Last edited by Nutcracker, sweet; 4/20/2012 7:28am at .
Wow, it's almost as if his head was smashed into the ground several times.
Crime statistics based on what? A previous era where unbiased policing was done?
Originally Posted by tgace
Face it. You target the poor and the brown and find what you're looking for where you look hardest. Then you punish them harder and stigmatize them more, making them less employable and less enfranchised when they get out.
You talk about statistics but they're statistics for a game you're practically forcing people to play...
The crime is everywhere. You find it where you look. But a six figure white male in a lexus gets caught with coke, he gets chewed by the system way less then someone with colored skin caught with a poor person's drug. He gets lower charges, better lawyers, less time, more rehab, and is less likely to be a permanent resident of the system.
Corrections data shows this definitively.
Crime is not normally distributed across all populations. It is not "everywhere." The clearest example is murder because it is the easiest to identify (i.e. you have a corpse) and it has the highest clearance (~solve) rate. There have been years in this country where the absolute number of blacks killed has been greater than the number of whites, even though blacks are a much smaller fraction of US population. About 90% of all murders are intra-racial. Other violent crime shows similar patterns.
Originally Posted by JohnnyCache
As I've said before, criminals tend to victimize the people in the own neighborhoods/class/race. Putting black criminals away tends to help the law abiding black people that they would have otherwise victimized.
You should read this: http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0514hm.html
Here are the crime data that the Times doesn’t want its readers to know: [in New York City] blacks committed 66 percent of all violent crimes in the first half of 2009 (though they were only 55 percent of all stops and only 23 percent of the city’s population). Blacks committed 80 percent of all shootings in the first half of 2009. Together, blacks and Hispanics committed 98 percent of all shootings. Blacks committed nearly 70 percent of all robberies. Whites, by contrast, committed 5 percent of all violent crimes in the first half of 2009, though they are 35 percent of the city’s population (and were 10 percent of all stops). They committed 1.8 percent of all shootings and less than 5 percent of all robberies. The face of violent crime in New York, in other words, like in every other large American city, is almost exclusively black and brown. Any given violent crime is 13 times more likely to be committed by a black than by a white perpetrator
Beat me to it....people confuse FBI/DOJ statics with local crime statistics.
You want to know how we determine trouble areas? We track where crime occurs based on VICTIM'S complaints. If there is a high level of armed robbery in a neighborhood....or a rash of burglaries....we put cops there. We determine that based on people complaining about being robbed.
The "you find crime there only because you look there" meme... implying we ignore other areas out of some sort of racial bias... is the typical hippy/hater claptrap.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
Ok so I 100% support this argument, but that may only be because it's exactly the point I tried to make like 50 pages ago lol.
Originally Posted by Vince Tortelli
Zimmerman apologizes on the stand; bail set at $150,000. Will have a GPS tracker, and can possibly leave the state for his own safety.
Last edited by Nutcracker, sweet; 4/20/2012 12:14pm at .
Reason: add possibly
Honestly, the more details I get the more I think Zimmerman's going to walk if he doesn't cave in and take a plea.
Murder 2 ain't happening. Corey caved to the immense political pressure. I don't think manslaughter would stick either if he'd fight it.
The guy looks innocent to me. He was being nosey but I don't see where he committed a crime. Looks to me like he was returning to his car when Martin approached him and started beating his ass. I don't think he stepped outside the law and I don't think the prosecutor can prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for any crime.
It's true there could be details that could change things. But my gut feeling is that we're starting to get a pretty good picture of what happened. It may piss people off to no end that he may have noticed Martin because of his race, etc. That doesn't make it a crime though.
If Zimmerman would have been an inshape alive practicing martial artist this could easily have been "kid gets rnc" instead of one dead and one ruined for life.
Way to keep up, that was only posted like 1000 posts ago.
Originally Posted by David Koresh Jr.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO