PDA

View Full Version : How to reduce the crime rate.


HelloKitty
30-09-2005, 20:24:42
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/30/bennett.comments/index.html

Too bad the interview wasn't longer. He could have told us how to get rid of gays by castration, Jews by sending them to camp, and Slant eyes by raising the price of rice till they starve.

protein
30-09-2005, 20:28:12
Didn't that republican bodybuilder nazi actor recently ban same sex marriages?

HelloKitty
30-09-2005, 20:45:24
No, they were already banned. He just prevented the legislature from passing a law that made them legal.

He says it is a job for the courts to decide.

Then he went and in an interview talked about how bad "activist" judges (the ones that set legal precedent to effectivly make law) are in this country.

Gary
30-09-2005, 22:00:10
I think you're on to something there. You two should team up !

Cruddy
01-10-2005, 23:47:10
Clearly a racist fuckwit.

Purely by aborting every birth, killing every living human and launching every existing nuclear weapon at the US would reduce the crime rate to zero.

Sometimes there are more important things than no crime, but you can't really get that idea over to someone with their head stuck that far up their arse.

HelloKitty
02-10-2005, 02:22:11
I like the part where he says that people who are upset OWE HIM an apology.

Oerdin
02-10-2005, 02:28:30
If you see the whole clip it wasn't as bad as it sounds but he is clearly a fuckwit none the less.

Oerdin
02-10-2005, 03:28:06
I'd also like to say if we properly educated every American child then the crime rate would also go down but some people find it easier to talk about aborting black babies.

HelloKitty
02-10-2005, 06:38:27
Education costs money. Aborting black babies makes doctors more money and gits rid a dem niggerz.

Lazarus and the Gimp
02-10-2005, 09:23:49
Check the thread about this on t'other site. It's depressing.

devilmunchkin
02-10-2005, 11:45:13
are their any stats on which race is proven to commit the most crime?

Oerdin
02-10-2005, 11:49:36
There are incarceration rates which show more blacks per capita end up in jail. Some people say that means blacks commit more crimes while others claim that shows bias against black in the system. My own feelings are that poor people more often are both the victims and causes of crime and that blacks (mainly do to lack of educational& thus employment opportunities) end up being more disadvantaged then other groups.

I'd have to say Laz is right though that given we don't know what percentage of crimes go reported or unreported it is hard to really say who commits the most crime.

protein
02-10-2005, 11:59:09
It's the same over here. Poor people are more likely to commit crime. Some areas the poor people are white and some they aren't.

There's also a fashionable crime culture at the moment amongst kids (of all races) that goes with the chav music and fashion. Arrogance and knives are a problem. The race isn't the thing making them criminals, if anything it's their age or their street culture. The "street" culture is completely made up, they just can't see how stupid it is. They make their own problem and fight amongst each other. The problems in the "street" weren't there ten years ago. To go extremely Daily Mail for a moment I think that garage and hip hop culture plays alot in it. If kids rap and brag about guns and brawling and respect and money all the time, that culture is going to actually mean something to them. Even in little old England.

devilmunchkin
02-10-2005, 12:04:10
you could also argue that just because more blacks end up in jail doesn't mean they commit more crimes..they just get caught..or, like you said, it is a circumstance of bias.

But think about it, who are the ppl you read in the news committing all the heinous, sick crimes??? WHITE PEOPLE! The mothers killing their babies, the men kidnapping the little girls and killing them...all white that i've read.

I know that ppl say blacks are more disadvantaged..but where i went to highschool, they were provided more oppotunities than i was. Both Hispanics and Blacks can have lower SAT scores than white ppl and still qualify for National Merit Scholar. This means scholarships out the yin yang..and they could prolly go to a state school for free for college. My senior year, I outscored the hispanics and blacks who made National Merit Scholar on the SATs..but i was only given honorable mention because I'm white. Now maybe this lack of education applies to the extreme ghettos... but not in San Antonio where I'm from. They got the same education as I did..and got more oppotunities handed to them. Whether they chose not to take advantage of those opportunities was up to them. (Recently heard one of those scholars i graduated with is now a penniless drug addict).

Koshko
02-10-2005, 21:16:00
Statistically the highest percentage of violent crime in the US occurs in the lower class "ghettos". In fact if you look at the pure statistics for homocides in the US, you will see that the 10 most populated cities in the US account for a bulk of the murders in this country. People comment about how much more violent we are than Europe/Canada/etc due to our homocide rate, but in actuality if you disclude the numbers tallied from New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, and Detroit (top 5 homocide cities in the us in 2004 iirc), and take the average murders per population, the USA is comparible to the other countries. Basically our big cities skew the rates much more than many country's big cities. Well anyway, the reality is that the ghettos have a tendency to be heavily populated by blacks.

LoD
02-10-2005, 22:40:17
As aswlays, I'd like to nitpick (you lot probably hate me for this already). Koshko, usually most crime happens in the big cities, whether it be the US or Europe.

protein
02-10-2005, 23:23:17
Everything remotely interesting happens in the big cities.

Koshko
02-10-2005, 23:49:34
Originally posted by LoD
As aswlays, I'd like to nitpick (you lot probably hate me for this already). Koshko, usually most crime happens in the big cities, whether it be the US or Europe.

Yup but the inner-city Americans are much more adept and killing each other than the inner-city Brits.

HelloKitty
03-10-2005, 06:31:53
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Check the thread about this on t'other site. It's depressing.

I am going to use my psychic powers and guess that many people are mad he stated the "truth" and got in trouble.

Am I right?

HelloKitty
03-10-2005, 06:32:39
Originally posted by Koshko
Yup but the inner-city Americans are much more adept and killing each other than the inner-city Brits.

Thats because God is on our side. Thats why we kill good.

Oerdin
03-10-2005, 06:47:28
Originally posted by HelloKitty
I am going to use my psychic powers and guess that many people are mad he stated the "truth" and got in trouble.

Am I right?

Yes, we had the usual right wing nut jobs spouting the same depressing garbage. Park Avenue would be proud.

HelloKitty
03-10-2005, 07:00:11
Bah edit

HelloKitty
03-10-2005, 07:01:41
I am sure Firaxis must be proud about thier decision to use Poly as their official forums rather than pay the $ each month to have thier own.

Funko
03-10-2005, 09:45:12
Originally posted by protein
It's the same over here. Poor people are more likely to commit crime. Some areas the poor people are white and some they aren't.

The other part of the higher black incarceration rate is that it's also easier to convict a black suspect because of unconcious predjudice amongst the jurors. (in the UK, I assume it's the same in the US)

HelloKitty
03-10-2005, 18:28:15
Its not unconcious here.

Lazarus and the Gimp
03-10-2005, 22:45:35
Originally posted by Funko
The other part of the higher black incarceration rate is that it's also easier to convict a black suspect because of unconcious predjudice amongst the jurors.

Not just among the jurors, but among the police (certainly) and probably the CPS and wider judiciary too.

Harold Shipman managed to kill 250 people because he "wasn't the type" to kill people. He only got caught because he flipped out and forged a bogus will.

protein
04-10-2005, 01:34:54
That's not a race issue. If he was a black doctor the same thing would have happened. He's not the type because he's a doctor.

Koshko
04-10-2005, 07:07:21
Well the total lack of black doctors compared to the black population could potentially be a race issue though. It fits with the "keeping the black man down" attitude.

Funko
04-10-2005, 09:21:10
Originally posted by HelloKitty
Its not unconcious here.

It's not always unconcious here either.

Dyl Ulenspiegel
04-10-2005, 14:17:24
Hmm...


"If you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down.

"That would be an impossibly ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down," he said.

I think that was in reply to a similarly simplistic suggestion, was it not? So I don't get the bruhaha about that.

He was inept making that statement, but I'd be more concerned about a that is not openly racist, but just lets the poor niggers rot in jail after bogus court convictions, or lets them be shot in the ghettom, or in Iraq. Or simpley lets them drown.

maroule
04-10-2005, 15:07:16
I suggest "Freakonomics", by Levitt, as an excellent, if sobering, reading

The fact is that crime declined in the 90s in the US because abortion laws were made more easy in the 70s' (laxists / aka inhuman if you're a 'pro-life'). In effect, childs born to single mothers have a disproportionate chance of ending in jail (that's well established in statistics, and that's fairly intuitive). Of course in the US, 'childs born to single mothers ' means 1/ blacks 2/ poors.

Ergo, allowing young single black women to yet an avortion in the 70s' deleted a wave of future 'criminals' (wether they really are criminals because inherently bad -the right view- or because their environment make them so -the left view- is your choice). In the end, would be mothers tend to make the right decision when they decide if they should or not have a child.

Levitt was hammered by the pro life for making the statistical relationship explicit, by the way.

King_Ghidra
04-10-2005, 15:38:49
freaknonomics is no bible, but i understand the argument

Lurker the Second
04-10-2005, 15:40:30
I assume Levitt was using that example to show how statistics can be manipulated and not to argue the connection. At least I hope so.

Gary
04-10-2005, 15:40:39
Possibly because they believed it would be misused once common knowledge.

King_Ghidra
04-10-2005, 15:53:02
Originally posted by Lurker the Second
I assume Levitt was using that example to show how statistics can be manipulated and not to argue the connection. At least I hope so.

i'm not sure, i think freakonomics as a whole is something of an exercise in bullshit maniplation of statistics

and as for the purpose, well to make money

the Guardian did a great digested review as always:

http://books.guardian.co.uk/digestedread/story/0,6550,1540123,00.html

Lazarus and the Gimp
04-10-2005, 17:27:42
Originally posted by protein
That's not a race issue. If he was a black doctor the same thing would have happened.

Are you sure about that? Complaint levels against black doctors are higher than white ones.

Lazarus and the Gimp
04-10-2005, 22:35:58
Originally posted by HelloKitty
I am going to use my psychic powers and guess that many people are mad he stated the "truth" and got in trouble.

Am I right?

Not yet, but seeing as Cal's just turned up with his White Supremacist mentor it's surely only a matter of time.

Drekkus
04-10-2005, 23:20:07
Who's his mentor?

The Norks
05-10-2005, 08:00:56
why don't we ask our good friend and man of reason Epublius Rex about this thorny issue? He's bound to have some pearls of wisdom for us.

maroule
05-10-2005, 09:08:12
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
i'm not sure, i think freakonomics as a whole is something of an exercise in bullshit maniplation of statistics

and as for the purpose, well to make money

the Guardian did a great digested review as always:

http://books.guardian.co.uk/digestedread/story/0,6550,1540123,00.html


c'mon man, that's a bit easy, a 10 lines, written-in-five-minutes book critic is not enough to dismiss a book that was well liked by many reasonnably intelligent people (NY Times and The Economist swear by it, among others)

"and as for the purpose, well to make money"
ouch, that hurts in our world of disinterested compassion