Good FREAKIN God at the spin....

Oh please explain how 13% of the population accounts for HALF of ALL murders. I guess that blacks, being the 13%, have a bigger victim pool to choose from, right? Thats some piss poor "logic" you have there....

because people pick and choose their figures,, as implied in the quote

;figures dont lie, but liars figure'


much like the 'bell curve' science,, the problem with data is that it can be nitpicked to support completely opposing positions


for instance,, that half of all murders stuff is OLD data that picked a RANGE of years and averaged it,,,


however, the other data, checking actual numbers from, lets say 2013

reflect that 38 percent of arrests for homicides are blacks,,,and thats ARRESTS, reflecting who the police are catching not who goes uncaught or unarrested

and thats still 'disproportionate' to their representation as a population, but then so was their enslaved status once upon a time,, doesnt prove propensity in character as much as it does propensity in ARREST and convictions

because people pick and choose their figures,, as implied in the quote

;figures dont lie, but liars figure'


much like the 'bell curve' science,, the problem with data is that it can be nitpicked to support completely opposing positions


for instance,, that half of all murders stuff is OLD data that picked a RANGE of years and averaged it,,,


however, the other data, checking actual numbers from, lets say 2013

reflect that 38 percent of arrests for homicides are blacks,,,and thats ARRESTS, reflecting who the police are catching not who goes uncaught or unarrested

and thats still 'disproportionate' to their representation as a population, but then so was their enslaved status once upon a time,, doesnt prove propensity in character as much as it does propensity in ARREST and convictions

no

in your example,,,there are 3 black workers to every 1 white worker

that would mean it would be numerically logical, considering every white worker has 3 unique black victims,,, and only every third black worker has their own unique white victim

IF whites were 'more likely' to be involved in crimes of an INTERRACIAL nature against their coworkers,,

based on their being 'more likely' to have the opportunity to do so,,,

so, if someone were to point out that at your workplace that whites were involved in interracial crimes three times as much as blacks were, that would not prove some exceptional propensity towards crime, but would reflect numbers that logically added up based upon OPPORTUNITY to commit interracial crime being 3 times more likely

yes, intraracial crimes outweigh interracial crimes, mostly due to opportunity in a society where people are still largely segregated and have more opportunities to encounter others in their race

As usual you are spinning the numbers. The 50% data came from the FBI, not some racist group. Arrests are arrests and murders are murders.

yea, of course... just kill whats closest, huh... thats why so many other races only kill each other...

wow,,,still missing it huh?

no race kills ONLY each other,, nowhere has that been implied or the topic


the topic is INTERRACIAL crime,,,,,and INTRRACIAL crime

most crimes are committed WITHIN a race , or INTRARACIAL,,whatever the race

getting back on topic with my last quote before race was interjected (by someone else)

---------------------------------------------------------------
but no one hears their name that way,, people are addicted to feeling 'popular',, and going out this way gets them 15 minutes of fame

people do all sorts of things, just to get that 15 minutes,,,

A lot of delusional folks on this thread.. Heh MS... Lol

I know, it doesnt support the neat little narrative box does it?

I still have not seen a reference to a source, and the information about the 50 percent I know was taken from a COLLECTION of yearly FBI numbers over a chosen RANGE OF YEARS

arrests ARE arrests, and murders ARE murders, but unknown murder assailants arent figured into the statistics that measure the known murder VICTIMS,,,


for instance 100 victims,, of which we know the assailant for 60 means there have been 100 crimes, and if we know that jack committed 40 of those crimes,,

that would mean that out of the 60 crimes where the assailant is known he has committed 66 percent (2/3)

hwoever he has not committed 66 percent of the crimes if others are responsible for the 40 crimes we dont have an assailant for

in that case that 66 percent drops down to 40 percent

Your facts are false and your math stinks.

From the FBI for the year 2013

2245 blacks killed other blacks of the total of 2491 blacks killed.
That is 90%

409 blacks killed whites of the 3005 whites killed. That is 14%

Considering blacks and whites

2654 blacks killed 5496 blacks and whites for 48% These numbers don't include the unknown which would raise the percentage higher.

BACK TO THE SHOOTER,,,,

(but I suppose him being black means we HAVE to continue arguing how much more violent black people are,,,?)

Well...considering he belongs to a part of the population that commits half of the nations's murders while only making up 13% of the total population... it just means blacks, as a group, are more violent. No need to argue that fact. But, your math skills seem lacking so Im sure you'll argue anyway....even if it's only to get in the last word.