patrick.net

a car is an inanimate object. So is a gun. Both are tools. Both can be weapons. So can the fists of a 17 year old suspected prowler. And, late at night, in the dark, with the hoodie covering the head, it is very intimidating to interact with someone who is acting like, and looking like, the people you are supposed to be "watching" for as a neighborhood "watchmen". But, I'm just guessing.

Bap33 says

it is very intimidating to interact with someone who is acting like

a gangster. You know what dangerous gang bangers say to strangers (other young people) in their neighborhood ? They say things like "where you from ?" "What are you doing here?"

If Martin was questioned in this way by a guy in an aggressive posture who seemed to have his hand on a gun in his pocket, who knows what his reaction would be.

The thing is, the police told Zimmerman not to engage. Not guessing.

marcus says

If Martin was questioned in this way by a guy in an aggressive posture who seemed to have his hand on a gun in his pocket, who knows what his reaction would be.

My guess is that he would start calling for help.

Oh, wait... that is what he did.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57407964-504083/screams-on-911-call-not-george-zimmerman-forensic-voice-experts-say/

marcus says

The thing is, the police told Zimmerman not to engage. Not guessing.

negative, an operator suggested that Zimmerman remain a hapless victim. But, since Zimmerman was able to conduct his day, and life, without that operators guidance or opinions, then why would anyone think Zimmerman should follow some lone voice? The operator was sitting in a safe place and not a target of a crime wave, was not charged with the responsibility of stopping criminal activity in Zimmermans area, and is not a law officer, so his opinion means little to me, and ment less to Zimmerman. Not guessing.

White, black, yellow or green justice in some form needs to be served. A complete an thorough investigation needs to be done in the Zimmerman/Martin case. The officers and their handling, the 911 operator, the people in the community, the girlfriend on the phone, the requirements of neighborhood watch. Once all the facts are in the case should be handled as any other case. Why did a gated community with problems in the past not have surveillance cameras to back up the neighborhood watch. Who's voice is really on the tape crying out for health. Did Zimmerman receive his injuries in defense of his safety or as the aggressor with a teen that chose to fight back for his safety. Who really is the victim?

ladyc says

Who really is the victim?

We all are, these stories come up all of the damn time. And time and time again, the bleeding heart liberals and the every much accommodating NAACP ACLU and the like always turn it into a race story. When a white guy or a Hispanic guy gets the shitty end of lunatic with badge that should have never been given the job in the first place.
It's just business as usual, "well they've been trained to be cautious, the guy should have stayed in his car, he was given instructions to. He got out and the cop felt nervous and blew him away." Or beat the hell out of him. It's marshal law, cops have more liberties to trample anyones rights at anytime they see fit. They can make up rules as they go along. They can tackle you to the ground, gag you, hand cuff you, throw you in the car, bump your head on the door jamb for good measure, take you down to the station, strip you down and make you squat, and then put you in a tank with real criminals. For any reason they see fit. And even when it's a mistake the only group that has a legal ground to bitch about it are Blacks. The rest of us Sorry Fucks just have to take it up the Ass.

SO until there is a rally cry to change the way ALL Citizens are treated, the don't expect much inertia from the rest of us, for the blacks plight. We're a little busy our selves, getting our Asses handed to us, face down on the pavement with a boot to our necks. We're a little busy right, we'll get back to you.

if "dont taze me bro!" was a negro, there would have been hell to pay, instead of late night comic relief.

I think one needs a lot more information to come to a far conclusion. The link provided in the original post appears to only account for 6,284 murders. The other FBI page states an "estimated 14,748 persons were murdered nationwide in 2010". Some of the other FBI tables list a total of 12,996 murders.

Either way it seems as if thousands of murders are not listed in the link in the original post, therefore one can only spread misinformation when important facts are not made clear.

I think your analysis of the data is not quite right, Patrick. Your statement "white people are much more likely to be murdered by black people in the US than vice versa" seems to disagree with what the data suggests.

I wrote a quick Python script to calculate some expectations given the FBI data you posted, and an assumed population of 308,645,538 (from the 2010 census).

This obviously does not try to address bias in conviction rates or any other imperfections in the data.

The outputs are copied and pasted below:

--
Regardless of your race:
Your odds of being murdered: 2.035333058e-05
Your odds of being murdered by a white: 9.91755223358e-06
Your odds of being murdered by a black: 9.55479395463e-06

Given you are white:
Your odds of being murdered: 1.48837903769e-05
Your odds of being murdered by a white: 1.2423290014e-05
Your odds of being murdered by a black: 1.99971574947e-06

Given you are black:
Your odds of being murdered: 6.99193961705e-05
Your odds of being murdered by a white: 5.60383395778e-06
Your odds of being murdered by a black: 6.32102188174e-05
--

So, if you are white, your odds of being murdered by a black are about 2 in one million. If you are black, your odds of being murdered by a white are about 2.8 times that, or 5.6 in one million.

If you are black, you are about 4.7 times more likely to be murdered than if you are white.

Feel free to check my math!

I personally think your mistake is you do not know the difference between "ratio", "percentage" and "odds". But, nice math.

Do the same math with NBA or NFL and you may realize the mistake you are making - in my opinion.

I don't have a problem with the wording, because I know what he means (well not completely)

but...

2 x 10^-5 or .00002 is 2/100,000 not 2/1,000,000

So it would be 1/50,000

But what do you mean. Today ? This year ? Certainly it isn't the probability of dying by being murdered at any time (versus dying by other causes).

Bap, these are expectations. This analysis is valid if you are willing to draw expectations from the data, as Patrick originally did. This is done in the same manner as how the National Weather Service advertises the odds of getting struck by lightning to be 1E-6 in a given year--they do so by dividing the number of strikes per year by the total population. Does that mean those are the odds that YOU will get struck by lightning? Doubtful--I don't know how you spend your time. If you play golf on mountaintops during thunderstorms, the likelihood will be far greater than if you live inside a subterranean Faraday cage. But for large samples of a large population, that expectation can be applied with reasonably good agreement.

People DO do the same math with the NBA, NFL, and MLB; those statistics ARE part of the equation in sports management decisions (too much so for Brad Pitt, in Moneyball). Future expectations are based on prior performance, but just like with roulette, quantum mechanics, and women, there are no certainties.

Marcus, I agree with your math, but it doesn't seem to disagree with mine. Given you are white, the data suggests that the probability of being murdered by someone who is black is 2E-6 or 2/1,000,000, not 2E-5.

And this data is gathered over a year, so these are expectations that this will occur within a given year. Specifically, the data is from 2010.

1) The black population is 12% of the total population.
2) Blacks commiting murderer are >12% of the total murders.
3) Blacks murdered by blacks are >12% of the total murdered blacks.
4) Whites murdered by blacks are >12% of total murdered whites.

I'm sure the actual numbers can be used in place of "greater than 12%", but I think you see my point.

What is the data on Irish murderers? It is a known fact that Americans with Irish ancestry are 10,000 times more likely to murder a bottle of whiskey than Americans without.

You young kids and your statistics. If you don't correct for the "Irish problem" in your study its worthless.

The answer to this problem is simple - just pack heat, permit or not, and be willing to use it if you are victimized - regardless of media hype and race-baiters. In the end - if is my life or some attackers - I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6....

Sir Moneyworth, you're back! How was your vacation in rural China shooting peasants from a helicopter?

It's called the Paddy Wagon for a reason. :)

Nearly 100% of the Oxy addicts in Appalachia are white. Can I extrapolate a race predilection from this?

CL says

Nearly 100% of the Oxy addicts in Appalachia are white. Can I extrapolate a race predilection from this?

Oxycontin is called "hillbilly heroin" for a reason. ;)

So a rational white person should be about 100 times more afraid of being killed by a car than being killed by a black person.

A rational person should be more afraid of our highways than any other non-health-related danger in the U.S.

I walk to work, and exercise due caution when crossing the street.

msilenus says

A rational person should be more afraid of our highways than any other non-health-related danger in the U.S.

That's because our highways are crawling with ethnic minorities!!!! :)

CL says

That's because our highways are crawling with ethnic minorities!!!! :)

And don't forget black tornados. They've been proven by meteorologists to be far more dangerous than white tornados:

Not dangerous:

Dangerous:

CL says

CaptainShuddup says

There was a black kid back in November, that blew two kids away in a white Honda Civic, while he was hijacking them. He said he shot them, because they didn't look scared enough. Too bad Zimmer Man couldn't have been there to thwart him.

It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's Zimmer Man! Able to leap negative press in a single bound, faster than a running wild rumor, able to stop a loco Motive.

That has no bearing. A senseless murder could have been committed by anyone, regardless of ethnicity, especially if the victims were not "scared enough".

Difference is Zimmerman is a vigilante. A murderous, racist, extra-legal, gun-toting freak who kills innocent children.

He'd probably have shot the two kids, but pretend they wounded him as they struggled to get away.

No, it wasnt asenseless murder it was a racist murder , the problem is that most people ( most cinic and want-to-be politically corect) dont say it but that was a racist crime . If it was the other way around (the white killing 2 blacks)all press would be saying it was a racist crime

Think about it. If a white person is murdered by say a black person in a bad situation, we don't hear about people all across the country protesting for those murdered if they were white. Why is that?

MrMaddog says

Think about it. If a white person is murdered by say a black person in a bad situation, we don't hear about people all across the country protesting for those murdered if they were white. Why is that?

If a white person was murdered by a black person, and everyone knew who that murderer was, and that person wasn't even charged ?

a) I don't believe that's ever happened

b) If it did, people would make assumptions that are different than the assumptions here. Here (with Martin/Zimmerman) the assumptions are that either its massive incompetence, or systemic racism. Whereas if what you said (reversed situation) happened without the known shooter being charged, we would just assume extreme incompetence.

getting back to Patrick. I think you have to include the specific City's ethnic makeup first. So pick a city, look at the ethnic numbers, then start pulling the murder data.
As someone who used to live "in" chicago for 50 years,we might change those population numbers. i dont live there now, and I would give you the opportunity to guess why. but I'll save you the time...
"half of the town is bad news"... IMO...

Unbelievably, Patrick wrote:

"Most murders are within the same race, but even then blacks have a much higher rate of murdering each other than whites do."

My comment:

This sentence can be translated to:

"Most murders are within the same income level, but even then poor people have a much higher rate of murdering each other than rich people do."

Please don't spew this racist nonsense.

it is racist to say blacks = low income, aint it? Or, did you mean that blacks make up >12% of the low income population, in the EXACT same way they make up >12% of the drop out population, teen mom population, unwed births population, and murderer population? If that is what you meant, then that was not racist. But, if you just equated black with low income, that is racist. I think.

Bap33 says

if you just equated black with low income, that is racist. I think.

He (or she) was noting that it's low income blacks and more generally low income demographics in general where crime including murder happen much more. So making a generalization about murder among blacks actually implies something that is not true.

That is (just for you Bap), one might falsely infer that even among middle class (and above), African Americans are more likely to commit murder or be murdered. The latter could be true(being murdered), but if so probably because of communities that include lower income and gangs etc.

Bap33 says

it is racist to say blacks = low income

Also just to help you with your logic a bit more, if hc thought that black = low income, then he (or she) wouldn't have suggested that using one term in this context was racist, and that using the other was not.

HC's point was actually closer to: black does not = low income.

I think Chris Rock had it right: most of the people on welfare are "broke-ass white people." "Broke-ass, living in a trailer-home, eating mayonaise sandwiches, f***ing their sister, and listening to John Cougar Mellencamp records."

Hilarious.

Bap33 says

it is racist to say blacks = low income, aint it? Or, did you mean that blacks make up >12% of the low income population, in the EXACT same way they make up >12% of the drop out population, teen mom population, unwed births population, and murderer population? If that is what you meant, then that was not racist. But, if you just equated black with low income, that is racist. I think.

It is not racist to say black people are poorer than white people. Not in the least. It is a fact. And when you do the research, to find out why this is, it's because black Americans were and still are the most oppressed members of our society. An oppressed people = a poor people, regardless of skin color. And poverty leads to ignorance, which then leads to violence. I'm baffled by how many (not all) white folks don't get this basic fact. Who are the real ignorant one's in the end?

There's no question blacks were the most oppressed in America, historically.

Are they still actively oppressed? Or is a lot of the poverty just "inertia"?

I really don't know, I'm just an average "white guy."

Here's another way to look at it:

Fact: Red cars are more likely to get pulled over by cops

Fact: A red colored car will cost you more money in speeding tickets

Therefore, we can all agree that the color red is costlier than the color blue?

If you paint your house red, will you be more likely to get pulled over by a cop? And same thing if you wear red pajamas? Red is bad, red is bad!

wthrfrk80 says

There's no question blacks were the most oppressed in America, historically.

Are they still actively oppressed? Or is a lot of the poverty just "inertia"?

I really don't know, I'm just an average "white guy."

Funny question: "Are they still actively oppressed?" You mean it's okay to oppress them passively? Like the way a white HR hiring clerk might disregard applications from black people behind closed doors? They are most certainly still oppressed, though not as much as before.

housingcasino4865 says

Like the way a white HR hiring clerk might disregard applications from black people behind closed doors?

If they do that, shame on them.

But do they, in fact, do this? Is there evidence for it? Anything is possible, but the courts don't argue cases based on "mere possibility."

wthrfrk80 says

housingcasino4865 says

Like the way a white HR hiring clerk might disregard applications from black people behind closed doors?

If they do that, shame on them.

But do they, in fact, do this? Is there evidence for it? Anything is possible, but the courts don't argue cases based on "mere possibility."

Of course they do. I don't like saying this, but have you ever socialized with people in and outside of your local community or work? See this:

http://career-advice.monster.com/in-the-office/workplace-issues/do-black-names-matter/article.aspx

"In the movie Coach Carter, a pregnant teenage African American girl is asked what she plans to name her baby. "Loquisha," she says. Her friend replies, "Well, she might as well have the name 'Food Stamps.'"

The point is clear: Loquisha is a "black" name, and names affect destiny. That premise gained scientific backing with "Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination," an MIT-University of Chicago study conducted in 2001 and 2002 and published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) in 2003. Researchers sent 5,000 fictitious resumes for sales, clerical and customer service positions in Chicago and Boston. Applicants with white-sounding names were 50 percent more likely to be called for initial interviews than those with African American-sounding ones. The racial gap was uniform across occupation, industry and employer size."

And keep in mind, the study was done in Boston and Chicago. Both are liberal. Now just imagine what it must be like in Conservative cities.

housingcasino4865 says

That premise gained scientific backing with "Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination," an MIT-University of Chicago study conducted in 2001 and 2002 and published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) in 2003. Researchers sent 5,000 fictitious resumes for sales, clerical and customer service positions in Chicago and Boston. Applicants with white-sounding names were 50 percent more likely to be called for initial interviews than those with African American-sounding ones. The racial gap was uniform across occupation, industry and employer size."

Wow that sucks. I thought that kind of thing was relegated to the past.

I'm in engineering where there are just as many Indians and Asians as "white" people. It's true that there aren't many "blacks" where I work, though. There weren't too many black folks majoring in Engineering either, at least where I went to school (Erie, PA). Sad.

housingcasino4865 says

Here's another way to look at it:
Fact: Red cars are more likely to get pulled over by cops
Fact: A red colored car will cost you more money in speeding tickets
Therefore, we can all agree that the color red is costlier than the color blue?
If you paint your house red, will you be more likely to get pulled over by a cop? And same thing if you wear red pajamas? Red is bad, red is bad!

Maybe that's the problem.

Red = Danger (that's why stop signs are red and red means stop)

Black = Evil (the Black Plague, Black Magic, The Dark Side, Darth Vader's costume is black, etc)