Cobra, you might try looking up the difference between total crime numbers and the crime rate. Then perhaps you wouldn’t make faulty assumptions like the one above.

“I know it’s hard breaking the American mythology of the “black boogeyman” being the root of everything wrong in society.”

“Right wing ideology NEEDS scapegoats and pariahs for it to succeed…”

“Just realize that there are CONSCIOUS African Americans out here like me who won’t suffer damning generalizations quietly.”

Wow. Nothing like three “damning generalizations” to make my day. Well, not really damning, since they’re all rather silly. I particularly liked the backhanded one implying that black people who don’t spout off the way you do are UNconscious. That one was special.

I have an idea, Cobra. Instead of just arguing about this, let’s do something to fix the problem by using your train of logic. First we execute Bill Bennett, then we imprison anyone who fails to denounce him, and finally we burn the crime statistics and never speak of them again. That will make everything better, right?

You’re a victim of stereotypes once again.
One doesn’t have to be arrested, prosecuted and incarcerated to have committed a crime.

You write:

>>>”I read your post thoroughly, Cobra, and I see no evidence that whites necessarily commit as many homocides, etc. than blacks. You concentrated on ONE area of crime–drugs. I don’t find this convincing, because Bennett wasn’t arguing that the drug use rates of blacks are higher.”

Except Bennett didn’t list any SPECIFIC CRIMES. He simply said “crime rate.” He didn’t specify, homicide, illegal drug use, rape, racketeering, or driving while intoxicated. He just said CRIME.

I highlighted a few examples of criminal activity that is overwhelmingly committed by whites, and you either deny that these activities exist, or try to claim that a group representing 12% of the population would commit MORE of these criminal activities.

Both are fallacious conclusions not based upon one whit of evidence.

I know it’s hard breaking the American mythology of the “black boogeyman” being the root of everything wrong in society. Right wing ideology NEEDS scapegoats and pariahs for it to succeed, so I fully understand the passion of the Bennett-buddies to defend their boy. Just realize that there are CONSCIOUS African Americans out here like me who won’t suffer damning generalizations quietly.

–Cobra

>>>”I’m guessing this statement advocates less policing in areas associated with high murder rates and violent crime?”

>>>>>”Are you inferring that segregated neighborhoods are associated with high murder rates and violent crime?”

No, I think he was inferring that areas that are associated with high murder rates and violent crime should have more policing than areas that aren’t.

Which, of course, is RACIST.

It proves either a) the system is racist or b) black people in the U.S. are committing more crimes and thus getting arrested more (if someone has a better theory between these two I’d be interested in hearing it). You haven’t really proven the former or disproven the latter, and so I don’t understand why you automatically leap to conclusion A when it can be explained otherwise.

If the system IS racist, though, you’re just kicking yourself–Maryland is an incredibly liberal state (Dems outnumber Repubs 2-1 here). In fact, there’s a good chance that the more liberal a state is, the more racial disparity there will be in white/black prisoner ratios. (Hmm.)

I understand this topic is difficult because there isn’t a whole lot of trust between certain people and law enforcement. But to suggest that ALL white crime is EXACTLY equal to black crime seems a tad unrealistic. Bennett said the crime rate would go down–he did not suggest how much.

Let’s imagine for a moment what you’re ultimately suggesting: “white people commit the same numbers, if not more, of crimes than black people–they’re just getting away with it.”

Can we assume at least most of the people in prison now are in for something they actually did? I’ll leave at least a partial margin hanging because I know in any situation, there can be wrongful convictions. But in any case, most of the people incarcerated are criminals.

So, if white people are committing just as many homicides, robberies, burglaries, drug abuses, rapes, etc… Wouldn’t that be an awful lot of crimes never being surfaced? I can believe a good number of crimes are never reported, but a good number of crimes committed by both sides are never reported. People get away with crimes constantly–but somehow it seems a bit much.

>>>”I’m guessing this statement advocates less policing in areas associated with high murder rates and violent crime?”

Are you inferring that segregated neighborhoods are associated with high murder rates and violent crime?

Ashtony writes:

>>>”If you’re so eager to tell me I’m Rush-loving racist scum, how about YOU present some evidence that there is NO racial disparities in crime levels? Because all the evidence I have shows a huge difference.”

I guess you didn’t get a chance to read post #57, (which was addressed directly to you) about crime statistics. I humbly invite you to read it again.

Jan writes:

>>>”Speaking of the Irish, my Grandfather immigrated from Ireland.”

Didn’t I see you post on another blog that your Grandfather was black? Was it your maternal or paternal Grandfather?

Jan writes:

>>>”Without a reason to suspect illegal substance abuse activity, police simply cannot invade the privacy of people’s homes. The logistics of doing so are enormous. So, they concentrate their resources in areas where there is generally a high murder rate, assault rate, or high burglary rate.”

Hey now, you need to RE-READ that little Patriot Act one more time. You’d be AMAZED at what law enforcement can do right now in regards to search and seizure, e-mail privacy and wire tapping.

–Cobra

I’m guessing this statement advocates less policing in areas associated with high murder rates and violent crime?

‘explain how Bennett’s statement would apply to the crime rate of St. Petersburg, Russia or Belfast, Ireland’

Let’s say with about 100% certainty that Bennett was referring to the US.

Michael

Btw, my Irish-American horse thief ancestors weren’t really bad folks. They were just horse thieves, is all.

And, of course computer crime is as much of a crime.And, of course doing drugs in one’s own home is illegal. Everyone knows it. It’s odd to me that you feel such a need to point it out. But, you don’t send police into neighborhoods to patrol for hackers. They are difficult to apprehend. When they are, they are getting very severe panalties. Just recently, they caught a hacker student from UT, and he got years in jail. Similarly, police cannot go to people’s doors and check for drug use. Without a reason to suspect illegal substance abuse activity, police simply cannot invade the privacy of people’s homes. The logistics of doing so are enormous. So, they concentrate their resources in areas where there is generally a high murder rate, assault rate, or high burglary rate.

Incidentally, in the last four years, the SEC has done more to uncover corporate crime than has been done in years. The jail sentences are quite stiff, and the prevailing consensus is that there will be zero tolerance, when it is discoverd. Once again, it is very difficult. Right now, they are investigating Fannie Mae, which looks as if it needs wo be bailed out to the tune of $40 billion. It appears that there was a great deal of financial malfeasance..That’s a lot of dough. So, investigations are happening….

I am not exactly sure what you want the police to do..Do you want them to leave the inner cities to deteriorate more than they already are? Do you want them to go into areas with virtually no violent crime or break-ins in case they might see a group of teenagers leaving someone’s house walking funny?

Crime rates simply cannot be determined by the things people are doing that they don’t get caught doing…..as much as you would like that to be true. We don’t arrive at statistics by plucking numbers out of thin air or by guesswork. And, you are highly presumptive about who is doing what, as well as highly selective about which crimes you concentrate on, and which crimes you ascribe to different people. We simply have to go on the incarceration rates, which are consistent with CVS studies…..

Obviously, Bennet’s comments were relatd to the crime rates in America and cannot be extrapolated to other countries. Speaking of the Irish, my Grandfather immigrated from Ireland. At one point in our history, they were known to have a very high illegitimacy rate as well as an astronomical crime rate. IF these are true, and not merely anecdotal, then one could have applied Bennet’s statement to the Irish babies at the time, to reduce the crime rate…Naturally, no one would really propose such a repugnant idea, but from a sheerly mathematical, statistical model, it would be a correct statement.

Gotta run..

If somebody is using illegal drugs, even in the comfort of their own home, they are committing a crime.

If a suburban teenager with an IQ of 150 hacks into your bank account and cleans you out, he or she is committing a crime that is just as illegal as a teenager with an IQ of 90 pick-pocketing your wallet.

The allocation and concentration of police resources is more indicative of how still SEGREGATED American society is, along with the prevalance of racial profiling and insufficient legal counsel for poor and minority citizens in America, but if you still need an example, explain how Bennett’s statement would apply to the crime rate of St. Petersburg, Russia or Belfast, Ireland, since “black babies” doesn’t distinguish nationality.

–Cobra

So, either the individual draws attention to themself by illegal activity such as speeding or stealing or public intoxication, violence, or murder…

Or:
The individual indulges in the activity in an area that is heavily policed because it is a high crime area, in which the homicide rate is many times the overall national rate. Ergo, they receive more scrutiny. This is a more complex situation in that the police are in that area to protect the population from predators, who are literally making it difficult for the children to go out and play and for normal life to take place. Yet, the fact remains,that the population in that area is also under heavier scrutiny. Drinking was illegal in Saudi, but most had the sense how and where to do it reasonably. But, there were many who lacked judgment, and ended up in jail.

You did not mention that burglary is far more common in low socio-economic areas to support drug habits. The result of this is that the neighborhood becomes terrorized, people flee, business leaves, the tax base flattens out, business crumbles, schools fail…..

You continually speak of high school students who anecdotally admit to doing drugs. etc..The point of police intervention is to protect innocent victims from crimes that people may commit against them. You seem so concerned about whether people are snorting coke in the privacy of their homes (and I abhor drugs), but, in reality, most of us are far more concerned about murder and other forms of violent crime…

>>>”In 1999, an essay was published that said, flat out, “blacks are 8 times more likely than whites to commit homicide.” I guess white people were making them do it?

The fact that prisons are racially out of proportion doesn’t prove there’s racism in the system. And just because white drug users are somehow getting away with it more than black users doesn’t prove the system is racist.”

You fall into the same stereotype trap. Again, there are THOUSANDS of crimes on books. Apparently, you’re fixated on the ones that white conservative talk show hosts want you to in regards to blacks. That’s your right.

The Flat Earth Society has a right to their opinions as well.

–Cobra

>>>”Actually I call you pompous ill informed biased because you ONLY call white conservatives on the carpet (a sign of your own bias and mindset)and refuse to challenge the lying pompous hypocritical liberal media figures, both black and white, on the carpet, for the same thing and worse!”

The title of this thread is “Bennett Redux.” A neutral, outside person reading this thread would ASSUME it’s about BILL BENNETT, not any black face you would like to throw up as a counter example. I have discussed BILL BENNETT, and his radio strategy for attracting more conservative listeners, akin to Rush Limbaugh.

What is so hard to comprehend about this? I was once a BLACK BABY. Bill Bennett was talking about ME. If YOU were once a black baby, he was discussing YOU AS WELL.

–Cobra

Bennett’s preconceived idea/notion about a people is not created before and does not disappear after the context (radio program); even if you remove the context the idea/notion would not change. This notion/idea is deeply rooted in his perception of the world, his worldview. By implying that the radio context created the notion/idea is to misunderstand and completely underestimate the SPEAKERS knowledge of what’s been discussed. “Taken of context” is an argument of resistance and not factual because the idea/notion is not dependant on the context but dictated it, created the context, the context is dependent on the idea/notion. Racism is not just about what is said in one given context or another but a way of perceiving the world, a worldview.

“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery – then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” This implication is a very good example of a preconceived idea/notion about who is a potential robber and who is not: “- /–/ and see somebody white and feel relieved.” The notion of who is most likely to be a robber does not change even if the person is eating dinner or walking on the street. The interesting question here is; is the preconception based on a personal experience or statistics? The statement falls in the same category as the SPEAKER (Bill Bennet) For example, is your knowledge of Jesse Jackson based on your personal experience or on literature?

I suggest you learn to understand what you read or hear, especially when you choose to take comments out of context, and do so in order to justify your own bias and prejudices!” Well, you don’t need to blow your own trumpet if you dual in telling people how bias and prejudice they are. Remember, this is a discussion where we learn from each other and not about winning, rather to broaden our scope of knowledge and to understand ourselves better and hopefully be better people….. but not until we admit the fact that we can learn from each other.

The film director’s intention/opinion or the point he/she wants to make dictates what comes before and after. And what comes before and after are very, very important in making the director’s point/opinion. But they don’t create the opinion/idea/notion of the film producer. Am sure you are familiar with the principle of “EDITING”, a film, a book and so fort.

For the sake of good discussion let’s maintain the ethics of discussion, name calling is….