Multiculturalism boldly taking us into our future South African quality of life. This will continue and in fact increase until the victims families decide that retribution against the community that harbors these inner-city terrorist are fair game.
—The Color of Crime
By Nicholas Stix
(Men’s News Daily, CA )
Imagine if one demographic group in America were 33 times more prone to commit crimes than another group. How would you feel about the relatively crime-prone group? The relatively crime-free group? Wouldn’t you want to know about such differences?
But we don’t have to imagine anything. The above contrast was not a
hypothetical case, but rather the statistical relationship of black to Asian
crime in America, as detailed in the ground-breaking new report, The Color of Crime, released by the New Century Foundation, the organization that sponsors American Renaissance magazine.
* “… between 2001 and 2003, blacks were 39 times more likely to commit violent crimes against whites than the reverse, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.”
* Between 2001 and 2003, blacks committed, on average, 15,400 black-on-white rapes per year, while whites averaged only 900 white-on-black rapes per
year.
* “Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year
involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.”
But there are five-and-one-half as many whites as blacks. If anything, the numbers should be reversed. After all, as leftists always tell us, all
groups are supposed to be equally represented in all categories, for good or ill. (Well, not really. Leftists never call on the NBA and NFL to institute
racial parity for white players.)
* Nationally, youth gangs are 90 percent non-white. “Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.”
* The only crime category in which Asians are more heavily represented than whites is illegal gambling.
* “Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks.
Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10
percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.”
But how can that be, when for years commentators of all political
persuasions have insisted that the majority of the victims of black crime
were themselves black? But it has been true for some time, because blacks increasingly target whites based on the color of the latter’s skin. The commentators have been guilty variously of lying and laziness.
* Far from being guilty of “racially profiling” innocent blacks, police have
been exercising racial bias on behalf of blacks, arresting fewer blacks than their proportion of criminals: “… blacks who committed crimes that were reported to the police were 26 percent less likely to be arrested than people of other races who committed the same crimes.”
* “… police are determined to arrest non-black rather than black criminals.” (I have seen this practice in operation on the streets and subways of New York.)
* “[Blacks] are eight times more likely than people of other races to rob
someone, for example, and 5.5 times more likely to steal a car.”
Well, as everyone knows, innocent blacks get rounded up by the police all
the time, so we can safely ignore such statistics. After all, isn’t that
what the NAACP, Village Voice, New York Times, and countless black
“activists” and prominent academics have been saying for years? After all, although the folks insisting on racial profiling have no facts to back up
their claims, they enjoy political prestige and moral authority. The Color
of Crime, meanwhile, is based merely on lowly facts. As we shall see,
prominent people are already saying that we should ignore The Color of
Crime, because it wasn’t produced by the right sort of people. (And of
course, “the right sort of people” doesn’t tell the truth about race and
crime.)
* Charges of racial profiling, which maintain that police target innocent
black motorists for traffic stops notwithstanding, a 2002 study by
Maryland’s Public Service Research Institute found that police were stopping too few black speeders (23%), compared to their proportion of actual speeders (25%). In fact, “blacks were twice as likely to speed as whites” in general, and there was an even higher frequency of black speeders in the 90-mph and higher range.
* “… the only evidence for police bias is disproportionate arrest rates for
those groups police critics say are the targets of bias. High black arrest
rates appear to reflect high crime rates, not police misconduct.”
* Blacks not only commit violent crimes at far higher rates than non-blacks, but their crimes are more violent than those of whites. Blacks are three times as likely as non-blacks to commit assault with guns, and twice as likely as non-blacks to commit assault with knives.
* Blacks not only commit violent crimes at far higher rates than whites, but blacks commit “white collar” offenses — fraud, bribery, racketeering and embezzlement, respectively — at two to five times the white rate.
* The single greatest indicator of an area’s crime rate is not poverty or
education, but race and ethnicity. Even when one controls for income and
education, the black crime rate is much higher than the white rate.
Things are actually much worse than the above notes suggest. As The Color of Crime notes, the feds inflate white crime statistics by counting Hispanic offenders as white; at the same time, “Hispanics are a [hate crime] victim category but not a perpetrator category. If someone attacks a Mexican for racial reasons, he becomes a Hispanic victim of a hate crime. However, if the same Mexican commits a hate crime against a black, he is classified as a ‘white’ perpetrator. Even more absurdly, if a Mexican commits a hate crime against a white, both victim and perpetrator are reported as white.” Thus, the number of white perpetrators is bloated, while the number of whitevictims is constricted by the federal double-standard.
But things are even worse than the study shows. It fails to note, with
black-on-white male prison rape an institutionalized sport among black
inmates, that hundreds of thousands of white men have thus been victimized but never counted by the government. Meanwhile, white-on-black male prison rape is virtually non-existent.
Some of the study’s many sources were the FBI’s uniform crime reports
(UCRs); the feds’ National Crime Victimization Study (NCVS), in which
149,000 people across the country, in statistical proportion to all
demographic groups, were called; the National Incident-Based Reporting
System (NIBRS); Supplemental Homicide Reports (SHRs); State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS); National Youth Gang Survey; Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP); and National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP). The succinct report slays dragons in the course of mere footnotes, such as itsnailing of tenured California State University criminology professor Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, who in her book Hate Crimes: Causes, Controls and Controversies, the reality of interracial violence be damned, depicted whites only as perpetrators, and not as the victims of hate crimes.
The Color of Crime – not to be confused with a 1998 piece of propaganda of the same name by tenured University of Maryland professor of criminology, Katheryn K. Russell — is the most scientifically rigorous research on crime and race available. It’s the state of the art.
The mainstream media will surely be anxious to publicize and discuss The
Color of Crime. After all, hasn’t the public been inundated since the late
1990s (and ultimately, since the 1960s) with dubious charges of racism
(“racial profiling”) against law enforcement and the justice system? And
don’t the MSM always tell us that they will report on anything newsworthy?
After all, the New York Times claims to be “the newspaper of record.”
—The Color of Crime
By Nicholas Stix
(Men’s News Daily, CA )
Imagine if one demographic group in America were 33 times more prone to commit crimes than another group. How would you feel about the relatively crime-prone group? The relatively crime-free group? Wouldn’t you want to know about such differences?
But we don’t have to imagine anything. The above contrast was not a
hypothetical case, but rather the statistical relationship of black to Asian
crime in America, as detailed in the ground-breaking new report, The Color of Crime, released by the New Century Foundation, the organization that sponsors American Renaissance magazine.
* “… between 2001 and 2003, blacks were 39 times more likely to commit violent crimes against whites than the reverse, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.”
* Between 2001 and 2003, blacks committed, on average, 15,400 black-on-white rapes per year, while whites averaged only 900 white-on-black rapes per
year.
* “Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year
involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.”
But there are five-and-one-half as many whites as blacks. If anything, the numbers should be reversed. After all, as leftists always tell us, all
groups are supposed to be equally represented in all categories, for good or ill. (Well, not really. Leftists never call on the NBA and NFL to institute
racial parity for white players.)
* Nationally, youth gangs are 90 percent non-white. “Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.”
* The only crime category in which Asians are more heavily represented than whites is illegal gambling.
* “Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks.
Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10
percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.”
But how can that be, when for years commentators of all political
persuasions have insisted that the majority of the victims of black crime
were themselves black? But it has been true for some time, because blacks increasingly target whites based on the color of the latter’s skin. The commentators have been guilty variously of lying and laziness.
* Far from being guilty of “racially profiling” innocent blacks, police have
been exercising racial bias on behalf of blacks, arresting fewer blacks than their proportion of criminals: “… blacks who committed crimes that were reported to the police were 26 percent less likely to be arrested than people of other races who committed the same crimes.”
* “… police are determined to arrest non-black rather than black criminals.” (I have seen this practice in operation on the streets and subways of New York.)
* “[Blacks] are eight times more likely than people of other races to rob
someone, for example, and 5.5 times more likely to steal a car.”
Well, as everyone knows, innocent blacks get rounded up by the police all
the time, so we can safely ignore such statistics. After all, isn’t that
what the NAACP, Village Voice, New York Times, and countless black
“activists” and prominent academics have been saying for years? After all, although the folks insisting on racial profiling have no facts to back up
their claims, they enjoy political prestige and moral authority. The Color
of Crime, meanwhile, is based merely on lowly facts. As we shall see,
prominent people are already saying that we should ignore The Color of
Crime, because it wasn’t produced by the right sort of people. (And of
course, “the right sort of people” doesn’t tell the truth about race and
crime.)
* Charges of racial profiling, which maintain that police target innocent
black motorists for traffic stops notwithstanding, a 2002 study by
Maryland’s Public Service Research Institute found that police were stopping too few black speeders (23%), compared to their proportion of actual speeders (25%). In fact, “blacks were twice as likely to speed as whites” in general, and there was an even higher frequency of black speeders in the 90-mph and higher range.
* “… the only evidence for police bias is disproportionate arrest rates for
those groups police critics say are the targets of bias. High black arrest
rates appear to reflect high crime rates, not police misconduct.”
* Blacks not only commit violent crimes at far higher rates than non-blacks, but their crimes are more violent than those of whites. Blacks are three times as likely as non-blacks to commit assault with guns, and twice as likely as non-blacks to commit assault with knives.
* Blacks not only commit violent crimes at far higher rates than whites, but blacks commit “white collar” offenses — fraud, bribery, racketeering and embezzlement, respectively — at two to five times the white rate.
* The single greatest indicator of an area’s crime rate is not poverty or
education, but race and ethnicity. Even when one controls for income and
education, the black crime rate is much higher than the white rate.
Things are actually much worse than the above notes suggest. As The Color of Crime notes, the feds inflate white crime statistics by counting Hispanic offenders as white; at the same time, “Hispanics are a [hate crime] victim category but not a perpetrator category. If someone attacks a Mexican for racial reasons, he becomes a Hispanic victim of a hate crime. However, if the same Mexican commits a hate crime against a black, he is classified as a ‘white’ perpetrator. Even more absurdly, if a Mexican commits a hate crime against a white, both victim and perpetrator are reported as white.” Thus, the number of white perpetrators is bloated, while the number of whitevictims is constricted by the federal double-standard.
But things are even worse than the study shows. It fails to note, with
black-on-white male prison rape an institutionalized sport among black
inmates, that hundreds of thousands of white men have thus been victimized but never counted by the government. Meanwhile, white-on-black male prison rape is virtually non-existent.
Some of the study’s many sources were the FBI’s uniform crime reports
(UCRs); the feds’ National Crime Victimization Study (NCVS), in which
149,000 people across the country, in statistical proportion to all
demographic groups, were called; the National Incident-Based Reporting
System (NIBRS); Supplemental Homicide Reports (SHRs); State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS); National Youth Gang Survey; Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP); and National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP). The succinct report slays dragons in the course of mere footnotes, such as itsnailing of tenured California State University criminology professor Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, who in her book Hate Crimes: Causes, Controls and Controversies, the reality of interracial violence be damned, depicted whites only as perpetrators, and not as the victims of hate crimes.
The Color of Crime – not to be confused with a 1998 piece of propaganda of the same name by tenured University of Maryland professor of criminology, Katheryn K. Russell — is the most scientifically rigorous research on crime and race available. It’s the state of the art.
The mainstream media will surely be anxious to publicize and discuss The
Color of Crime. After all, hasn’t the public been inundated since the late
1990s (and ultimately, since the 1960s) with dubious charges of racism
(“racial profiling”) against law enforcement and the justice system? And
don’t the MSM always tell us that they will report on anything newsworthy?
After all, the New York Times claims to be “the newspaper of record.”