison technique employed in the first study revealed that pretrial probabilities of guilt were greater when the victim was White than when she was Black. In the second experiment, a different group of subjects viewed one of four videotaped simulated rape trials in which seven segments of testimony had been previously rated as pro-prosecution, pro-defense, or neutral. During the trial, subjects rated each segment on three different scales: prosecution, defense, and degree of defendant guilt. Results indicated that neutral evidence was seen as more favorable to prosecution for a White victim compared to a Black victim. Evidence which favored either prosecution or defense was not distorted. Regression analyses revealed a positive relationship between estimates of guilt and distortion of evidence. The weight or importance of the evidence did not vary as a function of victim or defendant race. Years of recommended imprisonment indicated greater severity toward the Black assailant of a White woman. The results suggest that bias in favor of White victims occurs both in the assessment of pretrial probabilities and perception of evidence.”

    What is described in this article show the same result than the first one I posted. When the victim is white the likelihood to be found guilty is much greater than if the victim is black.

    This is what the author says in his conclusion of the first paper:

    “The major factual finding of this study is simple: There has
    been racial discrimination in the imposition of the death penalty
    under post-Furman statutes in the eight states that we examined.
    The discrimination that we found is based on the race of the victim,
    and it is a remarkably stable and consistent phenomenon.
    Capital sentencing disparities by race of victim were found in
    each of the eight states, despite their diversity….Our findings are consistent with a large body of previous
    research, and, in two states-Georgia and Mississippi- they parallel
    the findings of studies that include more detailed information
    than was available to us.”

    It is really shocking read someone who believe that blacks are given more leeway in their previous encounter. In the US, it has been shone that white smokes weeds at a rate a little higher than blacks yet blacks are arrested and convicted, at a much higher rate than white.

  30. Person of Choler

    July 18, 2013 at 12:51 am

    Sylvain Allard on 16 July 2013 at 6:15 pm said: “Carlo C, Do the black who kill white go free after the trial?”

    If they are acquitted, yes they go free.

  31. Sylvain:

    http://patriotupdate.com/2013/07/blacks-benefit-more-than-whites-from-flas-stand-your-ground-law/

    Sylvain, that study is over 20 YEARS OLD with data even older. Shoud we be investigating whether the KKK are really racist also??

    The glove didn’t fit and they acquitted OJ even though there was blood and DNA all over the place, yet, YOU think blacks don’t get the benefit of the doubt.

    Again, when someone is GUILTY and all the evidence shows they are guilty they are USUALLY convicted. Yet YOU have this mythological thinking going on that it is only because the LEFTARD courts who repeatedly let these criminals go to commit more crimes are convicting them for no good reasons. Seriously man, you need some reality injections.

  32. Sylvain,

    Sylvain,

    I feel youare probably not happy with my blowing off the study you thought so highly of so here is more info to show it is absolutely USELESS to apply to an actual court case in the real world.

    1) would any of the people used as subjects even be selected to sit on a jury??
    2) they claim a bias in evaluating the evidence. How do we quantify that in an actual trial?? It is a relatively MEANINGLESS statement. In the Zimmerman trial some of the jurors WANTED to find George guilty. Why didn’t they?? Because the instructions from the court CONSTRAINED their actions in a manner that was not duplicated in this wonderful social experiment because the subjects could not be sworn in as jurors. Additionally the Theatre often used by the attorneys and the experts explanations in addition to the demeanor of the persons involved, especially the defendant, will affect the jurors evaluation consciously and unconsciously. How did they compensate for the fact that cases in court are so varied?!?! There were only 4 SIMULATED rape trials This is abysmally inadequate even excluding the possibility of bias in the way the simulated trials were run.

    3) I am still wondering why they wasted their time blathering about pretrial probabilities. What happens IN the trial often completely changes any clear bias from pretrial.

    4) “The results suggest that bias in favor of White victims occurs both in the assessment of pretrial probabilities and perception of evidence.”

    If you do not understand what the word SUGGESTS means in the above line please look it up. This is a very WEAK statement that is seen in numerous pieces of JUNK SCIENCE along with honest work that is admitting it doesn’t mean much.

    5) Finally, this bias only matters if there is insufficient evidence to clearly show guilt or innocence. Do you think EVERY court case is a Perry Mason case??

    If you get me a copy I would be happy to look through it and see if they made any real boners in running their experiments.

    Do yourself a favor and look for studies that use actual cases and do reasonable background investigations and collection of real life data rather than iffy experimental stuff that is subject to its own problems and biases.pieces of JUNK SCIENCE along with honest work that is admitting it doesn’t mean much.

    5) Finally, this bias only matters if there is insufficient evidence to clearly show guilt or innocence. Do you think EVERY court case is a Perry Mason case??

    If you get me a copy I would be happy to look through it and see if they made any real boners in running their experiments.

  33. Sylvain Allard

    July 18, 2013 at 9:11 am

    Kuhnkat,

    rom the source of the article you linked to:

    “Forty four African Americans in the state of Florida have claimed a “Stand Your Ground” defense. Of these claims, 24 were considered “justified” (55 percent), while 11 resulted in convictions and nine cases are still pending.

    Of the 76 white people who have used the defense, 40 were considered “justified” (less than 53 percent), while 25 were convicted and 11 cases are still pending.”

    They missed, and you seem to miss the point, that the biggest part of the problem is the race of the victims. How many were black victims and how many were none black. How many got freed when comparing the victims. When a black is killed the guy will go free at a much higher rate than when it is a white.

    When comparing the murderer. A black that kills a white will convicted at a higher rate than a white killing white, but the difference will be less than when comparing victims.

    Meanwhile, a black woman was sentenced to 20 years while not having killed anyone.

    http://www.inquisitr.com/234987/marissa-alexander-domestic-abuse-victim-sentenced-to-20-years-for-warning-shot/

  34. So our leftist idiot still does not get that blacks commit more crime and then complains about a black being sentenced for committing a crime.
    And of course not mentioning she did not act in self defence.

    Dishonest these lefties.

  35. Sylvain Allard

    July 18, 2013 at 7:23 pm

    Andy,

    “Dishonest these lefties.” As honesty goes there is very little to be learn from the right.

    But yes, it is normal that a black should be condemn for committing no crime and a white liberated for killing a kid. You can then claim that blacks commit more crime.

    What is illegal for a black is not illegal for a white. This is a big reason why blacks commit more crime.

  36. Males are more homicidal than females? Thats what the statistics say. But you will get a different answer from any male who has been at the recieving end of the “look”, from the fair sex….

  37. So, did anyone’s preconceived notions change even one iota as a result of all this hot air?

  38. No Sylvia, as i thought you are merely stupid, and come here to parade your self aggrandizing morality.
    Black people commit more violent crime. That is quite clear. The lady you referred to in the above link, most definitly did commit a crime and was correctly punished. You have not provided and cannot provide any evidence of white people (Zimmerman?) not being found guilty of crimes incorrectly. The zimmerman verdict is correct both morally and legally.

    What is illegal is illegal, sadly black people do not see this and do break the law more often, particularly when it comes to murder as shown above. Or are there lots of whites killing folk, but not being found guilty….no?

    Yes the right is more honest, you find it unpalatable and hide behind the lefty hive mind as a defence.

  39. Sylvain Allard

    July 19, 2013 at 8:55 pm

    Andy,

    The Zimmerman acquittal is a complete travesty both legally and morally.

    If he had caught Trayvon Martin stealing or breaking and entering, he may have had a case. If he was so scared he only had to stay in his car. If Tayvon Martin had been white the killer would have been condemn of first degree murder and put to death. But in the USA and even more in the south the life of black is worth less than a cockroaches, so the killer goes free.

    You say that Melissa Alexander who was beaten and even sent to the hospital while pregnant committed a crime for firing a single bullet that did not injure or kill anyone. How many white people have been condemn for the same thing. A violent husband is more than a good reason to shoot a warning shot.

    Your law are biased anti-black and the south of the USA is just as retarded as the Taliban.

  40. Legally Zimmerman was released because self defence is a defence. In addition he should never have been charged, only being charged due to the hysterical idiot rantings of the liberal left.
    Morally Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from the Trayvon. A young man, who was a thief, a drug taker and a violent thug. If Zimmerman did profile him, he profiled him correctly.
    It in not illegal to get out of your car, nor to follow someone. Nor is it wrong to stop someone before a crime occurs. It is illegal, as Trayvon did, to assault someone. The evidence is quite clear Trayvon, a racist, assaulted Zimmerman the ‘crazy ass cracker’.
    Your inability to discuss crime without excusing it based on the colour of a persons skin marks you out as the worst kind of racist, one who cannot grasp the simple fact that black people commit more violent crime. You should be ashamed but you lefties abandoned shame years ago.
    Oh and by your own logic Alexander could have stayed in the car if she was scared and not returned to attempt to murder her husband. I assume you think, stopping black people from murdering black people is anti-black…..

  41. Sylvain Allard

    July 20, 2013 at 6:50 pm

    Andy,

    Is entire self-defence case rested upon him being able to get is gun at the last minute, while his head was smashed on the concrete. Something that is impossible, since he said that his gun was inside his pants, on his back on his right side. How could he access it while Martin was above him. It is impossible.

    Zimmerman lied on Hannity when he said he never heard of stand your ground, yet he got an A in a class that discussed it. He had a lot of reason to lie, mainly to lie about at which moment he pull out his gun, because if he pulled it out sooner than he claim, he cannot claim self- defence.

    The most disturbing after the event is its lack of any affect. Policeman and military personnel almost all get into nervous shock or even developed PTSD after killing someone. Yet this guy was calm and matter of fact has if nothing had happened. These are signs that this guy is a psychopath/sociopath. By the way, how can someone forget the name of the street where he has been walking his dog for the last 4 years.

    The color of the skin does not matter a bit to me. That the victim is black or white should change nothing to case. But for racist individual, the fact that the victim is black equals automatic self-defence for the killer, even more when he is not black.

    The problem is that he didn’t prevent any crime, Martin had full right to get to his dad’s house. Nothing in Martin’s past lead to him breaking and entering homes.

    If Alexander was trying to kill her husband, why has she fired only one round, why is nobody dead. At least her husband had a violent past where he put her in the hospital while she was pregnant. BTW, she tried to get away through the garage but couldn’t find her keys. Isn’t the castle doctrine and stand your ground about not having to flee a dangerous situation.

  42. This is plainly rubbish. Why is it impossible to get a gun from your back on the right?And no the entire case did not hinge on this made up fact. Lying to a journalist is not illegal, not being a good student is not illegal. No your second made up fact, relies on the first made up fact. At least you now seem to accept Trayvon assaulted GZ.
    No Sylvia people who kill others have a wide variety of responses. Again you are just making stuff up. Could you list the signs GZ is a psychopath?
    I’m afraid that many things in Trayvons past suggest he robbed people, like the unfortunate fact that he was caught at school with stolen property and the tools for stealing them. He was violent and a drug user, he purchased two of the three things you need to make lean. The jury heard none of this and yet still found GZ innocent.
    Exactly how do you know a crime was not prevented? Oh silly me more made up stuff.
    No Sylvia, Alexander returned to her car after her partner confronted her about her ex who he suspected had fathered her child, she then went back to the house with a gun retrieved from the car, pointed it at her partner and the children and then fired. Sweetie, she’s a criminal, Trayvon was a criminal. And they get judged on the content of their character and on their actions, not on the colour of their skin as you seem to think they should be.

  43. Sylvain Allard

    July 20, 2013 at 9:15 pm

    Andy,

    1) it is Sylvain, not Sylvia.

    2) “Why is it impossible to get a gun from your back on the right?”

    Get onto your back with someone on your torso and try to get a gun from your right back side. This is based on GZ testimony during the walkthrough with the police. So this is not a made up fact. By the way, he was the best student in is class for stand your ground.

    Why did he lie to Hannity? Wasn’t he on his side?

    3) “No… people who kill others have a wide variety of responses. Again you are just making stuff up. Could you list the signs GZ is a psychopath?

    Since you ask:

    You can see the sign and symptoms hereÈ

    http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/narcissism/psychopathy_checklist.html

    Most, if not all of these symptoms applies to GZ, Mainly:

    3. NEED FOR STIMULATION or PRONENESS TO BOREDOM (strong desire to become a cop, enforce laws has he see fit.)
    4. PATHOLOGICAL LYING (Hannity)
    6. LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT (It was gods plan!!!)
    7. SHALLOW AFFECT (no emotion after killing someone)
    8. CALLOUSNESS and LACK OF EMPATHY (never tried to help MArtin after he shot him, let him die).
    10. POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS (court mandate, resisted arrest, hit police officer, sexualy assaulted her cousin for years (witness #9).
    11. PROMISCUOUS SEXUAL BEHAVIOR (sexualy assaulted her cousin for years (witness #9))
    13. LACK OF REALISTIC, LONG-TERM GOALS (training in MMA fighting but was described as a whimp, would never make it in police).
    14. IMPULSIVITY (getting out of his car when he lost him.
    16. FAILURE TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR OWN ACTIONS (refused to take responsibilities for initiating the fight.)
    20. CRIMINAL VERSATILITY (Got of for murdering a kid, beating is wife, abusing a cousin).

    Other may apply but we would need to know more about his childhood, all of these facts were mention in the trial.

    4) “I’m afraid that many things in Trayvons past suggest he robbed people, like the unfortunate fact that he was caught at school with stolen property and the tools for stealing them. He was violent and a drug user, he purchased two of the three things you need to make lean. The jury heard none of this and yet still found GZ innocent.”

    Any sources, proofs for these claims, like any arrest. The school denied that he was ever expelled.

    The defence received the okay from the judge to mention the use of cannabis (which was found at the level of trace). The defence didn’t mentioned it because cannabis render people less aggressive, more mellow. Cannabis is used at a higher rates among white individual, than blacks. I’m a very rare exception to never have tried any drugs.

    5) “Exactly how do you know a crime was not prevented? Oh silly me more made up stuff.”

    I forgot walking while black in the US is a crime.

    As for Alexander, the children were not in the room and the shot was fire away from them. If she had been white she would not have been charged, and again no one is injured.

    Matin was not a criminal, he was a kid doing the same thing millions of white kids do everyday.

  44. No Sylvia its not impossible to get a gun from your back in that position. Why have you not listed all the points in the link? You have chosen those that fit in your mind, merely a case of looking for evidence to support your bigotry. The list, in the link you provided fits Trayvon much better.
    Did I say Trayvon was arrested? I said he was caught, by the school. I suggest you do some research.
    And no the deliberate race baiting of “walkin whilst black” as a crime is untrue. Of course assaulting a man so much that he is scared of his life is a crime.
    No sylvia the children were in the room, the court documents state that she pointed the gun at all three victims. Your attempt to excuse bad behaviour on the colour of her skin is deplorable.

    I doubt very much whether millions of any kids, white or black live a life of thuggish drugged up violence similar to Trayvons.

  45. Sylvain Allard

    July 21, 2013 at 6:01 pm

    Andy,

    Have you tried to retrieve a gun in the position described by Zimmerman, I did and it is simply impossible to do unless you have very long harms. I’m 5’8″ and Zimmerman is 5’7″.

    It is impossible to reach the gun from that position. The most likely scenario is that Zimmerman instigated the fight by pointing the gun at Martin. It is also ridiculous to claim that Zimmerman was the one yelling for help. It was Martin yelling for his life, this is why the yell stops when the shots is fired. Remember that Zimmerman said he wasn’t sure he had hit Martin, so why would Zimmerman stop yelling if he wasn’t sure he had it him. The guy is scared for his life and he holster back the weapon as if nothing happened. This is not believable, and it would not be believable if Martin was white and Zimmerman black.

    Yet for you it would be all different. The only reason you believe Zimmerman is because he shot a black kid, if he had shot a white kid, you would have been the first to claim that Zimmerman should have received the death penalty.

    Martin was never arrested for violence while and the idea that some burglar tool were found in his possession comes from…….. a conservatives blogger?? Zimmerman had priors for violence against his ex-fiancé. If at least it had come from a reputable source it might be believable but from a blogger!!! Sorry, find better excuses.

    People have the right to defend themselves, but people who go out of their way to get into a fight cannot claim self-defence after they get their ass kick because they are wimp. I don’t believe Zimmerman version of the fact. He lied to many time to be believable, and his version is simply physically impossible, unless the law of physics don’t apply to Florida.

    “Why have you not listed all the points in the link?”

    To be a psychopath, a person doesn’t have to show every symptoms. There are symptoms like irresponsibility that may apply to him but that were not shone in the trial.

    Most likely Zimmerman will kill someone else in the next few years.

  46. Sylvia, i have given you the benefit of the doubt but I can only conclude you are as daft as a spanner.
    It is not impossible to get a gun from that position. If it were and your claim that GZ instigated the fight with a drawn gut, it would mean Trayvon attacked an armed man, harmed him and then got shot. This is absurd, it of course would still be self defence.
    Every independent witness said the scream was from GZ, even Trayvons dad said it was not his son before changing his mind.
    The reason I believe GZ, is that from the start, he was honest, every bit of evidence backed up his claims, the forensics backed up his claims as did the witnesses.
    No, no one has stated that Trayvon was arrested for anything, just suspended several times by his school and also found by his school with stolen material. His twitter feed shows clearly his drug taking and violence. This is true Sylvia and nothing to do with racism.
    Please look up genetic fallacy.

  47. Sylvain Allard

    July 22, 2013 at 6:23 pm

    Andy,

    I have also given the benefit of the doubt and I most conclude to racism. Since in any case you are presented with the black is always the guilty party.

    If ever you get to try it you will see that Zimmerman version, the only version we have since no one saw how the fight started or even ended, no one ever heard martin’s version because GZ made sure he could not talk.

    “If it were and your claim that GZ instigated the fight with a drawn gut, it would mean Trayvon attacked an armed man, harmed him and then got shot. This is absurd, it of course would still be self defence.”

    This is far from absurd. When you look at holdup-up footage in gas station and small store you will notice that many clerk react by reaching for the arm that hold the gun.

    If someone pull the gun first, he becomes the aggressor, and no one can claim self-defence if he is the one that start the fight.

    Zimmerman injuries were very minor. If Martin had been smashing his head on the concrete as O’mara portrayed during the trial when he used the dummy, Zimmerman would have had several cranial fracture, not little abrasion or cut.

    If Martin, had pounded his face over 20 times with his fist, Zimmerman would have had at least been spitting blood from his mouth or he would have had a black eye or something or bruising. Not the little nose injury. Even is lawyer, in is closing argument, said that GZ lied and over stated the gravity of his injury.

    Looking at this video I can only think that racism was the cause of the acquittal there is so much BS that doesn’t correspond to Zimmerman’s version of the fight: By the way, Zimmerman somehow got his gun in his hand as if he is a wizard.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MrrX6TOoyY

    While everything that is describe in this video doesn’t mention that Zimmerman is yelling for help while Martin is pounding him with his fist and smashing is head against the concrete and with his third hand, which might have been is dick, tried to reach for the gun, all at the same time. Of course, the body wasn’t found anywhere near of concrete.

    This psychopath will kill again and the blood will in your hands.

  48. You should keep in mind that the FBI statistics grossly understate the white/black disparity, because the FBI classifies hispanics as “white” only when they are perpetrators. In other words, as I understand it, there is a separate “hispanic” category for victims, but not for perpetrators.

    So your white on black murders undoubtedly include a large number of murders by mestizo hispanics, and, to add insult to injury, the black on white murder rate does not even get the bump from black on hispanic murders.

  49. Figure 4 shows an extraordinarily high (negative) correlation between Black on Bland and White on White.

    It is mislabeled, somehow?

    Why would there be such a high correlation? I can understand SOME postivie correlation or more likely, no correlation at all…, again, this shows a very high negative correlation.

    What’s up with that?

  50. @Michael J – “Mathematician “La Griffe du Lion” has written a number of related pieces.”

    The problem with those articles is that the author ignores so much data and interprets it in an obviously biased way. For example take the last link:

    Crime in the Hood
    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/hood.htm

    He concludes that,

    “black thugs prefer white victims, selecting them 64 times more than white thugs choose black victims.”

    This guy apparently isn’t all that smart. He talks about how when a minority group like blacks is living in a majority white community that the majority of victims will be white. Really?

    Jeez! What silliness. In white majority communities in a white majority society, the majority of all victims will likely be of that majority demographic. Of course, a black criminal surrounded by white people will choose mostly white victims, just as will a white criminal surrounded by white people. You don’t need to analyze statistics and graph it to figure this out. I’d be embarrassed to link to those articles.

  51. Why all the angst about statistics? It’s very simple from a well informed middle aged point of view: you have a much higher rate of crime in areas where you have a larger black population. It’s indisputable. All one has to do is look at crime maps of major American cities, especially in the south. The reasons blacks move into white neighborhoods is primarily to get away from other blacks (crime).

  52. “Why all the angst about statistics? It’s very simple from a well informed middle aged point of view: you have a much higher rate of crime in areas where you have a larger black population. It’s indisputable. All one has to do is look at crime maps of major American cities, especially in the south. The reasons blacks move into white neighborhoods is primarily to get away from other blacks (crime).”

    A brain is a terrible thing to waste. I’d recommend educating yourself. I promise it won’t hurt.

    One of the simplest explanations is lead exposure.

    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

    The poor have higher rates of lead toxicity than the wealthy. Minorities more than whites. Poor minorities more than poor whites. And blacks more than Hispanics.

    It’s because lead pollution has been concentrated in poor minority neighborhoods, such as bypasses and toxic dumps. It’s called environmental racism. There are many studies and books about it.

  53. La Griffe du Lion does not deserve to be called a mathematician.

  54. Briggs —

    Maybe I am missing the point, but how is this relevant to current events? Are you answering or refuting some aspect of claims made after the sad events this week? If so, what are those claims?

  55. Matt – Even though it’s only marginally related, looking at these numbers I wonder what would the average murder rate for the US by rate and how it would compare with other Nations.
    It is all over the news that the US despite being the most advanced nation has murder rate well above other “similarly-developed” countries. Even with the appropriate interpretations I’d still wonder where the US would be if the rate would be only for the non-black:
    https://mises.org/blog/mistake-only-comparing-us-murder-rates-developed-countries

  56. @Marco – The US is a large country. Some US states are larger than most countries in the world. There is no single demographic population of any race. For example, black populations in some Northern states have average higher IQ than some white populations in Southern states.

    You see the same kinds of patterns in violent crime rates where, for example, Southern whites and Appalachian whites have extremely high rates of homicides and gun ‘accidents’ (along with high rates of spousal abuse, child abuse, bullying, etc). I live in Iowa and the violence rates here are low, including gun violence, despite their being high gun ownership rates.

    So, whites in states like Iowa are more peaceful and law-abiding, whereas whites in states like Tennessee are more violent and law-breaking. It depends on which whites you’re talking about and also what you’re comparing to.

  57. For example, black populations in some Northern states have average higher IQ than some white populations in Southern states.
    You see the same kinds of patterns in violent crime rates ….

    Where might I find the sources for those assertions?

  58. @Geezer – You can look information up on the internet. Try Google. Or remain ignorant. I don’t care which. I learned long ago that most people demanding info don’t actually want info, because most people who want info simply go look for it and find it all by themselves.

  59. Almost across the board, crime has been down in America for a generation now, but the country is vast and diverse with widely variant situations from place to place. Old industrial cities, abandoned by free traders, left with the refugees of the South, taking in a permanent class of non-citizen cheap labor, of course have crime issues. What kind of moron would need to read more into that?

    JMJ

  60. I learned long ago that …

    … a snarky refusal to cite sources for one’s assertions tends to suggest that no such sources exist and that the asserter is simply talking through his hat.

  61. @Geezer – There is nothing snarky about it. I’ve just been down that road a thousand times before. It simply becomes familiar after a while. I honestly don’t care what you think. If you’re curious enough, you can do what I have done and research the topic. That is all there is to it.

    I’m not sure why you’d find it surprising that different populations in different areas living under different conditions and with different resources, opportunities, problems, etc would have different results in average IQ or whatever. Just read some social science research.

  62. I’m not sure why you’d find it surprising …. Just read some social science research.

    I asked a simple, polite question: “Where might I find the sources for those assertions?” I was hoping for a simple, polite answer. I got instead a rude evasion.

    I did not “demand[] info” or express surprise. I am familiar with “social science research”; my major in college was psychology. (What was your major?) Citing sources is the custom in all science, not just the “social” kind.

  63. I’m not sure why you’d find it surprising …. Just read some social science research.

    I asked a simple, polite question: “Where might I find the sources for those assertions?” I was hoping for a simple, polite answer. I got instead a rude evasion.

    I did not “demand[] info” or express surprise. I am familiar with “social science research”; my major in college was psychology. (What was your major?) Citing sources is the custom in all science, not just the “social” kind.

  64. And I gave a simple answer. I was being honest and straightforward.

    I don’t care if you genuinely do or don’t want to know any particular thing. I just pointed out that, if you are interested and curious, it isn’t hard to find. Ask yourself this question: Do you want to know? If so, what’s stopping you?

    My point is that I can’t force knowledge on you nor do I want to try. Whatever evasion there is, you must take responsibility for it. Assuming you’re telling the truth, you should have no problem finding the info… assuming you’re telling the truth.

  65. You got it, Geezer. He can’t back it up. Stop feeding him.

  66. Stop feeding him.

    Oh, dear. I didn’t realize I was feeding him. I thought I was poking him with a sharp stick. For some reason, I’m amused by pretzel-logic sophistry. (And the Dunning-Kruger effect.)

  67. For those who are interested this is the latest update to “the color of crime”.
    http://www.colorofcrime.com/2016/03/the-color-of-crime-2016-revised-edition/

  68. @Geezer – Have you attempted to educate yourself yet? Just wondering. Let me know when you’ve looked at some data. Also, let me know when you’ve found that data you think exists that shows that all blacks everywhere have worse rates of everything than all whites everywhere. I’d love to see that data because, as far as I know, it doesn’t exist.

  69. Also, let me know when you’ve found that data you think exists that shows that all blacks everywhere have worse rates of everything than all whites everywhere.

    I seem to have been mistaken for a straw man.

  70. @Geezer – “I seem to have been mistaken for a straw man.”

    I certainly didn’t mistake you for an intelligent, informed man.

    You responded to a comment of mine where I was making a particular argument. That last comment of mine was referencing that argument, to which you apparently disagreed.

    There is no rational reason to expect there to be great diversity in IQ within races. You see that comparing numerous populations.

    There are majority white countries with higher average IQs and those with lower average IQs. The same goes for majority non-white countries. And the pattern is seen in diverse populations within countries, especially larger countries like the US where states are the size of countries.

    I’m not sure why you’d find this shocking. Anyone who has looked at much IQ data already knows this. It’s not as if it is obscure data hidden away in arcane journals on dusty academic shelves. It’s not hard to find, assuming you want to find it.

  71. I’m torn between wondering whether a simple request for a source citation drove a guy crazy or whether it simply triggered a pre-existing condition.

  72. I’ve just dealt with people like you for years. It doesn’t matter the topic. It always begins the same way and never goes anywhere. No matter how much evidence I shared, you’d dismiss it or rationalize it away.

    You show no indication of being particularly curious and interested to learn. You show no indication of being familiar with any of the data or having spent any time seeking out data.

    If you are unwilling to do it, why do you expect me to do it? Why do you hold me up to a higher standard than you hold yourself?

    So, whatever.

  73. Geezer – here’s one reference for the assertion ‘BDS’ made:

    The IQ Mythology: Class, Race, Gender, and Inequality
    By Elaine Mensh, Harry Mensh

    I have no idea how credible, or if there’s any credibility to, the statements made there (see page 33 of that reference) might be. Measures of IQ, especially earlier versions, often didn’t / don’t measure intelligence but rather proxy measures that reflect much [or little] of the educational materials to which a given demographic segment had been exposed.

    Thus, one would expect that in any geographic area the relatively wealthier and more enriched student/youth population would, overall, score higher on measures such as IQ — especially if the authors of such tests hail from such populations & educational experience.

    Which is to say that the raw measures of North vs. South IQ among the demographics mentioned may be valid insofar as it goes in terms of raw numbers, the meaning & implications of those numbers seem prove to abuse & faulty extrapolation (e.g. “Flynn Effect”).

    Here’s some links:

    To the book citing the stat BDS referenced without attribution:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=NyN6CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=Northern+black+vs+southern+white+IQ&source=bl&ots=F5_4hH_uxR&sig=Iy-VZ6735FIFts6VQLU5NNcsBbQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjHotni8-vNAhWsO5oKHWlNAiM4ChDoAQhCMAc#v=onepage&q=Northern%20black%20vs%20southern%20white%20IQ&f=false

    A summary explanation of the value of “IQ Tests” (esp. the “Flynn Effect”) — http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/why-people-keep-misunderstanding-the-connection-between-race-and-iq/275876/

    For additional insight into IQ relative to the ‘nature vs. nurture’ debate peruse on-line studies of “neuroplasticity” and with that as a search term ‘London Cab Drivers” or “London Cabbies.” In particular seek out some discussions of how the brain, in the first six months, prunes away unused neural connections — meaning that the more stimulated a baby is the more such connections will be retained…and…the smarter they will become. So, clearly, adults from more disadvantaged upbringings will be expected to perform worse … one of the subtle biological facets of the “nurture” side of the ‘nature v. nurture’ debate.

    “The Brain That Changes Itself: Stories of Personal Triumph from the Frontiers of Brain Science,” by Doidge is one interesting on the subject (mostly dealing with recovery from stroke) as is “The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force,” by Schwartz & Begley (I found this interesting, but the bit on the “quantum brain” somewhat contrived…).

  74. There are many sources, both academic books and research papers, for that kind of data. It’s fairly standard stuff.

    IQ (and neurocognitive development in general) strongly and causally correlates to numerous factors: poverty/wealth, economic inequality, accessible and affordable healthcare, toxicity rates, parasite load, etc (along with various social problems: high school dropout rates, obesity rates, violence rates, etc). Also, many of those factors are correlated to each other as well, although one of the most central factors are those that are economic.

    Northern states on average have lower rates of both poverty and economic inequality. Whereas Southern states are the opposite. But there are exceptions. Some Northern states do worse. And some Southern states do better.

    You can even do comparisons within states. There are states that have particular black communities that are wealthy. Unsurprisingly, wealthy communities correlate to higher IQs. You can see a similar thing with African immigrants who are wealthier on average with, of course, higher on average IQs.

    The wealth factor has been shown in other ways. Research shows that families that move from poor communities to wealthy communities or poor children adopted into wealthier families tend to show an improvement in IQ over time, as compared to families and children that remained in poverty.

    None of this is secret knowledge. There are dozens of good books out there on IQ research and data, along with issues about intelligence tests, demographics, genetics, epigenetics, and much else.

  75. Well Ken,

    No wonder DBS refused to link them. They are all based on those low-p-value-proves-me-right “studies” that are rampant in the -ologies. He doesn’t really have anything to back up his claims other than poorly done papers and articles about them. If he can find one, I’m sure he’d want us to know about it. ‘Til then it’s safe to assume he’s full of it and is parroting NPR and MotherJones.

  76. @DAV – You seem to think the opposite is true. You basically admit you are anti-scientific. Any scientific data someone offers you is wrong because… well, just because. The science can’t be right, as it doesn’t fit hats DAV knows in his gut is right. He just knows. DAV doesn’t need to disprove the data that Ken offered. He just dismisses it. That is exactly what I said would happen if I mentioned data. No data would be acceptable, if it disagreed with DAV’s or Geezer’s beliefs. So, what’s the point? I’ve played this game before.

  77. Yes, of course. Change the subject. Run away. Not that low-p-vlaue studies aren’t poor quality in and of themselves and,no, they aren’t science but look enough like science to fool the simple-minded. You apparently. (http://wmbriggs.com/post/15465/ andhttp://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=4687 and http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=9338 for examples and look under Classic Posts for more).

    I notice you haven’t provided any data or links at all. How trollish and empty-headed of you, you cute twit you. But, yes, I know why. You can’t. You aren’t impressing anyone here (well, maybe Ken) with your childish ways along with your unsupported and unconvincing claims. So, what are you trying to do? You may be accomplishing something other than you have intended.

  78. You dismiss scientific data, dismissing that data from scientific research is even scientific. And you then demand more data. You’ve so far demonstrated everything I said of people like you. I wasn’t exactly trying to accomplish that, but I’ll accept that as a worthy accomplishment.

  79. Your squirming is amusing. What data have you provided that I’ve dismissed? You haven’t provided any. Ken didn’t provide any data other than an article in the not-so-scientific The Atlantic — a magazine devoted to analysis of politics and business — and none of it supports your claims. He also linked a book but it contains no data that supporting your claims — unsupported conclusions at that.

    If you want to be taken seriously you need to show how you arrived at your claims and show supporting data you consider compelling. But you can’t so you have nothing to get you out of you jam. Until you do there is nothing to talk about except the inanity of your posts and that’s becoming boring.

    So far, you’ve instead hidden behind smoke and mirrors attempting to change the subject every chance you get and seem to be merrily chewing your anus. It’s hilarious. You should quit while it’s still your behind.

    But please do chew some more. Its entertaining.

  80. @DAV – I honestly don’t care and you’ve mistaken me for someone who does care.

    Since the early 2000s, I’ve had thousands of more important and interesting online interactions, some where both sides were informed and honest, although plenty where that wasn’t the case. I’m simply bored and indifferent about interactions such as this one.

    If I thought you actually cared about honest informed debate, I’d join in. But I just don’t see the point. You’ve demonstrated no interests. It’s easy to flippantly throw out questions and demands on the internet and expect everyone else to jump, but it’s troll-like behavior.

  81. Speaking of chewing, that was some biting comment. Doesn’t it hurt when you bite your butt like that? LOL!

    If I thought you actually cared about honest informed debate, I’d join in
    It’s easy to flippantly throw out questions and demands

    So apparently requesting how you arrived at your conclusions and claims is flippant demand and not honest debate? Avoiding answering questions like: “What makes you think that?” and ” Where’s your data?” is somehow honest and indicative of debate?

    If so, you are a babbling fool or a sleazy liar. A not-very-bright jackass in either case as you insist on proving it. You pick.

  82. Apparently your dismissing data and science itself means nothing to you. And you expect me to debate you, to treat you as if you are an honest actor. Really?

  83. Apparently your dismissing data and science itself means nothing to you.

    You have provided none to dismiss, idiot. In fact, you insist on not providing any. It is you that I am dismissing. Toodle-oo!

  84. DAV – I dunno about the ‘low p-value’ facet of the studies first raised by BDS as those simply parrot a tally of test scores/test score averages grouped by locale. A more accurate description might be a ‘no-p-value-study’. Insofar as they go, those numbers are straightforward. My point was & remains that there are some factors, investigated since the study BDS referenced (or a similar study–there are several very similar), that explain why test scores may vary among groups/regions. That’s a counterpoint to such summary level studies that so often lead many (especially the press) to jump to wrong conclusions.

    In a blog commentary, one ought to expect summary-level descriptions that might, occasionally, rise to the level of an abstract in an actual published paper. Being blog commentaries one ought to expect that some will provide comments based on their recollections and might not have a given reference readily available — but took the time to share some insight.

    Intelligent considered discussion by mature parties typically delve into various details of a topic, trade off competing theories and ponder possibilities — there’s always more to study — and continue in a manner that induces thought & some learning among those involved.

    Unfortunately, we don’t see so much of that here. Opinions, or even observations of distasteful realities, invariably provoke personal attacks–and lame ones at that. Consider:

    Original Comment: “For example, black populations in some Northern states have average higher IQ than some white populations in Southern states.
    You see the same kinds of patterns in violent crime rates ….”

    Then DAV responds in part: “If you want to be taken seriously you need to show how you arrived at your claims and show supporting data you consider compelling. But you can’t so you have nothing to get you out of you jam.”

    That emotional attack is unmerited & nonsensical — the alleged “claims” were not “arrived at” they were merely recited from another’s study, and that study (or studies, there are multiple reports) merely compiled IQ test scores & summarized demographic patterns by region. DAV asserts a ‘low p-value’ where there wasn’t even such a calculation — a histrionic fabrication, at best, and that not used to debate the merits/limitations of the data but instead to attack the person making the presentation.

    The remark, “…show supporting data you consider compelling. But you can’t…” is factually wrong — and proven so. I provided one of the references that explicitly presents the data BDS originally presented — and the fact that that reference, readily available to everyone online, expressly supports BDS’ original assertion proves BDS correctly reported someone else’s finding.

    The fact that BDS didn’t footnote a statement doesn’t make BDS wrong, nor does it make the statement presented wrong. To address the statements made one needs to confirm the supporting material, or, find some that refutes it (I presented some references that a) proved the statements made are substantiated, and b) present more subtle reasons for why the seemingly obvious implications of those data ought not to be trusted). DAV sidesteps that with this curious personal attack founded on a provably factually false assertion (aka a “lie”):

    “Ken didn’t provide any data other than an article in the not-so-scientific The Atlantic — a magazine devoted to analysis of politics and business — and none of it supports your claims. He also linked a book but it contains no data that supporting your claims — unsupported conclusions at that.”

    The fact is the first reference I provided explicitly addresses BDS’ “claims” (and, again, these are not “claims” but reporting of someone else’s findings; and I had no trouble finding, on-line, other studies reporting the same findings). But to acknowledge that defuses the basis for DAV’s personal attack. So he simply pretends that reference doesn’t exist (and, maybe, believes this — there is insufficient information to rule out the possibility that DAV is to some extent prone to bona fide self-delusion, but clearly the fact that he failed to see relevant evidence indicates he might).

    But that’s the perverse effect occurring, repeatedly, in the wmbriggs blog — someone doesn’t like the comment, or doesn’t like the presentation…attack the person making the comment/assert some flaw (usually trivial) in the supporting material. DAV took this further than most in pretending supporting documentation, presented, simply didn’t exist…just to enable a personal attack.

    BDS’s somewhat [avoidably] argumentative response to a request for a reference is, when one realizes the routine ad hominem at wmbriggs, is actually quite understandable.

    Observe that BDS sparked the whole argument with this remark when he didn’t respond with a reference:
    “I learned long ago that most people demanding info don’t actually want info,..”
    The ensuing back-n-forth proved this point — the people involved arguing, spent more time typing their vile than it would have taken them (like I did) to simply do a keyword search and find the references.

    Brings to mind the old saying, ‘Any fool can complain…and that’s what most fools usually do.’ At wmbriggs this is almost constitutes an art form…

  85. Like I said earlier, BDS impressed no one except maybe Ken.

  86. BDS’s somewhat [avoidably] argumentative response to a request for a reference is, when one realizes the routine ad hominem at wmbriggs, is actually quite understandable.

    Where I come from, gratuitous rudeness is not “understandable”; it is inexcusable. I asked a polite question: “Where might I find the sources for those assertions?” Is there a more polite way of phrasing such a question?

    Where I come from, the proponent of a factual assertion has the burden of proving its truth. There is nothing unseemly about asking for a source citation.

    BDS is the one who started the personal insults and straw man arguments. DAV was simply giving him a small dose of his own medicine.

  87. Note the first sentence in BDS response to Geezer: (http://wmbriggs.com/post/7168/#comment-158787) @Geezer – You can look information up on the internet. Try Google. Or remain ignorant.

    Pretty trollish. As is a general refusal to link to any source. It’s not the mark of someone seeking honest and polite discourse. The only reason for hiding sources is knowledge that they are poor indeed and will be summarily shot down.

    Actually, BDS did supply one link some time ago (last year) (http://wmbriggs.com/post/7168/#comment-142578) and it was to that great scientific journal MotherJones. I suspect he gets most of his “science” from there and has grown tired of being told what a terrible source it is.

    Note that BDS again resorted to insult. His primary mode it seems when someone even suggests disagreement with his “facts” which he is loathe to support because he can’t.

    Actually, BDS did supply one link some time ago (last year) (http://wmbriggs.com/post/7168/#comment-142578) and it was to that great scientific journal MotherJones. I suspect he gets most of his “science” from there and has grown tired of being told what a terrible source it is.

    Note that BDS again resorted to insult. His primary mode it seems when someone even suggests disagreement with his “facts” which he is loathe to support because he can’t really support them.

  88. update:
    why is nobody apparently aware that the fbi data is for ARRESTS, and is not the number of crimes or criminals? Just arrests.

    In 2014, a full 1/3 of murders (higher percentage for other violent crimes) did not even result in a known suspect. of ~12,500 murders (reported to fbi…) only 8200 arrests were made.

    of these, only 5800 convictions were had, and 4100 of those were plea bargains. a full 30% of arrestees, race undocumented, were acquitted or case dismissed…

    So – 35% of murderers unknown. 30% of supposedly known murderers arrested but not convicted. That means we have stats showing that of 12,500 homicides in 2014, 4100 people plea bargained, 1700 were convicted in court, 2450 were arrested and released, and so (at least) about 6700 killers are still at large, race unknown.

    5800 killers in jail. A few no doubt wrongly, but 5800 nonetheless. but 6700 unknown.

    The conclusions being drawn about crime and race from such data are, in total, without the slightest validity. They are neither right nor wrong, they are pure nonsense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

© 2016 William M. Briggs

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑