Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FairWitness
it is not as straightforward as you are trying to make it.

It is not straight forward at all. My point was that just because blacks are commiting 85% of the interracial crimes you can not conclude from this fact that blacks are targeting whites. To conclude that blacks are targeting whites in significant numbers, you need another fact besides this one because the 85% figure is what you would expect from random crimes. Perhaps blacks are targeting whites, perhaps not. Perhaps whites are targeting blacks, perhaps not. My point is, that there is no statistically significant fact that says one way or another.

68 posted on 07/17/2002 8:17:55 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: staytrue; mrustow
To conclude that blacks are targeting whites in significant numbers, you need another fact besides this one because the 85% figure is what you would expect from random crimes. Perhaps blacks are targeting whites, perhaps not. Perhaps whites are targeting blacks, perhaps not. My point is, that there is no statistically significant fact that says one way or another.

Please see my post 50 regarding cross racial rapes. While the fact that black on white crime was 85% of interracial crime might be explained by population statistics, it’s more a function of the large number of cross racial rapes committed by blacks (whites commit far more rapes).

Note that of black rapists, 41% of their crimes were cross racial, compared to 3% for white rapists. That’s far from statistically insignificant. If these were crimes of opportunity those stats would be similar for both groups.

71 posted on 07/17/2002 8:42:57 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson