re: “Relevant Statistics” Thread

quote:

---

So if we are better trying to understand the issue of violence should the 1,000 number be the victim’s race or the offender’s race?

---

The victim's race.

In other words, in any given year, a white person has a 3.1 in 1000 chance of being a victim of a black offender, and a 12 in 1000 chance of being a victim of a white offender. Similarly, a black person has a 2.8 in 1000 chance of being a victim of a white offender, and a 16.5 in 1000 chance of being a victim of a black offender.

Again, per the data, page 4.

quote:

---

Okay, genius, tell us how this math is wrong -

59,778 violent crimes perpetrated on blacks by 197 million whites = 30 whites out of every 100,000 whites violently victimize a black

547,948 violent crimes perpetrated on whites by 38 million blacks = 1441 out of every 100,000 blacks violently victimize a white

1441/30 = 47.5

So blacks are 47.5 times more likely to violently victimize whites than whites are likely to violently victimize blacks

---

Well, you did the arithmetic right, but unfortunately you have failed the word problem part.

The actual likelihood that a black will commit a crime against a white, and vice versa, is laid out plainly in the actual data, which I have linked several times now, and which some of you flatly ignore in favor of the meaningless math that you have performed above for no reason.

It ignores the fact that the pool of victims from which you took the data is 5X larger for black offenders than for whites.

quote:

---

He’s a hardcore prog

---

I am not.

quote:

---

so he’s obligated to believe that whites/cops are hunting down blacks in the streets.

---

I have never made any claims remotely close to this.

quote:

---

He also cheered on the coronavirus with uncommon devotion.

---

I did not do this, either.

quote:

---

Dude will argue the minutiae of one part of one graph.

---

The minutiae? I'm talking about an order of magnitude error.

quote:

---

Deliberately missing the forest for the trees bc the movement must go on, whether it’s grounded in fact or not.

---

OP is using bunk numbers to create a movement.

All I can say is the thread and the attached documents support the targeting of a victim’s race is not the motive in these incidents. I wish people would stop focusing on race in these studies because that doesn’t lead to the strongest solutions and improvements.

They should focus on behavioral factors, economics, and education. Then you can ask what communities are disproportionally affected by those factors. That then leads to improving those factors for that community regardless of race.

quote:

---

All I can say is the thread and the attached documents support the targeting of a victim’s race is not the motive in these incidents. I wish people would stop focusing on race in these studies because that doesn’t lead to the strongest solutions and improvements.

They should focus on behavioral factors, economics, and education. Then you can ask what communities are disproportionally affected by those factors. That then leads to improving those factors for that community regardless of race.

---

I don't disagree with your point at all. The mammoth divide in this country is about economics, not race, gender or orientation.

I think these stats and how they're presented is more about batting back the false narratives out there, that blacks are being hunted down by white supremacists (and cops) and are in a struggle for life every day. And it's not like that false narrative isn't having a dramatic impact on every single American today.

quote:

---

It means nothing unless we assume that the victim’s race is a motive in the violence. I would say it is useless and that study yielded exactly that.

That information means absolutely nothing. You should be focused on why certain groups are producing a certain rate of violent offense by offenders.

---

Race is usually NOT a factor, and that is exactly what I'm trying to say. Most violent crime is against people we know, probably followed by random crimes of opportunity, then race-related is further down the line.

OP and his dozens of upvoters are making it about race using bunk math.

~65% of violent crime is committed against whites, and whites are ~61% of the population. Nothing out of proportion there. ~11% of violent crime is committed against blacks, and they make up ~13% of the population. Not too out of proportion there. 62% of crime against whites is committed by whites, and 70% of crime against blacks is committed by blacks. The majority is against people we know. No surprise there.

If someone manages to work that data over to produce anything close to 45X, they've fricked up. In this case, specifically, the frick up is in adjusting for demographics twice.

quote:

---

using bunk math

---

Fail.

quote:

---

It's not a word problem.

It's logic.

---

Same thing.

quote:

---

It's not victimhood everybody is discussing. That's seriously stupid.

---

quote:

---

It's about who's committing the violent crimes. It's about offenders. And the relevant math is:

59,778 violent crimes perpetrated on blacks by 197 million whites = 30 whites out of every 100,000 whites violently victimize a black

547,948 violent crimes perpetrated on whites by 38 million blacks = 1441 out of every 100,000 blacks violently victimize a white

1441/30 = 47.5

So blacks are 47.5 times more likely to violently victimize whites than whites are likely to violently victimize blacks

---

Still a meaningless number.

quote:

---

So answer these two question, Kork- focusing on only blacks and white:

Who is more likely to commit a violent crime against a person of the other race, a black or a white?

---

Black.

quote:

---

And by how big a factor is that difference?

---

A factor roughly 2X out of proportion from the demographics.


Now you answer a question: of all random violent crime, why do you care about ~63% of the acts committed by blacks and only ~13% of the acts committed by whites? And then why in the world would you adjust for demographics that data which is already cherry-picked demographically?

You seem to be struggling with something internal.