Update II (1/3): See “Hispanic-on-Black Violence: Protestors, Where Are You?”
Update: If Darrent Williams’s killer is black, expect to hear no more about the case. However, if the killer is white, expect man-bites-dog media coverage.
Also not of interest to the “black community” or white liberal media: latino-on-black crime.
Nifong responds to media after his swearing in ceremony (video).
——————————————————————
Why did certain blacks in Durham, North Carolina, rally around a black stripper claiming to have been gang raped by three white men but virtually ignore the more destructive trend of black-on-black crime in their midst? (Duke blogger KC Johnson elaborates on blacks’ deafening silence about the latest developments in the so-called rape case.)
Last year, four young black men were murdered by a black man in a drug-related incident, and I don’t remember the national or local NAACP or black citizens of Durham protesting against the perpetrator. I don’t recall the so-called New Black Panthers showing up at the courthouse and shouting him down, either.
New Black Panther member Bruce Bridges said, “We’re here today because a human life has been violated in the city of Durham, and we’re here seeking justice.” (Source)
Isn’t death a more serious violation than rape? Isn’t taking a human life the ultimate violation?
Durham County School Board member Jackie Wagstaff reportedly said, “I am here with these brothers because it appears Durham does not want to see the truth.”
What about the truth of “brothers” killing other “brothers”? Were Bridges and Wagstaff protesting in front of the courthouse or in front of the murderer’s house after he killed four black men? Why is it that black “activists” shout and camera-hog about rumors of white-on-black crimes but express no outrage about black-on-black crime that goes on daily?
My assessment is well-known. It is neither profitable nor psychically satisfying to speak out against or address black-on-black violence. So-called black leaders and others inclined to protest have no interest in chastising their own people for living careless, reckless, fruitless, and crime-saturated lives. Guilt-tripping whites is where the money and other perks are.
Columnist DeWayne Wickham wrote about this strange phenomenon. Last month, Kevin West (and others), the son of a friend, was killed in a typical black-on-black, drug-related crime. He wrote (emphasis added):
As troubling as it is that [Sean] Bell’s life might have been cut short by the unlawful actions of some rogue cops, it bothers me more that most of this nation’s black murder victims are killed by other blacks. And despite this chilling fact, nowhere have tens of thousands of people taken to the streets recently to protest this carnage. Not in New York, or Baltimore, or Atlanta, or Detroit, or Chicago. Nowhere.
…
Of the country’s 14,860 homicide victims in 2005, 7,125 were black, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. And of the 3,289 cases that year in which a single black was killed by a single assailant, the FBI says, 91% of the killers were black.Let me put this another way: The number of blacks killed in 2005 in this one homicide category alone approaches the total of all the blacks lynched in this country from 1882 to 1968, according to records maintained by Tuskegee University.
Wickham wonders, as I do, why blacks turned out in droves to “protest” police actions in the killing of Sean Bell in New York City, but West’s death was a footnote. No need to wonder. Entitlements and concessions are what they care about, not black lives. Ironically enough, one of Bell’s killers may have been black, but all we read and heard were implications of white racism. Dolts.
Also see “No, the Cops Didn’t Murder Sean Bell.”
Now, what could be happening is that blacks are protesting against and ranting about black-on-black crime, and the jaded media simply fail to report it. After all, black-on-black and black-on-white crimes are more common, but just the perception of white-on-black crime gets their investigative reporting juices flowing. Possibly…but not likely. If blacks are protesting against something, you better believe a reporter from somebody’s newspaper will be there.
Look, I understand the all-too-human tendency to point fingers, but important to the development of good character is a willingness to face hard truths. Black crime rates are out of control, and it’s not white peoples’ faults. Criminality and incarceration (however brief) is a defining characteristic of black subculture. The least of our concerns are drunk white men at house parties or perceived “racist” police shootings. If white cops want to kill black men and white boys want to rape black women, they’ll need to kill and violate a hell of a lot of them to catch up to black-on-black crime stats.
Post takeaway: Hypocrisy and idiocy are equal opportunity afflictions.
Addendum: Lots of Duke news at The Johnsville News.
Also see Harry Jackson’s “Open Letter to the Black Community” and Thomas Sowell’s “The real issue at Duke.”
Related posts:
White liberals explain away black on black crime as the fault of whites. They lament the inequitable system that forces blacks into lives of violence. So you see, those crime statistics that you just collected can’t make the black community more introspective or self-reproaching, it can only just make them angrier at whites, because it’s all white people’s fault anyway.
Comment by Jen M. in Durham — 01.02.07 @ 10:06 am
The subculture of protection and denial in the entrenched black “community” is extraordinary.
This gal “Crystal” in the Duke case has two children and a third one in the wings. Every teacher knows what these innocent kids are likely to bring to the classroom.
Just as you can’t unscramble eggs, it is nearly impossible to undo the damage that mal-parenting creates.
I know far too many old folks who are raising their grandchildren. This is not because “it takes a village to raise a child.” It is because there is a pervasive willingness to look the other way at the viral pathologies that have infected the street. And somethimes, people don’t become adults until late in life.
Until the black “community” rises up against its own bad actors, it will continue to be meaningless yelling about affirmative action, racism and reparations.
The smart black family gets out of the mix and attends to business. Thank God, that is becoming more common.
Poverty of the soul is the worst form of poverty.
Comment by Heliotrope — 01.02.07 @ 10:23 am
Burning the House of the Civil Rights Industry
Well La Shawn Barber is opening up the new year with a can of whip butt for the Poverty Pimps of the Civil Rights Industry and their selective outrage when it comes to crime.
She notes:
…
Criminality and incarceration (however brief) is a def…
Trackback by Independent Conservative — 01.02.07 @ 11:13 am
LaShawn, you’re focused on homicide, but I suggest looking at the rates and stats for all violent assaults for a better overall crime picture. The graphs show that black homicide (both victims and perps) are at a 30-year low; in Milwaukee homicide was down in 2006 but shootings were up; one of the reasons cited by the local paper is that 90% of gunshot victims are saved by EMT crews and ER staff. I’m sure the cause/motivation of any particular shooting (or knife attack, etc) is the same whether or not the victim is DOA.
I think we may start to see some outrage after Denver Broncos player Darrent Williams was murdered yesterday after a “disagreement” in a nightclub. It’s easy for media to pass over the senseless death of a random kid on Milwaukee’s north side because outside of his neighborhood he’s unknown, but harder to dismiss the senseless death of someone seen on TV by millions across the country every Sunday.
Unfortunately, I expect the outrage will probably be aimed at the existance of guns instead of on the culture that encourages people to end “disagreements” with bullets.
Comment by Radish — 01.02.07 @ 11:43 am
DeWayne Wickham and you are on mark.
And to his great credit, Bill Cosby, even after his own son was killed by a Ukrainian immigrant in a rare white on black robbery-murder, continued to hammer away on black leaders and audiences that the number #1 crime problem in inner cities, was black thugs, gangsters, and “knuckheads” preying on other blacks. Cosby said it will persist until community leaders stop excusing black thugs as “victims” of society and protest their actions, instead of being silent or saying it was all from “white people’s actions somehow causing blacks to shoot blacks”.
And curiously, again Durham and Mr. Nifong enter the topic. A prison psychologist in Durham, John Schwade, notes that Nifong solidly belongs in the long traditional camp of guilty white liberals and social workers. (Who in the 50s began using Marxist class-based arguments to explain tremendous black crime rate disproportionalities and other dysfunctions - on white racism and majority oppression. Why this did not affect other minority classes that suffered similar discrimination but displayed low crime rates and high societal achievement - Jewish, Chinese, Japanese, Caribbean-Americans went unanswered by the 50s liberals.)
Schwade notes a telling Nifong incident that has gone unreported until now:
Could Nifong have believed otherwise? Did he believe that the worst sentiments expressed by members of a diverse group, the demand for injustice instead of justice, were representative of or acceptable to the entire group?
Yes, if Nifong’s campaign appearance before Parents of Murdered Children last January is indicative of a stereotypical view of blacks.
All of the mothers in attendance were black, their young sons having been murdered in a city where virtually all young black male homicide victims are murdered by the sons of other black mothers.
After sympathetically describing how he would handle murder cases and assist survivors, Nifong outraged the bereaved mothers with this non sequitur: “You have to remember that when there’s a murder, two mothers lose their sons. There’s another mother whose son will spend the rest of his life in prison.”
This evoked an outcry of “No!” in unison, followed by one mother’s chilling refutation: “She can visit her son in prison. If I want to talk to my son, I got to talk to dirt!”
If you see Nifong as a man fairly isolated from the black community except as he sees “them” through the lens of media like the NYTimes and activist radical “black community spokesmen” then his views become plausible. Certainly no one would have reprimanded Mike at his upper-middle class get togethers or in Democratic machine Party meetings for having “progressive views” fully consonant with liberal academic theory.
But that was utterly contradictory to what everyday groups of blacks throghout the country believe, and Mike didn’t KNOW THAT or he never would have said that the murderer’s family deserved the equivalent sympathy as the family of the murdered.
Go talk to dirt, then give the mother or child of the murderer a hug as “equals”. Yeah, right. Better yet, join the milquetoast Christians who try impress on their followers an “obligation to forgive and hug the murderer himself”. (I get faintly nauseated when I hear of a Christian mother of a rape murder victim forgiving the thug, going on prison visits to talk and hug them, and being pen pals. That to me, is abherrent behavior generated by bizarre belief systems at play)
Schwade goes on:
Nifong’s miscalculation was egregious. Blacks are not in solidarity with the worst among them, those who murder their children, or with the mothers of these murderers.
Now, it is almost understandable that whites not in contact with blacks that much, or Hmong or Eskimos for that matter, might not have their finger on the pulse of what everyday people or crime victims in those communities actually believe. But Nifong is different. For 30 years he has dealt with a variety of criminal cases in Durham that should have put him in regular contact with crime victims. He should have had a weekly tutorial in the rage, heartbreak, fear in black victims of crimes done by other blacks. That he didn’t listen, it appears, or learn anything from them - is either astonishing cluelessness or willfull blindness by him to any part of reality that did not match his liberal social ideology.
Schwade also adds one point I partially disagree with:
Nor is there black solidarity with vengeful racists, false witnesses or prosecutors who subject defendants to trial when the evidence of their guilt is dubious.
Yes, when it affects “their own”, or when black individuals conclude such injustices could affect them. We are still Americans conditioned by our culture and by who we hang with. We are not colorblind and never will be. That is why we, the white majority, daily express our choices and cultural bias in a way that marketers pick up on. Pretty missing white girls from good families sell copy, missing white meth users from a trailer park or a black gangsta girl shot by other gangsta girls, don’t.
Whites are conditioned, especially white liberals, to have the “burden” of speaking out in any case of possible white on black violence, as possible racism on top of the crime - but not rail against the reverse. I’d like to think that I am quite capable of empathy towards other people, classes, or genders misfortunes and will work and speak out to correct them as much as I can regardless of such conditioning, but honestly, hearing of a fellow person of very similar background to me meets with a bad fate resonates deeper in me than a person of very dissimilar background. The problem is coumpounded by PC. Whites are conditioned not to discuss black on black violence and other subculture pathologies unless the discussion is started by a “black spokesman”.
And all too frequently black leaders are silent on black-on-white or black-on-black predations. And a good part of the black community itself has become conditioned, in a way different than whites, Asians, hispanics - to excuse such behavior or feel they break with solidarity if they criticise negative elements within their community. Especially when it has been pounded home from a wide range of authorities black and white that “none if it is your fault as victims of the past”.
*********************
From the beginning of the Duke case, I was hopeful that it would have a “macro effect” and lead to constructive, not accusatory discussions along the lines of what Cosby, Wickham, KC Johnson, La Shawn, Dorothy Rabinowitz, Susan Estrich are doing.
Too long, such open, honest discussion has been blocked by black leaderships total fealty to 50 year old ideas and conventions, by white guilt, by Marxist-based intellectual PC.
The Duke case is yet another big event suggesting such open, honest discussion is long overdue.
For starters, if the radical elements and leaders of the black community had half as much concern about the fact that the accuser is in a life of whoredom, drug abuse, with 3 out of wedlock kids and mental problems - as they did for her false accusation - perhaps Mangum would not have descended into the bottom levels of society. If they had prayed for her, helped her get some dignity, supported anything she did to get her life back in order, find a regular job - but also condemned her poor choices unequivocably, no excuses - as they were helping her - wouldn’t she have had a better shot?
Comment by Chris Ford — 01.02.07 @ 12:23 pm
The primary motivation behind the lack of outrage/under-reporting and explaining away black-on-black violence and highlighting any white-on-black violence is money and political influence.
In NYC Charles Barron (former and possible “New Black Panther”) was elected to the City Council on a racial hate platform and the likes of Sharpton and Jackson make millions from acting as “the official arbiters” of “racial justice.”
In Queens the Sean Bell shooting has been erroneously called a “racial” or “racist” shooting, when in fact, only ONE of the five officers who fired their weapons was white (European) - there were two blacks, one Hispanic, one Syrian and one white involved in that shooting.
Since early December the uproar over that case has dampened, though it will no doubt resurface when the police investigations are concluded. Still, it’s interesting to note that neither Sharpton, Barron or Jackson found the time to attend the funerals of two black NYPD detectives (Rodney Andrews and James Nemorin) who were killed by a black thug (Ronell Wislon) in a buy-and-bust gone wrong on Staten Island last year.
I agree with you that the vast majority of “Blacks are not in solidarity with the worst among them,” that’s generally true of all groups. Sometimes, out of embarrassment people reflexively defend those unworthy of defense, but few would support the Barron’s and Nifong’s who use racial resentment for their own gain.
Comment by JMK — 01.02.07 @ 2:08 pm
“Nifong’s miscalculation was egregious. Blacks are not in solidarity with the worst among them, those who murder their children, or with the mothers of these murderers.”
Apparently not sufficiently egregious to lose him an election.
“if the radical elements and leaders of the black community had half as much concern about the fact that the accuser is in a life of whoredom, drug abuse, with 3 out of wedlock kids and mental problems - as they did for her false accusation -”
See any sign of that happening yet?
Comment by Ralph Phelan — 01.02.07 @ 2:15 pm
Silent Murders:
La Shawn Barber has a theory as to why the murder of 4 men in Durham, NC, last year got little-to-no coverage compared to the hoopla surrounding the now infamous Duke rape case: “It is neither profitable nor psychically satisfying…
Trackback by Pajamas Media — 01.02.07 @ 2:31 pm
““Nifong’s miscalculation was egregious. Blacks are not in solidarity with the worst among them, those who murder their children, or with the mothers of these murderers.†(LB)
“Apparently not sufficiently egregious to lose him an election.” (Ralph Phelan)
Nifong successfully used a racially explosive charge for his own political gain.
He refused to interview the accuser for more than three months, no doubt because he knew (from the local police) that she’d given various versions of the story and seemed unreliable.
Nifong was able to manipulate this case to appear to be “a champion of racial justice.”
Hopefully his victory will be a pyrrhic one.
Comment by JMK — 01.02.07 @ 2:54 pm
Besides the obvious, one thing that jumps out at me is that the rates for black perps and victims have swung back and forth considerably over the past thirty years, while the rates for whites have remained pretty constant. I’m not at all sure what to atribute this to. It might be strictly a demographic factor. The correlation in the swings does provide further evidence that black perps tend to seek out black victims. Is that to say that black perps see members of their own race as inherently weaker and more exploitable? (I’m not being sarcastic; I don’t know the answer.)
Comment by Cousin Dave — 01.02.07 @ 3:13 pm
First, Happy New Year!
When I read your column, I was reminded of when we have itching ears. When our ears itch, they need to be scratched and usually it is not personal responsibility that does the scratching. No, it is usually claiming a false victimhood that does the scratching.
When I am stuck in false victimhood I am NOT to blame, and that can feel good. But I am also HELPLESS when in victimhood, and that feels awful.
Trouble is, there are a lot of people who scratch ears as a job. They rescue for money, and rescuers NEED victims. So the “rescuers” need to look as if they are doing something positive, while keeping the “victims” in need of rescue. I mean if the victims were no longer victimized, where is the job in that? And then there are other people who are misguided and think that they are helping by scratching. Trouble is that the brains between the ears taking a long hard look at choices made is the only thing that will help.
But in your recovery (Praise God) you learned better and with God’s help have become responsible and you are offended now by irresponsibility. Recovery is slow and difficult. But it is POSSIBLE! My prayer is that it will continue within the black community.
Trey
Comment by Trey — 01.02.07 @ 3:15 pm
La Shawn Barber has a theory as to why the murder of 4 men in Durham, NC, last year got little-to-no coverage compared to the hoopla surrounding the now infamous Duke rape case: “It is neither profitable nor psychically satisfying…
And, it seems why the black leaders of Denver are waiting to see which race supplied the idiots involved in the fatal shooting of Denver Bronco’s player Dennet Williams and the wounding of two others.
If the shooter is black, the leaders and poverty pimps will “sadly deplore” the violence, demand more gun bans thugs disobey anyways, and hawk for more poverty industry money to address “the root causes of victimized black people who end up shooting black pro athletes”. And that’s about it.
If the shooter is caught, or the victim is a nobody outside telegenic black children, the self-proclaimed “black representatives of the community” will have no interest in trial or punishment of the killer(s). No profit or power in that.
If the shooter is white, hispanic, or Asian - you can count on the “spokespersons for African Americans” to break out the Rolodexes, mobilize the base, get Rev Al and Jesse on the next plane in. To call guilty white media. It’s a 40-year long drill and scam they can do in their sleep.
Angry screaming mobs sent forth to march. Media groveling to non-negotiable “demands” for justice in white or latino “crimes” against blacks. Even law enforcement officers actions later found to be justified. Demands all whites and hispanics fall in line or “be judged racist yourselves”. The arrival of Brother Jess or Al to incite while professing as spiritual healers to be “calming the waters”, keeping things peaceful, as MLK would have wanted. And, what is needed is more money to let poverty pimps both “heal”, and spread understanding.
After 40 years of this, all parties know their role in this repetative and brain-dead ritual of grievance and redress. They can do it in their sleep. Media can pull out from archive an editorial about majority guilt being behind any specific crime “against blacks” they wrote about in the 70s, change the names, and be good to go in 2007. Jesse already just dusts off old “I’m coming in to avert this racist event and ‘heal’ the community” speeches and changes the names. White leaders feel obligated to make cooing noises regardless of what the reality is.
All while both black victims and black thugs that account for vast preponderance armed robberies, rapes, and homicides in the black community and a good deal of the assualts on other races are under the radar of all too many “black community leaders.”
Comment by Chris Ford — 01.02.07 @ 3:39 pm
Selective Outrage Over Black Crime Victims
Why did certain blacks in Durham, North Carolina, rally around a black stripper claiming to have been gang raped by three white men but virtually ignore the more destructive trend of black-on-black crime in their midst? (Duke blogger KC Johnson elabora…
Trackback by Anonymous — 01.02.07 @ 4:23 pm
For ALL the people that scream for equality, and then ignore the facts, I have 1 word to say…
Hypocrites…
Once again, La Shawn has hit the nail on the head and points out what ‘most’ won’t even talk about, I guess some folks are too worried about being politically correct and don’t want to offend folks…
I will say this about La Shawn, she gets to the heart of the matter and tells the truth too, and if the truth hurts, those that claim to be hurt need to ask themselves WHY…
Great post La Shawn, one day I want to be a REAL writer like you…
Comment by TexasFred — 01.02.07 @ 5:13 pm
Wow. It’s a rare blog that has comments as lucid as the referenced article. I have nothing to add. (Although, I can refer you to Thomas Sowell’s article in todays JWR regarding Nifong. Also excellent.)
Comment by Linda — 01.02.07 @ 5:26 pm
this might be a first for me: i might be sort of disagreeing with lashawn. wonders never cease…
in re the sean bell case, the “it wasn’t murder” argument fades quite a bit in the light of the classic “let’s turn it around” analytic technique.
if a cop/cops gets killed, on or off duty, in a circumstance that may or may not be a tragic accident……but it’s revealed that his death occured in the course of the other guy/guys firing 50 shots at him; in one instance pausing to reload…….
i very much doubt the cops (and the law & order types) will be willing to shrug and say, “oh, well. accidents happen.”
so why - in the sean bell case - why should we the people be expected to shrug it off?
Comment by ed — 01.02.07 @ 5:42 pm
Well Ed, the problem with your argument, which pretty much goes, “Why should the police be given any more latitude than any other civilian with a gun,†is that we DO (and rightly so) give the police more latitude for a very good reason - because they are duty-bound to make instantaneous judgments and act upon them.
Police Do make mistakes and there’ve been many, many cases of cops cleared by the courts, who were still fired because of procedural errors that occurred during the incident.
If a cop orders a man to “drop your gun,†and shoots a man still clinging to his car keys, that cop’s going to get a lot more latitude than I would, as I, like the rest of the civilian population has no authority to stop another person, nor are we duty-bound to intervene and disarm potentially dangerous felons.
There’s no question that cops warrant and deserve a lot more latitude than do civilians in cases like that and I’m one who believes that violent self-defense is a basic right, though that again, outside a homeowner shooting an intruder in his own house, I’d have to say, that I can’t think of many instances where I’d be willing to give a civilian the latitude I’d give a cop.
Accidents happen and mistakes are made by cops. Back in 1986 a black cop shot and killed a white teen in the Bronx who was unarmed and set to enter the Navy the next day. The cop and his partner had thought the youths were throwing light bulbs from the elevated train station they were on, down onto the street below.
One of the cops had his gun at the back of one of the youths heads and while searching the youth, the gun went off and killed the teen.
It was a terrible, tragic accident, but that cop was eventually cleared of criminal charges after a thorough investigation, I don’t know if he was subsequently cleared of procedural charges from the NYPD, though many firefighters who’d been cops mentioned that NYPD pistols had a trigger that required a certain amount of direct force (some women needed grip extenders) to fire them, expressing possible doubt over the accidental nature of that shooting.
Be that as it may, I’d ask the same thing of that situation as I would of those who’d question the Diallo or Bell shootings, “Do you even for a minute think that any of these cops, cops with clean records, and in the Bell shooting and the 1986 shooting, cops who hadn’t fired their guns in the line-of-duty, just up and planned on doing a race-based killing that tour?â€
The answer is no.
I don’t think that black cop meant to kill that kid back then and I certainly believe that the police in the Bell shooting saw that car strike the one undercover, before going into reverse and slamming into their van and took that as a hostile maneuver, in the wake of that undercover alerting them that the subjects claimed to have a gun.
I doubt the one cop responsible for firing 31 shots (two fifteen round clips, plus one chambered round on the first go-round will be given a procedural pass by the Internal Affairs investigators even if the shooting is found to be justified, but the entire incident is still under investigation.
But we give cops more latitude than civilians have when it comes to the use of deadly forces because we have to, because we demand that they intervene and put their own safety on the line in taking on potentially dangerous felons.
Comment by JMK — 01.02.07 @ 8:31 pm
As a black man, I’m willing to join with anyone, (black white and otherwise) who GENIUNELY care about Black on Black crimes.
I’m also willing to add my signature to any document drafted by anyone who GENIUNELY protests Black on Black crime.
In the past, I have been absent from to many of the night patrols in urban cities, and the many marches of community members, who, OUTRAGED and BEREAVED over the slayings in black communities, marched in protest without the benefit of Major Media. Many of the protest which have been held right here in DC.
Comment by Tafaraji — 01.02.07 @ 9:03 pm
It’s to the benefit of conservatives to point out “Black leadership” but no one here has ever addressed this point:
It has been a public issue since the picking of Ben Chavis that the NAACP has problems getting people to join the NAACP. The NAACP leadership has attempted to get more Blacks registered and voting but that has failed. Blacks support school vouchers but not the NAACP. Blacks do not support the idea of “gay marriage” but “Black leadership” does. Al Sharpton, in his “run for president” only won ONE mostly Black voting district. So, the Black population, in general, doesn’t follow the NAACP or “Black leadership” but conservatives keep bringing them up. Who benefits by pointing them out?
People want to say there has not been any speaking out by certain people concerning Black on Black crime. Well, if you listen to the entire audio segment that I give, you will hear Sharpton talking about Black on Black crime in Philly.
Go to this web page on the Tom Joyner Morning Show. Select the link next to 12/13/06. Listen to the entire clip.
For those who don’t know, Tom Joyner’s Morning Show is the #1 syndicated “Black” syndicated morning show and actually beat Howard Stern in some markets before Stern went to satellite.
Since I mentioned Philly, I may as well point out efforts by Black people in Philly.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.02.07 @ 9:13 pm
many of the night patrols in urban cities, and the many marches of community members, who, OUTRAGED and BEREAVED over the slayings in black communities, marched in protest without the benefit of Major Media. Many of the protest which have been held right here in DC.
No one will pay attention to you. It will be ignored.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.02.07 @ 9:14 pm
Several years ago the Washington Post carried an article by a perplexed a young white professional who served as a juror on a murder trial involving a teenage ghetto thug who had killed another ghetto thug during a drug deal gone bad in DC. Despite overwhelming evidence that the accused was guilty, all the black jurors decided to acquit.
When the white professional asked why, the blacks responded that the “system” is responsible and therefore, even though they believed the thug guilty, he didn’t deserve punishment. But what about the black victim? It was of no concern. And what if he should kill again the white guy asked. Again, of no concern. Six months later after getting away literally with murder, he killed another young black youth. This is not an isolated incident in DC.
(And don’t forget the “Don’t Snitch†t-shirts. That’s the way to stick it to the “Manâ€!)
I have been complaining about this for almost two decades that black people have been dropping like flies here in DC for 40(!!) years in this majority black city and no one cares. Our leaders, political, civic, and religious, only become interested in poor blacks when there’s a political payoff - namely exploiting the biggest shakedown of all time: white guilt. Otherwise they are too busy to be concerned with blacks, especially poor ones, because they have better things to do, like fighting “racism” and working for “social justice”. The same thing is now occurring in Prince George’s County which is experiencing a higher violent crime rate than Baghdad.
FYI: two weeks ago DC Council gave $3.8 million to the NAACP, the masters of race hustling and poverty pimping to relocate their offices from Baltimore to DC. What good are they? What have they ever done for anyone, let along Baltimore. As usual, no outrage.
Comment by Francois Krodel — 01.02.07 @ 10:05 pm
On the article you mentioned, if I remember the letter, you didn’t get it right. It started with one Black person. By the last vote, the initial juror had persuaded people to vote not guilty and race wasn’t the issue. The juror got white jurors to agree with him.
You didn’t mention that a few days later, two jurors responded to the white juror’s article and gave their version of the story. And it wasn’t race, it was a matter of the policeman lying on the stand or not lying on the stand. It was based upon the time the policeman stated was needed to get from one area to another area and the jurors didn’t believe the timeline.
The last letter in that exchange was from the original white juror. Again, if I remember correctly, he stated he grew up with the idea that the police are to be trusted and given the benefit of the doubt. Meanwhile, there were jurors who stated they know that police are capable of lying. He then admitted that race may not have been a factor, just previous contacts with the police.
FYI: two weeks ago DC Council gave $3.8 million to the NAACP, the masters of race hustling and poverty pimping to relocate their offices from Baltimore to DC. What good are they? What have they ever done for anyone, let along Baltimore. As usual, no outrage.
And just as I responded to Project 21, what’s the difference between the NAACP office and D.C. funding of baseball? Project 21 didn’t like the idea of tax breaks going to the NAACP, but the umbrella group of Project 21 is a non-profit and also gets tax breaks.
The same thing is now occurring in Prince George’s County which is experiencing a higher violent crime rate than Baghdad.
When you look at the violent crime, you see it occurs mostly inside the Beltway.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.02.07 @ 10:36 pm
Submitted for Your Approval
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…
Trackback by Watcher of Weasels — 01.03.07 @ 1:09 am
“If the shooter is white, hispanic, or Asian - you can count on the “spokespersons for African Americans†to break out the Rolodexes, mobilize the base, get Rev Al and Jesse on the next plane in. To call guilty white media. It’s a 40-year long drill and scam they can do in their sleep.” (Chris Ford)
Certainly true on “white and Hispanic,” as a neat little media/law enforcement trick is their listing most Hispanic on black violence as “white on black ‘HATE’ crimes,” while any white on Hispanic crime is listed as “white on Hispanic ‘HATE’ crimes.”
I haven’t seen that done with Asians, though to be honest, Asians have one of the lowest violent crime rates, to this point.
Another similar trick is that almost all white on black acts of random violence (muggings, etc) are presumed to be “hate crimes.”
There’s actually no such thing as a “hate crime,” it’s an artifical construct, as ALL violent crime is motivated by “hate” or antipathy and this category actually exists solely in order to excuse some similar crimes being taken more seriosuly than others. In that regard, the concept of “hate crimes” actaully violates the principle of “equal protection before the law.”
At any rate, while virtually all random white on black violence is presumed to be a “hate crime,” most black on white violence is NOT. It is generally explained away as violence in the perpetration of another crime (robbery, etc).
In that way so-called “hate crime” stats are rigged and worthless.
The entire concept of “hate crimes” should be abhored by ANY and ALL decent people who respect the principle of “equality before the law.”
Why should a black victimized by another black be deemed “unluckier” and worthy of less justice than a black mugged by an Hispanic or white?
Not to mention the obvious question of why are most “Hispanic on black crimes listed as “white on black,” while in white on Hispanic crimes, Hispanics are listed within their own racial derviation???
Comment by JMK — 01.03.07 @ 10:51 am
so what you’re saying, jmk - in your usual inimitable ‘100 paragraphs or more’ style - is that you think cops are somehow more equal than mere ordinary non-cops. better. more valuable. not subject to the same tired old customs and ideals (and laws! let’s be clear about that!) that the rest of us *not-nearly-as-special-as-cops* proles are held to.
so why didn’t you just say so? see how i did that in just a couple of sentences?
ok, now you try! remember: brevity! always brevity! bandwidth isn’t free, ya know!
Comment by ed — 01.03.07 @ 3:48 pm
Brevity’s not my style Ed.
I’m sorry you have a problem with that (eye strain?), but your bigger problem seems to be basic reading comprehension.
Maybe your eyes got tired, but as I pointed out, the police ARE by statute (that’s by law) given broader latitude than you and I (as civilians) in the use of force. That’s a fact of life and there’s a good reason for those laws.
The police ARE however, subject to the VERY SAME laws as you and I and are even subject to departmental regulations and procedures that can have police booted off the job even when some their actions are found to be otherwise within the law.
The reason the law gives the police that broader latitude is because they’re jobs require them to intervene when they see a crime occurring, and they are required to confront dangerous felons as a part of their job. They are paid to act as an “enforcement arm†of the government, enforcing and upholding its laws.
Above, I gave you a number of examples of that latitude.
I can see why you were unable to construct an argument, that’s not easy to do when you don’t understand the difference between concepts like “broader latitude†and “subject to the same law.â€
I can’t help you with that bit of basic understanding, if those above real-life examples didn’t help, there’s little hope.
I hope you don’t get called to serve on a jury any time soon, as those kinds of things come into play pretty routinely.
Comment by JMK — 01.03.07 @ 5:47 pm
I have no doubt that blacks have been victimized by hispanic thugs and that is regrettable. But the violence cuts both ways. Black thugs victimze hispanics as well. I am hispanic and considerably beyond the teen-age years but when I was sixteen I was almost killed by three black gunmen when I worked in a liquor store. Black customers tried to get me fired and replaced by a black. I saw crowds of blacks chasing hispanic girls after classes ended at LA’s Jefferson high school many years ago. That still occurs. Any attempt to place more blame on hispanics than on blacks is understandable but erroneous.
Comment by mhr — 01.03.07 @ 7:28 pm
of course i didn’t read your entire post(s), jmk. i read this stuff for fun, not because i have to, and i routinely tune out long-winded folks clearly in love with their own voice/font.
and since you’ve decided to get all snippy, let me just say i hope that you don’t have jury duty anytime soon, too! judges & lawyers don’t look too kindly towards folks who insist on droning on & on & on when there’s a trial they’re supposed to be paying attention to. when you do that on the web, we just ignore you. do it in a courtroom, and you’ll be tossed in jail. perhaps you’ll be able to hero-worship the cops there. who knows? but you have a nice day, now, ok?
Comment by ed — 01.04.07 @ 12:40 am
Ed, your initil presumption was wrong.
I carefully explained to you why.
YOU came back with a snarky response and I again told you why you were wrong and how your insistance on failing to understand the difference between two very basic concepts (“greater latitude” and “subject to the same laws”) didn’t bode well for you.
It doesn’t.
You responded to my initial post that answered your question with an answer and real-life examples that demonstrated that with a poorly thought-out non-argument that I felt warranted what I said in response.
The fact that you now acknowledge that you didn’t read my initial answer to you, shows that you’re not interested in knowing why the police have a “broader latitude” in the use of force than do civilians.
Like I said, “I can’t help you with that bit of basic understanding, if those above real-life examples didn’t help, there’s little hope.”
That’s not being “snippy,” just honest.
Comment by JMK — 01.04.07 @ 6:46 am
well then, allow me a little honesty too, jmk.
it was never about your sadly specious argument about why you think cops should be granted “super-special” legal status, above and beyond those of us who don’t carry badges. this is america: if you want to bleat “bless our security forces” as we slide down the slope towards police-statedom, well…this is america. you can do what you want. believe what you want, no matter how ridiculous.
what it was *about* was your predilictions toward verbosity: using 50 words where anyone else would make do with…you know….2 or 3. i’m not the only person here to have commented on it; but i - good guy that i am - wanted to help you become a better person. even your beloved security forces wouldn’t accept **long-winded** prayers for them at your hand-made shrine.
sadly, it went right over your head. i’m not sure what we can ascribe your long-windedness to, jmk: there may be deep psychological reasons for it - and your didacticism - or it may be something as simple yet unpleasant as mere arrogance; or perhaps an egotistical refusal to be bound be the rules & customs that hinder others.
i truly hope all this doesn’t come across as offensive. but if i can’t help you with this little bit of understanding, there’s little hope for you.
just being honest!
Comment by ed — 01.04.07 @ 5:39 pm
Ed this is the third time that you’ve failed to make any kind of argument for your belief.
I’ve carefully and in painstaking detail, explained to you that the police DO have “broader latitude” with the use of force than you or I, as civilians do.
That’s a fact. Their jobs require that somewhat broader latitude and it is granted by law.
You’re obviously unable to refute that or you would look up a source (as I have) and you’d claim that “This source refutes that.”
You haven’t because you can’t, as there is no such source.
The police are given broader latitude when it comes the use of force. That “broader latitude” means more of a “benefit of the doubt” and a “higher standard” needed to prove wrong-doing in such cases.
That is NEITHER “super-special” nor remotely the same as “not held accountable to the same laws.”
You apparently don’t even understand the argument.
That’s not your fault.
I accept your limitations.
I’ve been very patient and explained it all very carefully, and added real-life examples to clarify those explanations.
You’ve refused to read them, you apparently don’t understand the basic concepts involved, so you’re trapped within your own limitations.
I’m honestly surprised that you seem to have your feelings hurt (not my intent), but believe me, I’m on my best behavior here. I generally don’t suffer fools gladly, but I took a stab and made an exception here because it seemed such a basic, easy-to-understand misconception of yours to clarify for you.
Maybe if you were able to read that first post through, you might have gotten it, but again…limitations.
Comment by JMK — 01.04.07 @ 9:40 pm
another aspect of caustic, narcissistic egotism, jmk, is the response of such an individual towards perceived criticism. the egotist, unable to reconcile anything that’s not ‘praise’ with his/her warped self-image, typically attempts to lump his/her critic in a faceless, easily despised group of “others”.
you see it in cases where vain women are unable to stand other women nearby, hysterically seeing them as sinister competition, out to “get” them somehow. examples of this are marilyn monroe’s famous demand that ‘no other blonde be onscreen with her’. or nancy pelosi’s sytematic elimination of women in the (house) democrat party’s power structure. other textbook examples are the “overly jealous insecure boy/girlfriend” archetype; or, as in your case, the person insecure about his/her intellect calling everyone else ‘dumb’. (i believe you tried to dress up your childish insults as a pontification about ‘limitations’. unsubtle, true, but amusing anyway.)
your overwhelming urge to have the last word is also quite telling, to those who can see.
please: seek help. it’s a bright beautiful world out there, jmk, if you could only tear yourself away from the seductive siren call of the beautiful, beautiful mirror. ahhhh, well. perhaps i’m asking too much of you. as you said: “limitations”.
Comment by ed — 01.05.07 @ 4:14 pm
On January 1, 2006, the Harvey family of Richmond, VA–Bryan, his wife Kathryn, and their two girls, Stella (9) and Ruby (4)–was found bound, bludgeoned, and with their throats slashed in the basement of their burning home.
The national media was all over this shocking case. Who would brutally murder this whole family? It was assumed, due to the “personal” nature of the crime (throat slashing), that the killer was someone known to the family. Someone very angry at them. The media tried to pick this mystery apart, and covered the story closely. This was a well-known and well-liked Richmond family–what had they done to bring this on?
It wasn’t long before the mystery was solved. Someone confessed, and two guys–complete strangers to the Harveys–were soon arrested for the murders.
Wait–you never heard about this case? This horrifying quadruple murder committed by total strangers in broad daylight? That’s because the national media abruptly dropped all coverage once the killers–black men–were caught. The Harveys were a white family, and the media was only interested when it was assumed that they had been killed by a (presumably white) friend or relative. These murders–no less horrifying than the Manson murders–were “forgotten” by the national media overnight.
Comment by LAB — 01.06.07 @ 7:15 pm
Whats sad about Darrent William’s is he’d turned his life around but still couldn’t avoid what is tragically a typical way to die for many young African American men.
Pingback by Darrent William’s Shot Dead — 01.08.07 @ 1:55 am