It seems like we all agree that racism plays a role in some cases--not none, but not all, which is BLM's position. We just disagree about how often it plays a role, and whether anything further should be done to try to minimize that effect.
Just households, not looking at people per household. If you had three generations living in one house, that would be one household. And if any one of those three generations had a car, that'd be a household with a car. What was found by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials was that about 7% of white households in 2011 didn't have a car. And 20% of black households in 2011 didn't have a car. Looking at household numbers for 2010, we see about 83.5 million white households, and 15.1 million black households. So those percentages come out to be about 5.8 million white households without a car, and 3.1 million black households without a car. I'm not sure the average number of people per household per race. That'd be somewhat helpful in trying to figure out what percentage of each population doesn't have a car, though. No idea concerning the traffic stop data. If its worth looking into, I can see what I can find. What are you thinking, regarding the number of occupants per vehicle?
The hell are you talking about? Because I specifically said traffic stops, not encounters. When I say encounters, I'll use a word that starts with en, and ends in counters.
I think it's possible that a higher percentage of black people break laws than other races, because they tend to have less money and less education--not because they're black. I also think that difference in percentage is inflated by selective enforcement.
There appears to be, even at a glance, a much more systemic, easily identifiable and egregious amount of sexism than racism, amongst our law enforcement and criminal justice systems. Maybe there are .00006% more Native Hawaiians who are currently incarcerated than their representative population amongst all Anericans, and we should just start there, instead. You know, work our way up.
You said "traffic stops". My post pointed out the illogical nature of limiting the measurement of encounters with law enforcement to traffic stops, alone. I don't know if you should speed up or slow down, but to this point, you're making a terribly awful group spokesperson. Maybe let Nash or IP take over, or hell, maybe Indy or Un can drop in and lend you a hand.
Please cite your proof. I look forward to seeing it, and will congratulate you on its support of your claim.
Well, how else does one be black, vs white, if not for type of melanin? How would they? What is their difference that would cause it. No it isn't. No, I haven't. No, it isn't. No, it doesn't. It's just a distinguishing characteristic. Not a cause. When you misapply everything said, and call it logic, but it isn't, we get into this quote thing where I have to refute every friggen thing you say as false. Again, it's a distinguishing characteristic used to break out numbers. Because if we just looked at numbers, it'd be really hard to figure out what was what. Because, you know, they're just numbers. I answered your question, I said no. The difference between black and white is the type of melanin produced. The history and culture you refer to is HUMAN history and culture, and trying to segregate it out... is called segregation. Race shouldn't matter. It has in the past, and we are still feeling its ills. It is quite simply that simple. I don't know how to prove anything to you, relating to math or statistics.
I didn't limit it, it was limited for me. I responded to posts. You know, the thingss we're doing here.
I am now going to challenge you Tenny. You can either backtrack on what you said about what I said being racist, or you can ban me for making a racist statement, if you think it was racist, even unintentionally racist.
Some clarity. Thank you. There may be any number of reasons why black people commit more crime (and, I'm still uncertain if they, in fact, do) - and literally none of which may be in any way within their ability to control, or are possible to be mitigated in any way. Poverty and a general lack of educational opportunities seem like to excellent starting points in identifying why this may be true, if such is proven to be true. But these are societal problems, and law enforcement is not, by definition, concerned with why anyone commits a crime, but only that they did or are suspected of it. Can we at least agree on this?
Fair. You have no evidence to support your assertion that every racial demographic possess an equal percentage of violent persons, and which served as the presumptive basis of your prior post and previous example. Instead, this is merely your personal belief and opinion, but which cannot be supported with fact. And also, it remains a plausible possibility that some racial demographics may have a higher or lower number of violent persons, counted amongst them. Roger that.
I have been saying this thing, for literally... days. Hell, I said this: And not a drop of race was in the post. It's pretty well exactly the thing you are arguing with me about.
Some challenge. I'd ban you from your silly argument, but then I'd need your help to do that, both in theory and action.
Do you believe that BLM is correct in its assertion that law enforcement and the criminal justice system is racist against black people?
