Can anyone including the kid Rav explain why violent knife crime in London is spiking, similar culture (without the same level of culture wars) similar demographics, economics and most importantly instead of defunding the police the conservatives have been refunding the police. If gun culture was a thing in the UK, there would be murder spikes? And yet there is this claim that a lack of policing has resulted in a crime wave. That doesn't seem to be consonant with the argument being made by American conservatives. I suspect the instinct will be to claim different country and culture, but the arguments being made are data driven, so that doesn't seem to be relevant at all. More policing has lead to more violent crime in a wealthy country whilst the argument in philly is less policing has had the same effect. I realize there is a temptation to navel gaze and only look at America but that seems problematic to me because whatever is happening transcends
Interesting idea about dispersal. Let me tell you something I know about that personally. I grew up in Chicago and lived most of my life a hundred miles south in Champaign, Illinois. 30 miles east of us is Danville, Illinois. Twenty-five years ago or so, Chicago closed down its remaining housing projects, which were almost exclusively black. They had been a disaster, and of course gangs ran rampant there. Many thousands of former residents moved elsewhere. Some of them moved to Vermilion County where Danville and some other smaller towns received new residents from the south side of Chicago with readymade gang affiliations. Crime skyrocketed. Chicago has lots of murders, but is not number one per capita in Illinois. Danville is. In fact, Danville is the eleventh most dangerous city in the country in violent crime.
Seems to me that we know precisely what worked to dramatically reduce violent crime rates starting in NYC in the early 90s (proactive data-based policing based upon “broken windows theory”, COMSTAT, “stop & frisk”, etc), which resulted in tens of thousands of actual black lives saved across America. Now that we’re abandoning those proven policing methods in deference to an ideology that suggests that violent predators are actually victims of oppressive social structures, and therefore aren’t culpable for their crimes, we’re reaping a fresh harvest of violence and evil disproportionately impacting the black community. What else is there to understand? Where is the outrage?!!
"ideology that suggests that violent predators are actually victims of oppressive social structures"
Perfect summation. However, for most pushing the idea, I'm convinced it's not an ideology but a crass political strategy. Woke politicians throwing innocents into the volcano in exchange for votes.
A good point, nicely set out by Mr Roscoe. I don’t know the full ins and outs of the Philadelphia picture - but I am absolutely convinced that no form of crime was ever reduced by making the consequences of that crime less deterring, and the investigation of it less thorough.
Once you cede ‘control’ of a neighbourhood, you inevitably sacrifice willing public interaction, no matter how much each individual resident might wish to see excessive behaviour reined in. Omerta always trumps civic duty, when there is a credible (even probable) likelihood of violent reprisal against anyone coming forward.
Putting politics aside (as if that were even momentarily possible), you can not send out a poorly motivated and frequently scapegoated Police force - undermined at the highest levels of Police, judicial and political institutions by those with random personal agendas - and expect them to make headway against huge entrenched criminal networks who are committed to playing for keeps.
Once in place, the momentum of such a crime surge can only ever be broken by a determined, united, resolute counter-push by ALL the supposed forces of order - thereby empowering the decent moral majority in those communities to come SAFELY into play, and also make their viewpoints heard.
Every "justice system" reform I can think of has made it more difficult to apprehend, hold, try, convict and incarcerate people who commit crimes. It seems to me that these facts along with a lack of respect for the property rights of individuals and wide spread disrespect for law enforcement (and other forms of authority) is what is driving the increase in crime, violent and otherwise.
This is a small thing. The Black Lives Matter movement has a kitchen sink mentality. Black, Brown, and Trans lives all seem to matter in this movement. Are all of these “identities” on the same team? The tie between the black homicide rate and the intersectional feminist argument of the proverbial “trans women of color” is more related than one might first suppose. The list of names of the dead read every November 20th on the trans day of remembrance are almost exclusively black and brown names. It’s a fallacy to nitpick crimes, murder is murder, but there are those who have made it a cause to discuss this particular issue. Perhaps this demographic of gay women would be interested in the solutions presented by the black guys if the argument were presented in a certain way that zeroed in on the particular ideology they have chosen to follow. This is an argument for meeting people on their own terms. Though the trans women of color murder stats are a drop in the bucket of the overall issue, there is a chance to attract some flies with honey. This isn’t really in the realm of academia or research, but in way we talk about these arguments. Those who are not against us, are with us.
HI Marci, I have read that many of them do the very dangerous job of picking up paying tricks on street. And that their murderers are most often of the same race as the victims. Many trans women are "passable" and far more than just "passable". So what happens if the trick doesn't know what they may have..................................??????????????
Bingo, you got it. Atlanta nailed it, here’s a scene of this going down. There’s a Woolfian argument to be made about how the solution this isn’t criminalizing sex work. From history we can see that a harder crack down on this specific scenario results in something like Stonewall eventually, as well as a culture of secrecy, stigma, and shame. The solution is a room of one’s own. The tricks can be online clients through a screen with an internet connection. Much less dangerous, and less illegal. More of an opportunity to do something different which should not be ignored.
Philadelphia police have stopped pulling people fro traffic violations. Also not mentioned in your data is kit guns were stopped. These were ghost guns entering Philadelphia in Kit form. You can buy a gun kit without going through a background check, or registering the fire arm . There are thousands of these guns in Philadelphia. Some from Philly was buying the guns by the duffel bag full at gun shows in Oaks and Morgantown. Philadelphia has very strict gun laws but Krasner lets people go. Philadelphia wants gun laws to change in the entire state so Philadelphians don't kill themselves. That attitude is very selfish and one that shows people there have no self restraint, tolerance, empathy, and selfish.
As a police officer in a major metro area, I am enjoying this ongoing conversation, especially the balanced analysis. There are truly no easy answers. On the question of whether the DA is responsible for the spike: you noted the homicide captain’s quote about needing the community’s cooperation to solve homicides (implying that the black community is much less likely to cooperate), and argued that this effect cannot be linked to Krasner. Certainly the “no snitches” culture plays a part in this. However, in my experience, other than those in gangs (for whom snitching can be fatal), a community’s willingness to cooperate is far more strongly related to the level of trust in the justice system. A person who has cooperated with the police once, only to find their assailant/abuser released back on the street for whatever reason, is almost certain to not cooperate the next time. Why should they? We are asking them to take a great risk and then abusing that trust by not putting that dangerous criminal away. And the average citizen does not distinguish whether the person is back on the street due to ineffective investigation, low bail, weak prosecution, or a political catch-and-release policy.
In addition to the negative effects on citizen cooperation, these kind of effects are also devastating to the morale of officers, who sometimes put their lives and/or careers on the line to arrest dangerous suspects only to see them back out in the street. It’s a recipe for de-policing, which as we know does affect crime rates.
It is worth noting that Krasner got re-elected this spring with close to 70% of the vote and won a contested primary early by about the same margin. I can only conclude that the good voters of Philadelphia like and approve of his policies and the job he is doing. Or are indifferent to the murders because they do not affect most of them
How familiar are you with the number of black children being killed in black neighborhoods? Probably not much, and neither am I. And that is in no small part because our prestigious newspapers, tv channels, etc refuse to dwell on the issue. (Right-wing media is a better source.)
Perhaps Krasner won, in part, because the whites who voted for him are largely insulated from crime by their money and lower proportionate crime rates committed by whites. I have not looked on purpose, but I suspect that Philadelphia is very segregated. Those same whites are largely progressive/liberal and "defund the police", etc are credal among them. I believe that Krasner was hugely attacked by right-wing mediasphere.
I am going to skip commenting on the black vote....But didn't Krasner gain support from influential black churches in Philadelphia?
I live in Philadelphia. My sense is that many of the downtown whites who did vote for Krasner were, as you say , insulated or at least felt insulated from the violence and probably more importantly voted D out of reflex
Their data shows that over 1,000 kids 11 and younger have been shot or killed so far this year. About 4,500 kids between the ages of 12 and 17 have been shot or killed so far this year.
The data isn't broken out by race, but it's fair to assume that a disproportionate share of the kids represented by these numbers are children of color. The CDC's WISQARS database shows that 741 blacks between the ages of 1 and 17 were homicide victims in 2019 (Latest year available):
I think the FBI is a better source for viewing crimes. They say: Murder and man slaughter for whites is 3650 and blacks is 4078. Robbery is 25,143 for whites and 29,667 for blacks. Weapons carrying charges are about the same. All other crimes, show whites commit more than blacks. If these were weighted as percent of population, you will find blacks higher than whites in every category.
Suicide Deaths although caused by firearms is planned. It is not a thing that just pops into your mind as being something to do. Removing firearms from the population in Australia did nothing for suicide. They went from fire arms to gassing.
The FBI did break out race and deaths by guns and violent deaths until 2017. That is the data that consistently reported deaths by hammer were higher than by a rifle. They stopped reporting because too many people were getting data supporting the AR 15, which the Govt wants to get rid of first, just because they can.
Krasner was funded by Soros and most of the advertising for DA was done by Krasner. Kim Gardner in St. Louis has an even worse record. The population loves Gardener also; is it Soros funding or is it the woke attitude in the population?
I like your reply. The Soros funding is well known, and Krasner had the most advertisements form any candidate. I just picked a source at random. Here are other sources.
Well be careful with your sources, because they don't make you look credible when you pick the wrong one. I almost got caught by citing Stormfront many years ago before it was well-known for evidence refuting something a Jewish guy told me. Then I was like, "Wait...what's Stormfront?" and I looked at their landing page, lost my shit and found a better source :) So even utter crap sites can get something right on occasion, you just never want to cite them. I'm a big fan of Media Bias Fact Check for checking bias and factualism. I'm okay with some bias on either side as long as they ride high for factualism. The NY Post is a questionable source, 'Mixed' for factualism, LA Times is better with 'High" factualism. Snopes is another good one. They're one of the best sources out there although they don't rate the media the way MBFC does. Even nutty far and left wing websites get it right once in awhile (as my friend likes to say, "Even a broken clock is right twice a day") so if it sounds credible, check it elsewhere and always know how reliable the source is.
Someone else has suggested researching something from an anonymizer like Startpage to see the stuff that often gets filtered out of Google's sometimes suspiciously political-biased algorithms for top SERPs.
Snopes has some information on Soros debunked conspiracy theories, but not, from the quick check I did, on the DA funding, so I think I'll submit it.
When you talk about black on black murders, you are talking about gangs. When you talk about unsolved murders you are talking about gangs. When you talk about uncooperative witnesses you are talking about gangs. You can't talk about gangs without mentioning the word "gangs" on a regular basis.
Maybe, or maybe it's just people who do not care about morals. I like showing the four black girls beating the Asian up. It was brutal, filled with rage and hate. Jack Posobiec had posted it on Twitter. (1) I can't find the beating anywhere on the web.
Philadelphia Council Woman Helen Gym Says:
But Gym said the incident reflects the level of trauma and violence happening across Philadelphia, and lack of support for the city’s children — who are living through the COVID-19 pandemic, the opioid epidemic, gun violence and economic problems.
“It’s heart wrenching to see young people at such a young age harming one another,” she said. “But I will underscore time and again that they are witnessing violence at an unprecedented level across our city and we are not doing nearly enough for children right now in helping them deal with the trauma and harm that has been caused to them.”(3)
Philadelphia had just gone through a rape in the subway where all the people just watched. And the Libs of Tik tok posted, Black teens pulling up to a red light jumping out than robbing people waiting in the street at gun point. (4)
Philadelphia is full of anger, like St; Louis. or Baltimore or Kansas City. Is it buffoonery and reverse racism. Asians, Hispanics, and Whites don't do this. Remember Darryl Brooks and Waukesha? Google his image and try to find it. Google Ethan Crumley, school shooter in Michigan, and look for his picture. Darryl Brooks essentially disappeared from the Internet. Black racism is alive and present and the new pedagogy only create more problems. I think Helen Gym is wrong.
On the limited topic of black on black murder, it's hard to beat gangs as a cause. We can go back and forth all day about absent fathers, lack of opportunity, systemic racism; none of which have a feasible solution. We can, however, take a big chunk out of gangs.
With respect, I disagree with the notion that gangs are the source of the problem, and that their eradication is the key to finding solutions (well, sort of). The breakdown of poor families in America- disproportionately black- that has been fueled by the disastrous impact of 25+ $$TRILLIONS$$ spent by our federal government over the last 56 years to incentivize single parenthood and indigence is the true culprit. Though everyone must be held responsible for their own decisions, it is not reasonable to look upon the lot of fatherless young men trying to survive in blighted urban dystopia of our own making and blame them for too often reaching out for the most obvious opportunity they can find for male bonding, power and meaning amidst the chaos of their daily lives. Until we’re able to fashion a true “social safety net” for all citizens that prioritizes both family formation and gainful employment, we will continue to reap a bitter harvest of cultural pathology among our nation’s poor.
Why are the young black men fatherless? Is it because of the values they have? Panorama Surveys are coming to all schools and will find at risk children and take them from their mothers. This is funded by Zuckerberg and the Bill and Melinda Gates Fund. Merrick Garland the Attorney General had a conflict of interest with this.
Don;t worry, at risk children will be identified and the state will teach the values society wants.
There has never been a true social safety net for all citizens. I suspect there never will be. But there have been less violent societies. In the meantime we have no recourse but to treat the symptoms.
Sorry to sound “pollyannish”; what I mean by “true social safety net” is public policy that doesn’t subsidize demonstrably bad personal decisions, like having a child out of wedlock, or not securing enough income to jeopardize benefits, or not marrying somebody with a job for the same reason. This is a crisis of our own making, for which I maintain the faith that a wholesale reconsideration of these same failed policies and incentive structures can provide hope for its unmaking, and for our shared future as Americans.
You are right. Drugs fuel the gang problems and it is cool to be in a gang. Violence is their way of creating identity. Legalizing drugs would get rid of part of the gang problem. Here is another idea, disbursing black neighborhoods into rural areas may be another way. Appalachia, Nebraska, Western Kansas, Eastern Colorodo, South Dakota, West Virginia, New Mexico, Wyoming, Idaho, Western Texas, and North Dakota. Communities with little black population, far away from big cities.
The fact that we have to rely on The Washington Post or Mapping Police Violence for data on police violence now something like 8 years after Furgeson is unacceptable. Where is the US Dept of Justice? Why is there no hue and cry to get some factual information on an issue that is tearing the country apart? Why have no prominent Black politicians insisted on a Congressional investigation into whether or not racist police in this country are actually targeting and killing young black males? And to what specific scope does the problem exist? Does it happen rarely or regularly? Talk about an epistemological crisis! Why is getting to the bottom of this issue so difficult for a country that just put a $10 Billion super telescope into orbit to get to the bottom of how the universe was created? This could’ve been another sequence in the movie “Don’t Look Up”.
Given the centrality of the issue to academia, media, the overclass, foundations, Couldn't resources have been pooled so, for example, Yale or Stanford and the Ford Foundation and Pew and on and on gathered data that would be shared publicly?
I wonder if that may be because the shooting and killing of unarmed black men by police, especially white police, is well......Here is what the Post says for 2020: Black 17 men, White 25 men, Hispanic 9, Asian not explicitly reported.
I have seen a chart that says there is an appreciable number of progressive who think that police kill over 1000+ black unarmed men per year. I will try to find it....What would then happen if instead they found out that the real number is closer to 17 for all of 2020, as example?
(BTW, I have asked progressive friends question of how many unarmed black men are shot ...note that these are shootings......and killed each year and they have gotten very upset when they see the number precisely because it so low and the source isn't Fox but the Washington Post.)
Don’t forget we are also the country with a new commission trying to track down $100 billion of stolen “relief money”. Money is not the issue, it almost makes me think Black lives don’t matter as much when there’s no money in it.
I agree with your overall point about the need for better, more consistent data from a source such as the DOJ. That said, there's credible data that suggests the narrative of large numbers of cops targeting and killing innocent young black males is false. The Washington Post's database has never shown more than 40 unarmed blacks being shot dead by law enforcement in a given year since they started collecting data back in 2014. Only four unarmed blacks have been killed this year according to their database (Checked it just before I posted this).
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences did an analysis a few years ago that showed the lifetime odds of a black male dying from police use of force are about 1 in 1,000:
To put that number in context, the National Safety Council shows that all of us are more likely to die of other things that don't attract nearly as much attention:
The lifetime odds of dying in a fall, for example, are 1 in 106. The lifetime odds of dying in an auto accident are 1 in 107. The lifetime odds of dying because of a gun assault are 1 in 298. The lifetime odds of dying in a "pedestrian incident" are 1 in 543. I could go on, but I hope you get the idea. While each life is precious, the lifetime odds of a young black male being killed by law enforcement are modest and much lower than those associated with other things that nobody's worked up about.
To be fair, the PNAS analysis shows that the lifetime odds of being killed by law enforcement are about 1 in 2,000 for all males and about 1 in 33,000 for all females. The raw numbers don't mean much, however, unless you adjust them for differences in criminality. In other words, the reason that men are 16x more likely to be killed by law enforcement than women is that men tend to commit more crimes and are more likely to end up in situations where police officers feel the need to resort to deadly force.
Roland Fryer has done some work on racial differences in police use of force:
I wouldn’t trust any data that didn’t come from an official source. There’s too much at stake to leave it up to organizations that may or may not have an axe to grind. The President should simply ask the Attorney General to provide accurate numbers based on mandatory reporting by individual states.
No report - No federal law enforcement grants to that state. Hire ten lawyers per state, 500 lawyers, to vet the reports as accurate. Simple.
Without an official source to compare any studies with, it’s difficult to guess what other sources may be closest to it. Obama’s AG ordered a federal database to be established by the DOJ right after Furgeson. The DOJ requested data from the states, but not enough states cooperated to gather meaningful stats. It’s been years now, and the de facto blackout of this information is never addressed by the media, activists, politicians, conservatives, progressives? The DOJ could threaten to cut blacked out states out of federal grant money. Congress could pass a law. One has to wonder who benefits most from this enforced ignorance.
Clifton, thank you for the links. You should be aware of this article about forensic anthropology (a field I didn't know even existed until I read this article).
In essence the article states that forensic anthropologists (note that it's the forensic ones, not non-forensic) are about 90% accurate in determining "social race" of skeleton. But the writers than rather bluntly say they should stop since this rate of success counter the idea that race is a social construction.
It's fairly short and you really should read it.
"Forensic anthropologists can try to identify a person’s race from a skull. Should they?"
No. Omar is a "character" that John McWhorter came up with. a while back on an edition of The Glenn Show. Omar is a young black male who gets into more than his share of trouble.
Can anyone including the kid Rav explain why violent knife crime in London is spiking, similar culture (without the same level of culture wars) similar demographics, economics and most importantly instead of defunding the police the conservatives have been refunding the police. If gun culture was a thing in the UK, there would be murder spikes? And yet there is this claim that a lack of policing has resulted in a crime wave. That doesn't seem to be consonant with the argument being made by American conservatives. I suspect the instinct will be to claim different country and culture, but the arguments being made are data driven, so that doesn't seem to be relevant at all. More policing has lead to more violent crime in a wealthy country whilst the argument in philly is less policing has had the same effect. I realize there is a temptation to navel gaze and only look at America but that seems problematic to me because whatever is happening transcends
Interesting idea about dispersal. Let me tell you something I know about that personally. I grew up in Chicago and lived most of my life a hundred miles south in Champaign, Illinois. 30 miles east of us is Danville, Illinois. Twenty-five years ago or so, Chicago closed down its remaining housing projects, which were almost exclusively black. They had been a disaster, and of course gangs ran rampant there. Many thousands of former residents moved elsewhere. Some of them moved to Vermilion County where Danville and some other smaller towns received new residents from the south side of Chicago with readymade gang affiliations. Crime skyrocketed. Chicago has lots of murders, but is not number one per capita in Illinois. Danville is. In fact, Danville is the eleventh most dangerous city in the country in violent crime.
Seems to me that we know precisely what worked to dramatically reduce violent crime rates starting in NYC in the early 90s (proactive data-based policing based upon “broken windows theory”, COMSTAT, “stop & frisk”, etc), which resulted in tens of thousands of actual black lives saved across America. Now that we’re abandoning those proven policing methods in deference to an ideology that suggests that violent predators are actually victims of oppressive social structures, and therefore aren’t culpable for their crimes, we’re reaping a fresh harvest of violence and evil disproportionately impacting the black community. What else is there to understand? Where is the outrage?!!
"ideology that suggests that violent predators are actually victims of oppressive social structures"
Perfect summation. However, for most pushing the idea, I'm convinced it's not an ideology but a crass political strategy. Woke politicians throwing innocents into the volcano in exchange for votes.
A good point, nicely set out by Mr Roscoe. I don’t know the full ins and outs of the Philadelphia picture - but I am absolutely convinced that no form of crime was ever reduced by making the consequences of that crime less deterring, and the investigation of it less thorough.
Once you cede ‘control’ of a neighbourhood, you inevitably sacrifice willing public interaction, no matter how much each individual resident might wish to see excessive behaviour reined in. Omerta always trumps civic duty, when there is a credible (even probable) likelihood of violent reprisal against anyone coming forward.
Putting politics aside (as if that were even momentarily possible), you can not send out a poorly motivated and frequently scapegoated Police force - undermined at the highest levels of Police, judicial and political institutions by those with random personal agendas - and expect them to make headway against huge entrenched criminal networks who are committed to playing for keeps.
Once in place, the momentum of such a crime surge can only ever be broken by a determined, united, resolute counter-push by ALL the supposed forces of order - thereby empowering the decent moral majority in those communities to come SAFELY into play, and also make their viewpoints heard.
Every "justice system" reform I can think of has made it more difficult to apprehend, hold, try, convict and incarcerate people who commit crimes. It seems to me that these facts along with a lack of respect for the property rights of individuals and wide spread disrespect for law enforcement (and other forms of authority) is what is driving the increase in crime, violent and otherwise.
This is a small thing. The Black Lives Matter movement has a kitchen sink mentality. Black, Brown, and Trans lives all seem to matter in this movement. Are all of these “identities” on the same team? The tie between the black homicide rate and the intersectional feminist argument of the proverbial “trans women of color” is more related than one might first suppose. The list of names of the dead read every November 20th on the trans day of remembrance are almost exclusively black and brown names. It’s a fallacy to nitpick crimes, murder is murder, but there are those who have made it a cause to discuss this particular issue. Perhaps this demographic of gay women would be interested in the solutions presented by the black guys if the argument were presented in a certain way that zeroed in on the particular ideology they have chosen to follow. This is an argument for meeting people on their own terms. Though the trans women of color murder stats are a drop in the bucket of the overall issue, there is a chance to attract some flies with honey. This isn’t really in the realm of academia or research, but in way we talk about these arguments. Those who are not against us, are with us.
HI Marci, I have read that many of them do the very dangerous job of picking up paying tricks on street. And that their murderers are most often of the same race as the victims. Many trans women are "passable" and far more than just "passable". So what happens if the trick doesn't know what they may have..................................??????????????
Bingo, you got it. Atlanta nailed it, here’s a scene of this going down. There’s a Woolfian argument to be made about how the solution this isn’t criminalizing sex work. From history we can see that a harder crack down on this specific scenario results in something like Stonewall eventually, as well as a culture of secrecy, stigma, and shame. The solution is a room of one’s own. The tricks can be online clients through a screen with an internet connection. Much less dangerous, and less illegal. More of an opportunity to do something different which should not be ignored.
https://youtu.be/9r_xPa_Nsxw
Philadelphia police have stopped pulling people fro traffic violations. Also not mentioned in your data is kit guns were stopped. These were ghost guns entering Philadelphia in Kit form. You can buy a gun kit without going through a background check, or registering the fire arm . There are thousands of these guns in Philadelphia. Some from Philly was buying the guns by the duffel bag full at gun shows in Oaks and Morgantown. Philadelphia has very strict gun laws but Krasner lets people go. Philadelphia wants gun laws to change in the entire state so Philadelphians don't kill themselves. That attitude is very selfish and one that shows people there have no self restraint, tolerance, empathy, and selfish.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/pennsylvania/articles/2021-03-15/ag-gun-show-promoter-to-bar-ghost-gun-assembly-kit-sales
As a police officer in a major metro area, I am enjoying this ongoing conversation, especially the balanced analysis. There are truly no easy answers. On the question of whether the DA is responsible for the spike: you noted the homicide captain’s quote about needing the community’s cooperation to solve homicides (implying that the black community is much less likely to cooperate), and argued that this effect cannot be linked to Krasner. Certainly the “no snitches” culture plays a part in this. However, in my experience, other than those in gangs (for whom snitching can be fatal), a community’s willingness to cooperate is far more strongly related to the level of trust in the justice system. A person who has cooperated with the police once, only to find their assailant/abuser released back on the street for whatever reason, is almost certain to not cooperate the next time. Why should they? We are asking them to take a great risk and then abusing that trust by not putting that dangerous criminal away. And the average citizen does not distinguish whether the person is back on the street due to ineffective investigation, low bail, weak prosecution, or a political catch-and-release policy.
In addition to the negative effects on citizen cooperation, these kind of effects are also devastating to the morale of officers, who sometimes put their lives and/or careers on the line to arrest dangerous suspects only to see them back out in the street. It’s a recipe for de-policing, which as we know does affect crime rates.
It is worth noting that Krasner got re-elected this spring with close to 70% of the vote and won a contested primary early by about the same margin. I can only conclude that the good voters of Philadelphia like and approve of his policies and the job he is doing. Or are indifferent to the murders because they do not affect most of them
How familiar are you with the number of black children being killed in black neighborhoods? Probably not much, and neither am I. And that is in no small part because our prestigious newspapers, tv channels, etc refuse to dwell on the issue. (Right-wing media is a better source.)
Perhaps Krasner won, in part, because the whites who voted for him are largely insulated from crime by their money and lower proportionate crime rates committed by whites. I have not looked on purpose, but I suspect that Philadelphia is very segregated. Those same whites are largely progressive/liberal and "defund the police", etc are credal among them. I believe that Krasner was hugely attacked by right-wing mediasphere.
I am going to skip commenting on the black vote....But didn't Krasner gain support from influential black churches in Philadelphia?
I live in Philadelphia. My sense is that many of the downtown whites who did vote for Krasner were, as you say , insulated or at least felt insulated from the violence and probably more importantly voted D out of reflex
The Gun Violence Archive provides data on the number of children who are injured or killed each year:
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
Their data shows that over 1,000 kids 11 and younger have been shot or killed so far this year. About 4,500 kids between the ages of 12 and 17 have been shot or killed so far this year.
The data isn't broken out by race, but it's fair to assume that a disproportionate share of the kids represented by these numbers are children of color. The CDC's WISQARS database shows that 741 blacks between the ages of 1 and 17 were homicide victims in 2019 (Latest year available):
https://wisqars.cdc.gov/fatal-leading
It's an interactive tool, so you have to do a customized screen of the data to get the number I quoted above.
I think the FBI is a better source for viewing crimes. They say: Murder and man slaughter for whites is 3650 and blacks is 4078. Robbery is 25,143 for whites and 29,667 for blacks. Weapons carrying charges are about the same. All other crimes, show whites commit more than blacks. If these were weighted as percent of population, you will find blacks higher than whites in every category.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/table-43
BLACK PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-2.xls
OTHER INTERESTING TABLES
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-1.xls
Suicide Deaths although caused by firearms is planned. It is not a thing that just pops into your mind as being something to do. Removing firearms from the population in Australia did nothing for suicide. They went from fire arms to gassing.
The FBI did break out race and deaths by guns and violent deaths until 2017. That is the data that consistently reported deaths by hammer were higher than by a rifle. They stopped reporting because too many people were getting data supporting the AR 15, which the Govt wants to get rid of first, just because they can.
Krasner was funded by Soros and most of the advertising for DA was done by Krasner. Kim Gardner in St. Louis has an even worse record. The population loves Gardener also; is it Soros funding or is it the woke attitude in the population?
https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/12/george-soros-has-been-funding-woke-das-in-democrat-cities-with-high-crime-rates/
Red Voice Media is a useless source. Total crap. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/red-voice-media/
I like your reply. The Soros funding is well known, and Krasner had the most advertisements form any candidate. I just picked a source at random. Here are other sources.
https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-prosecutor-campaign-20180523-story.html
https://nypost.com/2021/12/16/how-george-soros-funded-progressive-das-behind-us-crime-surge/
https://nypost.com/2021/12/01/george-soros-has-blood-on-his-hands-for-the-rise-in-killings-nationwide/
Well be careful with your sources, because they don't make you look credible when you pick the wrong one. I almost got caught by citing Stormfront many years ago before it was well-known for evidence refuting something a Jewish guy told me. Then I was like, "Wait...what's Stormfront?" and I looked at their landing page, lost my shit and found a better source :) So even utter crap sites can get something right on occasion, you just never want to cite them. I'm a big fan of Media Bias Fact Check for checking bias and factualism. I'm okay with some bias on either side as long as they ride high for factualism. The NY Post is a questionable source, 'Mixed' for factualism, LA Times is better with 'High" factualism. Snopes is another good one. They're one of the best sources out there although they don't rate the media the way MBFC does. Even nutty far and left wing websites get it right once in awhile (as my friend likes to say, "Even a broken clock is right twice a day") so if it sounds credible, check it elsewhere and always know how reliable the source is.
Someone else has suggested researching something from an anonymizer like Startpage to see the stuff that often gets filtered out of Google's sometimes suspiciously political-biased algorithms for top SERPs.
Snopes has some information on Soros debunked conspiracy theories, but not, from the quick check I did, on the DA funding, so I think I'll submit it.
When you talk about black on black murders, you are talking about gangs. When you talk about unsolved murders you are talking about gangs. When you talk about uncooperative witnesses you are talking about gangs. You can't talk about gangs without mentioning the word "gangs" on a regular basis.
Maybe, or maybe it's just people who do not care about morals. I like showing the four black girls beating the Asian up. It was brutal, filled with rage and hate. Jack Posobiec had posted it on Twitter. (1) I can't find the beating anywhere on the web.
Philadelphia Council Woman Helen Gym Says:
But Gym said the incident reflects the level of trauma and violence happening across Philadelphia, and lack of support for the city’s children — who are living through the COVID-19 pandemic, the opioid epidemic, gun violence and economic problems.
“It’s heart wrenching to see young people at such a young age harming one another,” she said. “But I will underscore time and again that they are witnessing violence at an unprecedented level across our city and we are not doing nearly enough for children right now in helping them deal with the trauma and harm that has been caused to them.”(3)
Philadelphia had just gone through a rape in the subway where all the people just watched. And the Libs of Tik tok posted, Black teens pulling up to a red light jumping out than robbing people waiting in the street at gun point. (4)
Philadelphia is full of anger, like St; Louis. or Baltimore or Kansas City. Is it buffoonery and reverse racism. Asians, Hispanics, and Whites don't do this. Remember Darryl Brooks and Waukesha? Google his image and try to find it. Google Ethan Crumley, school shooter in Michigan, and look for his picture. Darryl Brooks essentially disappeared from the Internet. Black racism is alive and present and the new pedagogy only create more problems. I think Helen Gym is wrong.
(1) https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/video-teen-girls-attack-students-on-septa-train/3051706/
(2) https://twitter.com/search?q=philadelphia%20libs%20of%20tiktok&src=typed_query
(3) https://whyy.org/articles/philly-da-files-charges-against-teens-for-attack-of-asian-classmates-on-septa-train/
(3 )https://nextshark.com/philadelphia-group-sucker-punches-asian/
(4) https://twitter.com/i/status/1370484069989904384
On the limited topic of black on black murder, it's hard to beat gangs as a cause. We can go back and forth all day about absent fathers, lack of opportunity, systemic racism; none of which have a feasible solution. We can, however, take a big chunk out of gangs.
With respect, I disagree with the notion that gangs are the source of the problem, and that their eradication is the key to finding solutions (well, sort of). The breakdown of poor families in America- disproportionately black- that has been fueled by the disastrous impact of 25+ $$TRILLIONS$$ spent by our federal government over the last 56 years to incentivize single parenthood and indigence is the true culprit. Though everyone must be held responsible for their own decisions, it is not reasonable to look upon the lot of fatherless young men trying to survive in blighted urban dystopia of our own making and blame them for too often reaching out for the most obvious opportunity they can find for male bonding, power and meaning amidst the chaos of their daily lives. Until we’re able to fashion a true “social safety net” for all citizens that prioritizes both family formation and gainful employment, we will continue to reap a bitter harvest of cultural pathology among our nation’s poor.
Why are the young black men fatherless? Is it because of the values they have? Panorama Surveys are coming to all schools and will find at risk children and take them from their mothers. This is funded by Zuckerberg and the Bill and Melinda Gates Fund. Merrick Garland the Attorney General had a conflict of interest with this.
Don;t worry, at risk children will be identified and the state will teach the values society wants.
There has never been a true social safety net for all citizens. I suspect there never will be. But there have been less violent societies. In the meantime we have no recourse but to treat the symptoms.
Sorry to sound “pollyannish”; what I mean by “true social safety net” is public policy that doesn’t subsidize demonstrably bad personal decisions, like having a child out of wedlock, or not securing enough income to jeopardize benefits, or not marrying somebody with a job for the same reason. This is a crisis of our own making, for which I maintain the faith that a wholesale reconsideration of these same failed policies and incentive structures can provide hope for its unmaking, and for our shared future as Americans.
You are right. Drugs fuel the gang problems and it is cool to be in a gang. Violence is their way of creating identity. Legalizing drugs would get rid of part of the gang problem. Here is another idea, disbursing black neighborhoods into rural areas may be another way. Appalachia, Nebraska, Western Kansas, Eastern Colorodo, South Dakota, West Virginia, New Mexico, Wyoming, Idaho, Western Texas, and North Dakota. Communities with little black population, far away from big cities.
The fact that we have to rely on The Washington Post or Mapping Police Violence for data on police violence now something like 8 years after Furgeson is unacceptable. Where is the US Dept of Justice? Why is there no hue and cry to get some factual information on an issue that is tearing the country apart? Why have no prominent Black politicians insisted on a Congressional investigation into whether or not racist police in this country are actually targeting and killing young black males? And to what specific scope does the problem exist? Does it happen rarely or regularly? Talk about an epistemological crisis! Why is getting to the bottom of this issue so difficult for a country that just put a $10 Billion super telescope into orbit to get to the bottom of how the universe was created? This could’ve been another sequence in the movie “Don’t Look Up”.
Could the scarcity of that data be on purpose?
Given the centrality of the issue to academia, media, the overclass, foundations, Couldn't resources have been pooled so, for example, Yale or Stanford and the Ford Foundation and Pew and on and on gathered data that would be shared publicly?
I wonder if that may be because the shooting and killing of unarmed black men by police, especially white police, is well......Here is what the Post says for 2020: Black 17 men, White 25 men, Hispanic 9, Asian not explicitly reported.
I have seen a chart that says there is an appreciable number of progressive who think that police kill over 1000+ black unarmed men per year. I will try to find it....What would then happen if instead they found out that the real number is closer to 17 for all of 2020, as example?
(BTW, I have asked progressive friends question of how many unarmed black men are shot ...note that these are shootings......and killed each year and they have gotten very upset when they see the number precisely because it so low and the source isn't Fox but the Washington Post.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/
Don’t forget we are also the country with a new commission trying to track down $100 billion of stolen “relief money”. Money is not the issue, it almost makes me think Black lives don’t matter as much when there’s no money in it.
I agree with your overall point about the need for better, more consistent data from a source such as the DOJ. That said, there's credible data that suggests the narrative of large numbers of cops targeting and killing innocent young black males is false. The Washington Post's database has never shown more than 40 unarmed blacks being shot dead by law enforcement in a given year since they started collecting data back in 2014. Only four unarmed blacks have been killed this year according to their database (Checked it just before I posted this).
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences did an analysis a few years ago that showed the lifetime odds of a black male dying from police use of force are about 1 in 1,000:
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793
To put that number in context, the National Safety Council shows that all of us are more likely to die of other things that don't attract nearly as much attention:
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/
The lifetime odds of dying in a fall, for example, are 1 in 106. The lifetime odds of dying in an auto accident are 1 in 107. The lifetime odds of dying because of a gun assault are 1 in 298. The lifetime odds of dying in a "pedestrian incident" are 1 in 543. I could go on, but I hope you get the idea. While each life is precious, the lifetime odds of a young black male being killed by law enforcement are modest and much lower than those associated with other things that nobody's worked up about.
To be fair, the PNAS analysis shows that the lifetime odds of being killed by law enforcement are about 1 in 2,000 for all males and about 1 in 33,000 for all females. The raw numbers don't mean much, however, unless you adjust them for differences in criminality. In other words, the reason that men are 16x more likely to be killed by law enforcement than women is that men tend to commit more crimes and are more likely to end up in situations where police officers feel the need to resort to deadly force.
Roland Fryer has done some work on racial differences in police use of force:
https://scholar.harvard.edu/fryer/publications/empirical-analysis-racial-differences-police-use-force
It doesn't fit the prevailing narrative, so it never got the attention it deserves.
Here is a link to the survey by Skeptic Research that I think you're referencing:
https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&cx=018011741860882051434:sf9o9dutbts&q=https://www.skeptic.com/research-center/reports/Research-Report-CUPES-007.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiG0N2g94L1AhVRTd8KHQpxCbsQFnoECAYQAg&usg=AOvVaw3NdRRC5Loil-JipRmze5BG
The NY Post did a piece about this, but I don't think it got much coverage from most of the MSM:
https://nypost.com/2021/02/27/cases-of-police-brutality-against-black-people-are-overestimated/
Police Magazine picked up on this as well:
https://www.policemag.com/596346/half-of-surveys-very-liberal-respondents-believe-1-000-or-more-unarmed-black-men
I don't know anything about Skeptic Research, so I can't vouch for the quality of their work
I wouldn’t trust any data that didn’t come from an official source. There’s too much at stake to leave it up to organizations that may or may not have an axe to grind. The President should simply ask the Attorney General to provide accurate numbers based on mandatory reporting by individual states.
No report - No federal law enforcement grants to that state. Hire ten lawyers per state, 500 lawyers, to vet the reports as accurate. Simple.
Can you please provide a link to what you consider the closest to an official source? Thank you.....
Without an official source to compare any studies with, it’s difficult to guess what other sources may be closest to it. Obama’s AG ordered a federal database to be established by the DOJ right after Furgeson. The DOJ requested data from the states, but not enough states cooperated to gather meaningful stats. It’s been years now, and the de facto blackout of this information is never addressed by the media, activists, politicians, conservatives, progressives? The DOJ could threaten to cut blacked out states out of federal grant money. Congress could pass a law. One has to wonder who benefits most from this enforced ignorance.
Clifton, thank you for the links. You should be aware of this article about forensic anthropology (a field I didn't know even existed until I read this article).
In essence the article states that forensic anthropologists (note that it's the forensic ones, not non-forensic) are about 90% accurate in determining "social race" of skeleton. But the writers than rather bluntly say they should stop since this rate of success counter the idea that race is a social construction.
It's fairly short and you really should read it.
"Forensic anthropologists can try to identify a person’s race from a skull. Should they?"
https://www.science.org/content/article/forensic-anthropologists-can-try-identify-person-s-race-skull-should-they
Thanks! I'll check it out.
Interesting and informative commentary,as usual, but one question, are you referring to Congresswoman Omar?
See here: https://glennloury.substack.com/p/hope-for-omar/comments
No. Omar is a "character" that John McWhorter came up with. a while back on an edition of The Glenn Show. Omar is a young black male who gets into more than his share of trouble.
I am new to this conversation, thanks for the clarification.
The first priority of government is the safety of its people, short of success, we have no country!