"Not A White Problem"
The Chicago police are racist, just look at those statistics. 75% of murder victims were black, of course, 75% of murder perpetrators were black as well. And everyone knows that whites kill a whole lot of blacks, except that whites only comprise about 4% of the total murder perpetrators. They also comprise about 4% of the total murder victims.
What's going on here?
In a few words, the core problems are the breakdown of the inner city family, drugs, and crime recidivism. Nearly every year, violent criminals are 75-80% of the time, known criminals.
All of this has hit black families, and young black men the hardest. They have become uncivilized, they have become feral. Yes, many white and hispanic young men are equally as violent, and dangerous, but the numbers have yet to reach epidemic proportions.
"There are approximately 8,000 gun related homicides annually in the U.S. The vast majority occur in the urban ghettos and are committed by blacks and hispanics against other blacks and hispanics. They use illegally acquired guns, so more gun laws will do nothing. Their lawless culture, requiring no personal responsibility by those who father children, creates the dysfunction and crime. The urban ghetto kill zones all have the same thing in common – run by liberal Democrats for decades, with poverty created by their welfare policies, dreadful public schools, and a black population who don’t work and take no personal responsibility for their lives or their children.
Here are the murders by city for a sampling of these shitholes:
Los Angeles – 587
Chicago – 508
NYC – 333
Detroit – 316
Phila – 248
Baltimore – 233
New Orleans – 150
Indianapolis – 129
Memphis – 124
St. Louis – 120
Milwaukee – 104
Washington DC – 103"
This is harsh, but true. It is not just blacks, but they are the most affected by these external factors.
"The entire gun narrative peddled by liberals is false. The crime rate has been falling for 25 years. There were 24,703 murders in 1991 when the population was 253 million. Murders in 2014 totaled 14,249 with a population of 317 million. The willfully ignorant American public completely buys the falsehoods presented by Obama and believes murders and crime are skyrocketing.
Today, the national crime rate is about half of what it was at its height in 1991. Violent crime has fallen by 51 percent since 1991, and property crime by 43 percent. In 2013 the violent crime rate was the lowest since 1970. And this holds true for unreported crimes as well. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, since 1993 the rate of violent crime has declined from 79.8 to 23.2 victimizations per 1,000 people."
Again, all true. It seems odd that we continue to discuss gun violence when it is at its lowest point, or is near its lowest point, in modern US history, but there you have it.
We live in a period so safe for most of the US population, that no American in history has experienced such safety. Yet in our inner cities, is a cancer, which continues to grow and metastasize.
This chart is enlightening. Whenever Americans allow socialist policies to come to the fore, the homicide rate rises. Union anti-gun laws just after the turn of the 20th century started the first wave, it was accelerated by alcohol prohibition. Both of these are socialist laws, government regulating things for the betterment of society, but always doing the opposite. After prohibition ended, so did the homicide wave, and we began to settle back towards the low homicide/violent crime rates which were the norm in America.
But after the JFK assignation, Congress had to put on its socialist hat, act, and regulate, and as expected violent crime, and homicide rates rose. We then decided to do the unfathomable, and repeat the alcohol prohibition failure, only this time with drugs. All of this was, or should be seen as criminal, as it caused violent crime, and homicide to skyrocket past the prohibition era highs.
While the federal government has remain intransigently, and incompetently wed to socialist control of the people, the people themselves in the various states took control in their own hands, and began to relax the patently idiotic gun laws. And as expected, we saw a massive, and, to the "experts," surprising decline in homicide and violent crime. It was not surprising, it should have been expected.
"So, with homicides at a 25 year low and completely confined to the urban ghettos where young black men kill other young black men, we need new gun laws to restrict what white people can own? It makes you wonder. Why has the government militarized local police forces across the country in white communities when crime and murder is virtually non-existent in those communities? Why is Obama and his liberal nazi hordes trying to ban any gun capable of providing defense against a tyrannical government? Why has this become a war on whites when it is solely a black problem? It’s almost as if the government is treating working class whites with guns as the enemy. I wonder."
Jim Quinn is being inflammatory, but the issue merits inflammatory verbiage. Progressives have created a problem with the welfare state's incompetent construction, its extraordinarily bad timing, and modern policies in our cities designed to keep the welfare hoard on the plantation, and voting for the progressive candidates. Criminally, it is commonly black politician, herding a black electorate, while making off with vast amount of corrupt lucre. For all their protestations, these people care not a whit about "their" people, but only wish to steal as much from them as possible, and keep them on the voting plantation.
Gun control is a mechanism through which the authoritarian progressives whip up hate and envy against the more liberty minded. The progressives only want control, and there can be none, if the populace is armed. They need helpless sheeple, then they will be able to begin implementing policies, socializing the masses, herding them into small enclaves, or as the Brits call them, estates. It is all very Orwellian.
While this is a problem I write about frequently, Jim Quinn misses an ancillary point which is of at least equal concern. The natural born radicalized blacks.
Baton Rouge shooter called for black people to 'fight back'
"The gunman who shot dead three police officers and wounded another three in Baton Rouge has been revealed as an egotistical former Marine who later became a lifestyle guru and used the Internet to urge black people to 'fight back through bloodshed.'
Gavin Eugene Long, 29, of Kansas City, Missouri, to Louisiana, opened fire on officers after police were called to a gas station on Airline Highway at around 8.30am on Sunday - his 29th birthday.
Long did not lure the officers to their deaths, as previous reports stated, but ambushed them after a member of the public called 911, Louisiana State Police's Col. Mike Edmonson said.
* * *
Long, who claimed to have once been a member of the Nation of Islam, also declared himself a 'sovereign citizen' - part of a movement that believes the government and police hold no authority over them.
In a 2011 bulletin, the FBI said it 'considers sovereign-citizen extremists as comprising a domestic terrorist movement' and called the group a 'growing domestic threat to law enforcement.'"
As I learned back in the college in the 1970s, disaffected young men are a potent force for either good, or evil. Progressives have spend the past 50 years engineering the perfect disaffected young man, in our inner city, the young, unemployed, unemployable, welfare dependent, black man (yes, whites, and hispanics will be similarly situated, but it is the blacks with the near total breakdown of the black family, 70% are born to single female parents, which will be most affected.)
Here is a link to Eric Hoffers book, The True Believer both free online, and for a very low price at Amazon, please read the entire book:
Our world is becoming a very strange place. We fear violent, uncivilized, or feral, radicalized Arab muslims because of their propensity to terrorism. Yet our inner cities team with equally feral, violent, Americans. All that would be necessary to touch off this powder keg is for a radicalized mass movement to wash through the inner city's disaffected young men with the promise of a bright future, if only the true believer will act under the direction of the movements leader. Utopia is a powerful dream, and the disaffected need something powerful to dream about.
Whether this dream comes at the hand of a mass movement titled, Islamic, or "sovereign citizen" the outcome is likely to be similar - murder, and mayhem. We need to control the problem of young disaffected blacks being swayed into this movement, and soon. If we do not, it will surely grow, and become even more dangerous than it is currently.
We also need to begin to quickly modify our drug laws, our welfare laws, and many of the regulations, including work rule regulations, which keep young people from working, and especially keep young black men from working.
Drug laws must be treated similarly to prohibition, the creation of contraband always results in crime, and corruption. Here because most of the crime and corruption has occurred in the inner city, and mostly among blacks, it is far from the middle class. It is also easy to villainize those engaged in trade of the prohibited contraband. This only allows the problem to continue, fester, and worsen. We need to find a way to legalize, control, eliminate the crime, and corruption endemic to this problem. While I do not support legalizing street drugs, I do support the purchase of pharmaceuticals, over the counter for recreational use, but with only limited protections concerning fraud, and adulteration, no protections for improper use, etc.
Welfare laws while they are designed to assist people in a resumption of their regular lives after a catastrophic change in economic status, too often they become a lifestyle with the recipient living on the dole for long periods of time. Further, nearly all welfare systems in the US result in the recipient receiving much more in value by not working than if they work. This must change, and the recipient must be required to work to continue in the program after a few months. The concept should be 3 months, then back on your feet, or the state will provide work. Further, assistance must be crafted so that as the individual earns more, his lifestyle improves, and he has more money available for incidentals. Today, the individual commonly faces cutoffs where significant benefits will be rapidly reduced if he earns even a small amount more. This creates the situation where the individual feels the obligation to earn only an amount below the cutoff. And so become a welfare "lifer."
Work rules, and regulations like the minimum wage destroy the ability of the poor, and the unskilled to obtain that first job, which will teach them many of the skills necessary to work productively. No employer can afford to pay a young man $15 per hour if that young man comes from the inner city, and does not have even rudimentary work skills. These people don't dress appropriately, use appropriate language, have an appropriate amount of grit, respect authority, understand the need to be timely, work hard, or anything else. They will require a huge investment of time by higher paid people to instruct, and train them, and while they are being trained they will likely be unproductive, perhaps returning the employer a few dollars per hour in value. No employer will undertake this task, especially since the chance that any one of these individuals will work out is far less than 50/50.
Other work rules driving the price of worker above the value are things like mandatory time off, mandatory healthcare, and other mandates. Extensive reporting requirements are expensive, and also drive the price of employment up.
All of these things require the worker to be more productive, yet the inner city kid has none of the skills necessary to be productive. Who does? More commonly the upper middle class kids, or the middle class kids. And so these work rules which appear to favor the poor, favor the wealthier, and injure the poor.
While this seem to be counterintuitive, that is only because we commonly fail to understand that progressivism, and its sisters, socialism, fascism, and other authoritarianisms, are simply heresy of feudalism. They are essentially feudalism removed from landed agriculture and applied to industrial society. They are authoritarian. They want to control others, because they believe deep down, that its good to be King.
The current "Black Lives Matter" movement may have benign roots, but ultimately it is dangerous. The people who lead the movement do not believe one work of their mantra, if they did, they would not be focusing on the tiny, although real problem of police shooting black men. They would be focusing on the real problem thousands of black men shooting thousands of other black men. Policing needs reforms, it will always need reforms. But the fertile place to make Black Lives Matter is in the inner city, by altering progressive Democrat policies, and institutions to return a modicum of personal responsibility, and to change the water in which the criminal fish swim. Yet they speak not a word about these matters; the very location where nearly every black in America who will die by violence will die.
The leaders of the movement have another agenda, a political agenda, and it has nothing to do with Black Lives Matter(ing) it has everything to do with the promulgation, and success of the progressive movement, and moving the marker one step further towards authoritarian control for the progressive movement. Or to be clear, more dead young black men. And more corrupt lucre for the progressive politicians.
By focusing on gun laws, work rules, work benefits, and all of the other non-issues, the progressives only fog the issues, distracting you from truth. These things do not matter.
Progressivism must be fought, the fight must start now, we must be relentless.
Black Lives do Matter, and only by eliminating progressivism will we be able to make that happen.
Before signing off, this data must also be kept in the back of ones mind:
This is not the data we might expect from the discussion above. While blacks are more violent, they are not the most commonly killed by police. They are killed in about 2X their proportion of the population, this should not surprise.
Analysis of Washington Post police-shootings data reveals surprising result
"Now, many folks calculate the death rates of the groups by comparing the numbers killed, to the corresponding numbers of that group in the general population … but you can’t do that. It leads to wildly incorrect conclusions. Here is an example that shows why comparing numbers of police shootings to the corresponding number of individuals in the general population leads to big errors:
Men make up about 50% of the general population, but men comprise 96% of those killed by police. Does this huge number of “excess male deaths” prove that the police are being sexist and that they are biased against men? Does this imbalance in the number of men killed mean that we need a “Male Lives Matter Too” movement?
Of course not. Instead, it simply demonstrates that men both commit and are arrested for far more crimes of violence than women; that men are far more likely than women to both carry and use weapons; that men are far more likely to both threaten and commit serious violence against a police officer than are women; and most importantly, that men are far more likely than women to violently resist arrest."
Stupidity. They don't want to be arrested, and believe that if they get away they will never be caught, or something. Ain't gonna happen. So, they fight, threaten the police officer, and end up being killed by the superiorly trained officer. Tragic.
The author notes that it is whites who are killed nearly twice as often by police than blacks, white death by police rate is 38/10,000, while black is 21/10,000.
You need to read the entire article.