[Say his name] Cannon Hinnant

It was table 14. Let me know what you see.

 

Table 12 gives the total white and black population, Table 14 gives the total number of white victims from a black attacker and the total number of black victims from a white attacker. If you want to know what are the chances a white person will be violently victimized by a black attacker or what are the chances a black person will be violently victimized by a white attacker, then you need the figures from both tables.

 

Yes, for violent crime. You simply are misguided

 

Got any sources for that?

 

Table 12 tells me that 12% percent of the population is the offender in almost half as much crime as a 62.3% of a population.

 

You are the one accusing blacks of being more violent and saying poverty/income doesn't matter. Why aren't you using data to back up that assertion?

https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5137

• Persons in poor households at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households (16.9 per 1,000).
• Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8-2.5 per 1,000).
• The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels.
• Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).
• Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000).
• Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000).

Hispanics actually commit crimes at the lowest rate which makes sense since many of them are recent immigrants who are here mainly to work and send money home.

 

Wow, that's crazy (not really).

Can you answer this: What percentage of the country's wealth does that 62.3% of the population possess versus that 12% of the population?

 

Accusing?
Are you daft? You gave me a study on victimization based on socioeconomic status not offenders.

 

Why are you acting like anyone is against arresting and charging people who killed these children?

 

You just lost me. I was about to post that horrific incidents like this are tragic regardless of the color of a child's skin. I still believe that, but your post that I quoted above told me why you started the thread. You care more about making political points with your right wing friends and taking a shot, no pun intended, at those who think that it's far past time that something was done about systemic racism, than you do about what happened to that poor kid, and that's just sad. In my opinion.

 

Unbelievable tragedy, this is what matters folks.

 

Then why are you b****ing?

 

Was Kamala born in America?

 

You mean the guy throwing the race card thread only posting it because a little white boy was killed by a black man? That guy? The guy who doesn't give a damn about the children regularly killed by gun violence in this country unless it's in Chicago because the blacks are doing it there? That guy?

This shooting is just further evidence that we need better guidelines on gun control but to you it's just further evidence that the media largely made up of white people is orchestrating some campaign against white people. Give me a break.

 

yep who said it wasn't?

 

Then why did you post about it in your White Grievance thread?

 

At least we can see who the racist ****WITS are.

DD