Why do people get bent out of shape over facts relating to diffrent races ????

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why do people get bent out of shape over facts relating to diffrent races ???? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:18:14 AM EDT

If it is the least bit negative, yet true, someone is whining because someones little feelings may be hurt. That is one of the things that is wrong with the country . To many people are so PC and sit with blinders on, so now they can't even see the forest for the trees. Go ahead and knock me, I'm just a cracker anyway..... and we know it doesn't matter if you are a cracker....

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:19:36 AM EDT

[#1]

What kind of facts?

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:19:57 AM EDT

[#2]

Do you cling to your guns and religion? you sound like a TWP.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:21:05 AM EDT

[#3]

I believe most people are reluctant to account for negative dramatic changes amongst individuals by looking to race alone. Culture seems to be more coherent.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:21:17 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
What kind of facts?

The kind published by The New Century Foundation?

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:21:52 AM EDT

[#5]

If your facts are inflammatory or offensive towards any race other than whites (even if it's true), people get bent, even white people.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:21:55 AM EDT

[#6]

Site staff must protect ar15's "reputation" it has become a cash cow that must be protected. You cannot discuss facts that may make ar15.com look bad to someone overly sensitive and PC, so , staff and mods have become overly sensitive and pc in their duties to prevent this.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:22:06 AM EDT

[#7]

Because if the truth offends someone it should be covered up to protect their feelings.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:22:45 AM EDT

[#8]

Personally, I don't get offended if anyone says anything about me.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't get pissed at someone if they said or did something offensive to anyone in my family.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:22:56 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:
What kind of facts?

The kind published by The New Century Foundation?

You found the one flawed post in 7 pages, congrats

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:23:21 AM EDT

[#10]

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:24:15 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Do you cling to your guns and religion? you sound like a TWP.

+1

Just like my white Grandmother...

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:24:36 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Site staff must protect ar15's "reputation" it has become a cash cow that must be protected. You cannot discuss facts that may make ar15.com look bad to someone overly sensitive and PC, so , staff and mods have become overly sensitive and pc in their duties to prevent this.

Don't like it, leave...

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:25:37 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Do you cling to your guns and religion? you sound like a TWP.

+1

Just like my white Grandmother...

Is she a typical white person?

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:26:50 AM EDT

[#14]

Just checking in to see if any examples of the kinds of facts the OP is referring to have been posted.

No facts here yet.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:27:31 AM EDT

[#15]

"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:29:30 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
What kind of facts?

The kind published by The New Century Foundation?

You found the one flawed post in 7 pages, congrats

Thanks, not easy to do while simultaneously waxing the Staff Ferrari and boy did I have to oppress a lot of racially proud white men to earn that in my Staff bonus package.

Gotta run, have a lunch date with Farrakhan!

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:29:38 AM EDT

[#17]

White guilt.

Basically, if you point out that predominantly black or Hispanic areas tend to have higher crime rates than predominantly white areas, they freak out. They assume you're trying to assign a cause, when instead you're simply making an observation (and it's not exactly groundbreaking news, either).

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:29:58 AM EDT

[#18]

I can't dance worth shit, and I attribute it to being Polish-American.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:30:19 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Oh but THEY ARE FACTS,,,, we are just not allowed to say they are facts, we need to mask them as something else....because someone's feelings may get hurt.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:30:34 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
I can't dance worth shit, and I attribute it to being Polish-American.

Me too, and I also suck at basketball

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:30:53 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Oh but THEY ARE FACTS,,,, we are just not allowed to say they are facts, we need to mask them as something else....because someone's feelings may get hurt.

Prove it.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:31:09 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
White guilt.

Basically, if you point out that predominantly black or Hispanic areas tend to have higher crime rates than predominantly white areas, they freak out. They assume you're trying to assign a cause, when instead you're simply making an observation (and it's not exactly groundbreaking news, either).

Same with SAT scores.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:31:21 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
I can't dance worth shit, and I attribute it to being Polish-American.

HONKY !

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:31:25 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Just checking in to see if any examples of the kinds of facts the OP is referring to have been posted.

No facts here yet.

I think the OP is referring to the crime statistics that state most crime is committed by Blacks and Hispanics.

Many people are quick to post the racist opossum after those statistics are mentioned.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:32:35 AM EDT

[#25]

Reality is not politically correct.

Plain and simple.

ETA...............did someone say opossum?

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:33:23 AM EDT

[#26]

Because you are attributing those facts to race alone and not any other factors.

Find those same "facts" in eastern europe and see they have nothing to do with race.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:33:58 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Oh but THEY ARE FACTS,,,, we are just not allowed to say they are facts, we need to mask them as something else....because someone's feelings may get hurt.

Prove it.

Go look at you crime statistics, School Test Scores, Unemployment Rates, Rates of Those Collecting Welfare compared to the number of people of the same race in the country.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:35:48 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
White guilt.

Basically, if you point out that predominantly black or Hispanic areas tend to have higher crime rates than predominantly white areas, they freak out. They assume you're trying to assign a cause, when instead you're simply making an observation (and it's not exactly groundbreaking news, either).

well if that's not the cause, what's the purpose of that observation?

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:36:46 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Just checking in to see if any examples of the kinds of facts the OP is referring to have been posted.

No facts here yet.

Human Rights Watch (hardly a right wing outfit) on race vs. incarceration:

www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/race/pdf/table1.pdf

USDOJ on race vs. victims

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict_v.htm#race

USDOJ on race vs. victims & offenders

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

FBI UCR on race

www.fbi.gov/ucr/addpubs.htm

PDF of entire FBI report

There's plenty of data out there, but it can be used & misused by groups on all sides.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:36:52 AM EDT

[#30]

The data referred to above are facts.

The question is why do they exist? Race? Poverty? Broken families? Racism of authorities? Test development? Etc, etc.

But when you're not allowed to mention the facts, you'll never solve a problem.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:37:09 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Oh but THEY ARE FACTS,,,, we are just not allowed to say they are facts, we need to mask them as something else....because someone's feelings may get hurt.

Prove it.

Go look at you crime statistics, School Test Scores, Unemployment Rates, Rates of Those Collecting Welfare compared to the number of people of the same race in the country.

I said you prove it not me. But since you are being a reluctant, I'll provide the crime statistic posted by someone in another gun forum sometime ago.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
According to 2000 census
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp1/2kh00.pdf
White is 75%
Black is 12.3% of population.

According to FBI data(2006)
Arrests, City
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_49.html
White 67.0%
Black 30.5 %

Arrests, Metropolitan area
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_55.html
White: 75.8%
Black: 23.0%

Arrests, Nonmetropolitan Counties
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_61.html
White: 82.7%
Black: 13.7%

Arrests, Suburban Areas
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_67.html
White: 76.0%
Black: 22.6%

This is the arrest data I gleaned from provided FBI website. This data accounts for all the arrests, regardless of the crime. Compared to the census data(2000), Whites make up about 75.1% of population while blacks make up 12.3%

So if both races have equal amount of criminals committing equal share, the percent should be close to 75.1% and 12.3%.

In city, white is arrested about 67%, while blacks are about 30.5%. From immediate glance blacks get arrested more than whites, compared to census data of overall population. But since cities may have more blacks than suburban areas, it could be that more blacks could be arrested. It could also be that blacks indeed commit more crime and get arrested.

In Metropolitan area, the trend is similar except that blacks are still above the NATIONAL average, while population percentage is unknown.

When comparing in nonmetropolitan areas, whites get arrested more often than blacks and my bet is the population difference. In fact in this case blacks get about similar(slightly higher) percent in terms of arrest.

In suburban areas, the percents are back to the case where whites follow national percentage, but blacks go beyond that.

So in a nutshell FBI statistics do provide some insight, but it does not completely answer the question. Notice that whites include Hispanic population, and while arrest percentages are known, the population percentage of each category set by FBI is not known.

FBI provides more statistics,

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/arrests/index.html
Among the four categories of race reflected in UCR arrest data, 69.7 percent of persons arrested were

white, 58.5 percent of persons arrested for violent crime were white, and 68.2 percent of persons

arrested for property crime were white.

White juveniles comprised 67.1 percent of the juveniles arrested in 2006.

Black juveniles accounted for 51.0 percent of the juveniles arrested for violent crime, and white

juveniles comprised 66.3 percent of juveniles arrested for property crime. (See Table 43.)

While compared to national percentage of population whites have less percentage, whites still count for more than half of arrests. One area where blacks are arrested more are in juvenile area, where it is 51%

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
First thing you notice is that this is homicide percentage, and indeed blacks are 7 times more likely to commit homicide than whites. So does that mean blacks are the problem? I'd say no because,

Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison.

Race patterns among offenders are similar to those among victims

So as of 2005,
White on white homicide is the largest,
followed by blacks on black,
then black on white,
then white on black.

If anything, white on white is the problem.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:38:13 AM EDT

[#32]

Because logic isn't PC

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:38:48 AM EDT

[#33]

so tagged.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:39:11 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Because you are attributing those facts to race alone and not any other factors.

Find those same "facts" in eastern europe and see they have nothing to do with race.

No one is doing anything of the sort. Pointing out the obvious is not the same as assigning a cause. In this country, predominantly white areas tend to have less crime than predominantly black or Hispanic areas. So, what? In other news, the sky is blue. The reasons are complex, and you could probably write a book on it. But the correlation is no less valid.

I really don't understand why people get their panties in a bunch over this stuff.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:40:16 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Oh but THEY ARE FACTS,,,, we are just not allowed to say they are facts, we need to mask them as something else....because someone's feelings may get hurt.

Prove it.

Go look at you crime statistics, School Test Scores, Unemployment Rates, Rates of Those Collecting Welfare compared to the number of people of the same race in the country.

I said you prove it not me. But since you are being a douchebag, I'll provide the crime statistic posted by someone in another gun forum sometime ago.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
According to 2000 census
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp1/2kh00.pdf
White is 75%
Black is 12.3% of population.

According to FBI data(2006)
Arrests, City
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_49.html
White 67.0%
Black 30.5 %

Arrests, Metropolitan area
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_55.html
White: 75.8%
Black: 23.0%

Arrests, Nonmetropolitan Counties
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_61.html
White: 82.7%
Black: 13.7%

Arrests, Suburban Areas
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_67.html
White: 76.0%
Black: 22.6%

This is the arrest data I gleaned from provided FBI website. This data accounts for all the arrests, regardless of the crime. Compared to the census data(2000), Whites make up about 75.1% of population while blacks make up 12.3%

So if both races have equal amount of criminals committing equal share, the percent should be close to 75.1% and 12.3%.

In city, white is arrested about 67%, while blacks are about 30.5%. From immediate glance blacks get arrested more than whites, compared to census data of overall population. But since cities may have more blacks than suburban areas, it could be that more blacks could be arrested. It could also be that blacks indeed commit more crime and get arrested.

In Metropolitan area, the trend is similar except that blacks are still above the NATIONAL average, while population percentage is unknown.

When comparing in nonmetropolitan areas, whites get arrested more often than blacks and my bet is the population difference. In fact in this case blacks get about similar(slightly higher) percent in terms of arrest.

In suburban areas, the percents are back to the case where whites follow national percentage, but blacks go beyond that.

So in a nutshell FBI statistics do provide some insight, but it does not completely answer the question. Notice that whites include Hispanic population, and while arrest percentages are known, the population percentage of each category set by FBI is not known.

FBI provides more statistics,

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/arrests/index.html
Among the four categories of race reflected in UCR arrest data, 69.7 percent of persons arrested were

white, 58.5 percent of persons arrested for violent crime were white, and 68.2 percent of persons

arrested for property crime were white.

White juveniles comprised 67.1 percent of the juveniles arrested in 2006.

Black juveniles accounted for 51.0 percent of the juveniles arrested for violent crime, and white

juveniles comprised 66.3 percent of juveniles arrested for property crime. (See Table 43.)

While compared to national percentage of population whites have less percentage, whites still count for more than half of arrests. One area where blacks are arrested more are in juvenile area, where it is 51%

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
First thing you notice is that this is homicide percentage, and indeed blacks are 7 times more likely to commit homicide than whites. So does that mean blacks are the problem? I'd say no because,

Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison.

Race patterns among offenders are similar to those among victims

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/ovrace.png
So as of 2005,
White on white homicide is the largest,
followed by blacks on black,
then black on white,
then white on black.

If anything, white on white is the problem.

You do realize that you have to take in account population size. Blacks only make up 15- 20% of the population.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:40:53 AM EDT

[#36]

They are brainwashed by society to discount facts that might hurt someone's feelings so when such data is presented it short-circuits their programming.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:41:37 AM EDT

[#37]

Also if the data is positive, it's more easily accepted, and most people will freely offer explanations.

"Asians do better in school"
"Blacks dominate the NFL"
etc...

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:41:43 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Fact" that OP wants is not exactly a fact.

oh yeah IBTL

Oh but THEY ARE FACTS,,,, we are just not allowed to say they are facts, we need to mask them as something else....because someone's feelings may get hurt.

Prove it.

Go look at you crime statistics, School Test Scores, Unemployment Rates, Rates of Those Collecting Welfare compared to the number of people of the same race in the country.

And HOW exxactly are you not "allowed" to post that on ar15.com

I see crime statistics related to race posted on ar15.com all the time. Based on FBI statistics, it is VERY clear that there are higher rates of crime in the black population than in the white population.

However, if instead of posting FBI or .gov stats, people are posting stats provided by white supremacist organizations, then that might be a small problem.

See the difference?

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:42:01 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
You do realize that you have to take in account population size. Blacks only make up 15- 20% of the population.

You do realize that whoever wrote this compared it with population size given by Census.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:44:06 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
White guilt.

Basically, if you point out that predominantly black or Hispanic areas tend to have higher crime rates than predominantly white areas, they freak out. They assume you're trying to assign a cause, when instead you're simply making an observation (and it's not exactly groundbreaking news, either).

well if that's not the cause, what's the purpose of that observation?

It's interesting (at least to me).

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:44:55 AM EDT

[#41]

Thanks Merrell. You've made a good point.

Who has a problem with those facts? I don't.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:45:31 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

check your im box.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:46:06 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Because you are attributing those facts to race alone and not any other factors.

Find those same "facts" in eastern europe and see they have nothing to do with race.

No one is doing anything of the sort. Pointing out the obvious is not the same as assigning a cause. In this country, predominantly white areas tend to have less crime than predominantly black or Hispanic areas. So, what? In other news, the sky is blue. The reasons are complex, and you could probably write a book on it. But the correlation is no less valid.

I really don't understand why people get their panties in a bunch over this stuff.

You are right. but there are other places than arfcom that the same data is used to for the purposes i stated.

Maybe im just more cynical but i assume because arfcom is stricter that the only reason you are not seeing it in the open

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:48:03 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You do realize that you have to take in account population size. Blacks only make up 15- 20% of the population.

You do realize that whoever wrote this compared it with population size given by Census.

I looked over it, and to me a relatively small population contribute equally in crime than a population 10 times larger. So to me I read it as blacks commit more crimes than whites for as few as their are. Although overall whites do commit more crimes than blacks because whites are vastly more populated. The who ratio thing I guess.

Maybe I need to go back to statistics cause I ain't following it correctly ....

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:48:29 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

check your im box.

Unfortunately I can't reply back to you

You Are Set To Not Receive Instant Messages And Are Not Allowed To Send.
Please Update Your Profile If You Wish To Use The Messenger System.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:49:04 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
I said you prove it not me. But since you are being a Norwegian, I'll provide the crime statistic posted by someone in another gun forum sometime ago.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
According to 2000 census
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp1/2kh00.pdf
White is 75%
Black is 12.3% of population.

According to FBI data(2006)
Arrests, City
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_49.html
White 67.0%
Black 30.5 %

Arrests, Metropolitan area
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_55.html
White: 75.8%
Black: 23.0%

Arrests, Nonmetropolitan Counties
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_61.html
White: 82.7%
Black: 13.7%

Arrests, Suburban Areas
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_67.html
White: 76.0%
Black: 22.6%

This is the arrest data I gleaned from provided FBI website. This data accounts for all the arrests, regardless of the crime. Compared to the census data(2000), Whites make up about 75.1% of population while blacks make up 12.3%

So if both races have equal amount of criminals committing equal share, the percent should be close to 75.1% and 12.3%.

In city, white is arrested about 67%, while blacks are about 30.5%. From immediate glance blacks get arrested more than whites, compared to census data of overall population. But since cities may have more blacks than suburban areas, it could be that more blacks could be arrested. It could also be that blacks indeed commit more crime and get arrested.

In Metropolitan area, the trend is similar except that blacks are still above the NATIONAL average, while population percentage is unknown.

When comparing in nonmetropolitan areas, whites get arrested more often than blacks and my bet is the population difference. In fact in this case blacks get about similar(slightly higher) percent in terms of arrest.

In suburban areas, the percents are back to the case where whites follow national percentage, but blacks go beyond that.

So in a nutshell FBI statistics do provide some insight, but it does not completely answer the question. Notice that whites include Hispanic population, and while arrest percentages are known, the population percentage of each category set by FBI is not known.

FBI provides more statistics,

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/arrests/index.html
Among the four categories of race reflected in UCR arrest data, 69.7 percent of persons arrested were

white, 58.5 percent of persons arrested for violent crime were white, and 68.2 percent of persons

arrested for property crime were white.

White juveniles comprised 67.1 percent of the juveniles arrested in 2006.

Black juveniles accounted for 51.0 percent of the juveniles arrested for violent crime, and white

juveniles comprised 66.3 percent of juveniles arrested for property crime. (See Table 43.)

While compared to national percentage of population whites have less percentage, whites still count for more than half of arrests. One area where blacks are arrested more are in juvenile area, where it is 51%

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
First thing you notice is that this is homicide percentage, and indeed blacks are 7 times more likely to commit homicide than whites. So does that mean blacks are the problem? I'd say no because,

Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison.

Race patterns among offenders are similar to those among victims

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/ovrace.png
So as of 2005,
White on white homicide is the largest,
followed by blacks on black,
then black on white,
then white on black.

If anything, white on white is the problem.

Instead of cut & pasting data someone else found, examine which data they are posting.

Data can be spun a number of different ways, and the objective way to look at it is rates (typically per 100,000 people in this field)

Total numbers will always be biased by who comprises a larger chunk of the population.

Here is the Excel file comparing RATES for different crimes:

Race-specific arrest rates, United States—Part I and II Offenses

Straight from the FBI.

In terms of practical application, lowering one's risk exposure includes finding an area with a lower rate of crime, and a lower total population. Increasing either raises risk.

Posted: 6/5/2008 9:52:58 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
White guilt.

Basically, if you point out that predominantly black or Hispanic areas tend to have higher crime rates than predominantly white areas, they freak out. They assume you're trying to assign a cause, when instead you're simply making an observation (and it's not exactly groundbreaking news, either).

well if that's not the cause, what's the purpose of that observation?

It's interesting (at least to me).

well i guess that's part of what the problem may be. if there is a discussion on the cause of a particular phenomenon, most people are going to assume that any comments, or facts, are going to be related to, if not directly implied as, the cause.

eta an example: if there's a discussion on global warming, and i say "lots of cars get shitty gas mileage" i'd be willing to bet that it would be inferred that i believe that air pollution is contributing to global warming.