Posted on 07/23/2013 3:59:18 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
Young black males are at greater risk from their peers than from the police or white civilians.
Last week President Obama weighed in again on the Trayvon Martin episode. Sadly, most of what he said was wrong, both literally and ethically.
Pace the president, the Zimmerman case was not about Stand Your Ground laws. It was not a white-on-black episode. The shooting involved a Latino of mixed heritage in a violent altercation with a black youth.
Is it ethical for the president to weigh in on a civil-rights case apparently being examined by his own Justice Department? The president knows that if it is true that African-American males are viewed suspiciously, it is probably because statistically they commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime. If that were not true, they might well be given no more attention as supposed suspects than is accorded to white, Asian, or Latino youths. Had George Zimmerman been black, he would have been, statistically at least, more likely to have shot Trayvon Martin — and statistically likewise less likely to have been tried. (snip)
... few people — and certainly not Barack Obama or Eric Holder, who have a bad habit, in an increasingly multiracial country, of claiming solidarity on the basis of race — will care that Khin Min and Lina Lim were torn to pieces by bullets and a knife. Few will care that they died in a vicious assault that had nothing to do with stereotyping, Stand Your Ground self-defense, weak gun laws, insufficient federal civil-rights legislation, or any of the other causes of interracial violence falsely advanced by the attorney general — but quite a lot to do with an urban culture that for unspoken reasons has spawned an epidemic of disproportionate violent crime on the part of young African-American males.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Wrong.
I've spoken to blacks and they really don't get the connection between how they act and how they're treated.
President Obama believed what he was saying. Blacks don't get it. Honest Injun...
That is the absolute truth.
Obama has many of the same delusions as the underclass... a part of him really believes it’s ‘the color of his skin’ rather than what the rest of us have learned about what that color means...
What it means is higher crime, violence, and an endless stream of excuses.
Everything you say is true, but race is not the prime factor. It is the entitlement culture. All you need to sign up is a complete lack of self-respect and a willingness to do as you're told by your government masters. Willful stupidity and literal degeneracy have no respect toward race.
There are just as many white thugs as black, but they tend to congregate in poverty-stricken rural areas where the population density skews the crime rate down.
If you took these white thugs and concentrated them in Chicago or Detroit, the biggest differences would be a notable uptick in green teeth and that pickups on blocks would replace the cars on blocks. Crime would remain the same, or nearly so.
It certainly does!
LLS
I agree 1000%!
You speak the absolute truth!
Can’t wait for Obama’s next book: “My Momma Was A Creepy Ass Cracker”.
I’m not trying to paint with an overly-broad brush, but the problems in the black communities appear to be related to the predominance of black culture. Since blacks tend to live in larger urban areas, the problem is absolutely skewed by proximity and population density.
I’ve lived in and near poverty-stricken white areas, and while there is crime, it’s not nearly as violent or overwhelmingly common as it is in black communities. Whites tend more toward domestic violence, alcohol-induced crime, and white collar theft. Blacks will out-and-out steal your car from you and shoot you without thinking. I’ve seen it. I’ve been a victim of it.
I hate to be labeled as racist, because my fear of blacks isn’t born from an inbred belief that my race is superior to theirs. My fear is born from first-hand experience of their criminality.
You're wrong on this... I'll be back with some statistics in a sec...
“An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white - with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”
Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.
If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides - in America?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3046037/posts
“...my fear of blacks isn’t born from an inbred belief that my race is superior to theirs. My fear is born from first-hand experience of their criminality.”
Yup. Right there with you, from too many personal episodes. It’s only by the grace of God that I’m still here.
And caution around young thugs isn’t borne of racism. It’s a natural attribute of being street wise.
I am not calling you racist—anyone who isn’t afraid when confronted by gang of thugs is stupid. I would suggest, however, that the proper term is thug culture. The problem of this pervasive perverse culture far exceeds the issue of race. It all ties back to the entitlement mindset promulgated by generations of welfare and the lack of fathers.
While blacks predominate in the thug culture, whites have embraced it as well. As far as violence, talk to the numerous victims shot at rural gas stations for a couple of bucks! My LEO friends always say it’s not a matter of if your store will be robbed, but if the employee will be able walk away (it’s probably 50/50 in some areas). There many white thugs who would steal your car and shoot you—but they are high on meth, rather than the drug de jure in the cities. The main thing about rural thugs is they don’t tend to run in gangs—rural areas tend to discourage such activities and this one fact decreases violence dramatically.
The white community once ran around in sheets and lynched black people. No one person ever lynched another—such violence requires a mob. I don’t raise this to excuse black criminals, but actually to suggest dissimilarity: even at the height of the Jim Crow era, such groups were regularly disparaged and despised. Unfortunately, such groups were occasionally abetted by a press corps unwilling to raise issues that were too divisive. That cowardice has now grown to monstrous proportion.
Today, the mobs are no longer vilified for the evil that they are. Every last grievance must be addressed; every perceived slight recompensed; and every insult tolerated. Mobs are now called communities and are celebrated in the media and feted at the highest levels.
Angry mobs are dangerous; organizing one and calling it a community doesn’t make it any less so. I do believe not a few French Aristocrats believed they could work with mobs…
Great points, anti. There was a recent murder here in the Tampa Bay area where white kid stalked and stabbed a store clerk to death. He appeared to have acted alone in the homicide, but he had accomplices who were released after questioning. The motive was never discussed by the media.
Whites are increasingly addicted to prescription pain medication and meth, and desperation sets in very quickly for money when the drug supply dries up. Most crimes committed by whites don’t involve violence, but when they do, it’s often quite shocking. It’s not a gangland shooting but a premeditated gore-fest.
I do like how you compared media complicity to the problem with black “communities” growing as actual living criminal enterprises and not legitimate cultural centers. The media does not deign to put down the criminality of blacks and even goes so far as to not release the race of the criminals despite signs pointing to their race being black by name alone. All of that said, I believe we can place blame squarely at the feet of the complicit media and leftist politicians who are continuing to subjugate blacks by keeping them in the ghetto and on the teat of Uncle Sam.
I do not disagree. Please excuse me while I parse my words. ;)
If you read my last post, I was not suggesting that the level of violent crime was the same. There numerous reasons for this. However, I am saying that the racial element is only one factor. The entitlement mentality is another. The fact that both of these motives coincide in black-on-white crime, and are comorbid with a propensity toward gangs, increases both the likelihood and the level of violence. This is an intended result.
All of these factors have been carefully orchestrated to subdue a particular race and ensure their continued utility to foster a larger behemoth. Increased fear in the hoi polloi is just an added bonus for the ringleader. Agitators throughout history are the same. . .
I have recently been reading Booker T. Washington’s Up From Slavery. What a great book, and what a great man. What a marked contrast with the modern ‘leaders’! He was so positive, and convinced that his race was destined for not just equality, but greatness. The hardscrabble life of the sharecropper could be replaced by owning the farm. Unfortunately, so many problems that existed during Reconstruction are still alive and well:
(Circa 1878) … I felt that the Reconstruction policy, so far as it related to my race, was in a large measure on a false foundation, was artificial and forced. In many cases it seemed to me that the ignorance of my race was being used as a tool with which to help white men into office… Besides, the general political agitation drew the attention of our people away from the more fundamental matters of perfecting themselves in the industries at their doors and in securing property…
During the time I was a student in Washington the city was crowded with coloured people, many of whom had recently come from the South. A large proportion of these people had been drawn to Washington because they felt that they could lead a life of ease there. Others had secured minor government positions, and still another large class was there in the hope of securing Federal positions…
…I saw other young men who received seventy-five or one hundred dollars per month from the Government, who were in debt at the end of every month. I saw men who but a few months previous were members of Congress, then without employment and in poverty. Among a large class there seemed to be a dependence upon the Government for every conceivable thing. The members of this class had little ambition to create a position for themselves, but wanted the Federal officials to create one for them.
The path he laid was filled with hard work and selflessness and it worked well. At least until the Great Society systematically destroyed all the underpinnings of the real black American culture. I cannot imagine how much he would despise both the government and those who profit off the destruction of his people’s lives. Nor can I imagine his wrath against those who show such a callous disregard of the very freedoms that he and his contemporaries spent their lives securing.
Friday’s speech was the same old straw men type arguments he has been making all his career. Still waiting for the Pub party to grow a set and call him on them.
I have to disagree — Black ‘leaders’ don’t watch things get worse, they actively work to make things worse.
It will take a new leadership that will allow members to speak out without penalty. mcconnell and boehner both keep heat from obama... they are playing for the “other team”.
Yes, that builds their "business."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.