|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 23, 2024 16:44:00 GMT
The recent and ongoing thread on the Stephen Lawrence case turned up a quite startling claim by one of the forum’s newer members, to wit:
“The murder of white people which is racially motivated does happen, I do not deny it, but such instances are extremely miniscule, almost insignificent, as compared to the other way around. “
Given the enormous attention that the legacy media pays to cases like Lawrence, it’s perhaps unsurprising that a widespread perception has arisen – at least amongst progressive circles – that ethnic minorities are overwhelmingly victims rather than perpetrators of interracial violence in general.
I responded to the claim as follows:
“ The official statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System, the so-called Section 95 reports, show that white people are significantly under-represented as perpetrators of inter-racial homicides, compared to blacks, Asians and 'others'.
On what data are you basing your claim? ”[/div]
Since the claimant has chosen not to respond, I have started this thread to decouple what is an important topic that calls for fatcual analysis from the more emotive and topical discussion of Stephen Lawrence and the cult that has grown up around him. In fact, the Ministry of Justice publishes quarterly reports on all manner of statistics relating to the criminal justice system and has been doing since 1991; they’ve recently dropped the ‘Race’ from the title and now refer to Ethnicity and the Criminal Justice System. The data of specific interest is to be found under ‘Victims Tables’, from which I have extracted the following (slightly edited for clarity):  From this simple table we can see that for the two years in question there were 930 homicides in England and Wales for which the ethnicity of both principal suspect and victim have been identified. Based on their representation in the population as at the 2021 Census, we can calculate the ‘expected’ number of homicides for each of the three ethnic groups as follows:
Whites: 930 * 0.817 = 760 (compared to 647 actual) Blacks: 930 * 0.053 = 49 (137 actual) Other: 930 * 0.129 = 120 (146 actual) So the white population group is under-represented as perpetrators of homicides in general, but what is the situation if we consider just interracial homicides, of which there were 214 during the two years in question? Here’s the same calculation but using interracial homicides:
Whites: 214 * 0.817 = 175 expected (compared to 84 actual) Blacks: 214 * 0.053 = 11 expected (45 actual) Other: 214 * 0.129 = 28 (85 actual)
In terms of over- or underrepresentation, the white population commited less than half the ‘expected’ number of interracial homicides, compared to blacks who are four times over-represented and the ‘other’ group which is over-represented by over three times. So which 'meta-group' has the greater propensity to kill the other, whites or ethnic minorities? |
|
|
|
Post by Equivocal on Apr 23, 2024 20:13:07 GMT
I don't think the second part of your calculation works. For example, if there is a population of 200 men made up of 199 whites and one black. One white man murders another white man as does the black man, then the black man has an infinitely higher propensity to commit inter-racial murder.
I do, however, think your interlocutor was incorrect. I remember discussing this years ago and the article which sparked the conversation is still on line.
I've looked for up to date figures and the best I could come up with was an FOI to the Met, who have recorded just 2 'hate' motivated homicides in the ten years ended 2022. I may be misremembering but I'm sure there were other stats available at the time which seem to have disappeared.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 23, 2024 21:54:57 GMT
I don't think the second part of your calculation works. For example, if there is a population of 200 men made up of 199 whites and one black. One white man murders another white man as does the black man, then the black man has an infinitely higher propensity to commit inter-racial murder.
I do, however, think your interlocutor was incorrect. I remember discussing this years ago and the article which sparked the conversation is still on line.
I've looked for up to date figures and the best I could come up with was an FOI to the Met, who have recorded just 2 'hate' motivated homicides in the ten years ended 2022. I may be misremembering but I'm sure there were other stats available at the time which seem to have disappeared.
Is this not the problem with all stats involving racial disparities of any sort? Too many assumptions. Another stat that seems to have disappeared was a CRE report in the late 90s on street crime where it was clear much street crime was against white men by black men. This was dismissed by the report authors as being that most white people when the victim of a crime by black people often regard it as a racist attack. They presented no evidence on how they reached that conclusion.. It is also the fact that too often stats are used incorrectly as in the excessive proportion of black men dying in custody is related to the size of the black population when the two things are effectively not relatable as it is the number of each group being arrested that is the correct stat to use as a comparison. Perhaps murders are too small a number and too shaky in their definitions to have any real meaning unless related to a meaningful comparator. What that is is difficult to pin down. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 24, 2024 6:43:29 GMT
I don't think the second part of your calculation works. For example, if there is a population of 200 men made up of 199 whites and one black. One white man murders another white man as does the black man, then the black man has an infinitely higher propensity to commit inter-racial murder. ... But the statistics and my calculations are based on actual samples of millions not a highly skewed example as you have presented. 48.7 million whites, 3.2 million blacks and 7.7 million other, in fact.
A heightened propensity towards lethal violence towards whites is shown by non-whites who commited 98 homicides with white victims, compared to whites who 'only' commited 84 homicides with black or other victims. And this despite the white population being four and a half times larger.
Brings to mind the BNP's famous (notorious?) 'Racism Cuts Both Ways' campaign which created such a furore in in 2008, including a condemnation in Parliament.
|
|
|
|
Post by Equivocal on Apr 24, 2024 7:18:48 GMT
I don't think the second part of your calculation works. For example, if there is a population of 200 men made up of 199 whites and one black. One white man murders another white man as does the black man, then the black man has an infinitely higher propensity to commit inter-racial murder. ... But the statistics and my calculations are based on actual samples of millions not a highly skewed example as you have presented. 48.7 million whites, 3.2 million blacks and 7.7 million other, in fact. The percentages I took roughly reflected the ratio black population. You may prefer to consider the propensity of Argon molecules to assault Nitrogen molecules in Airland.
To be clear, I don't buy into Critical Race Theory or, for that matter, Critical Theory. As such, I have little doubt all groups contain a proportion who might commit racially/religiously motivated homicide. I don't believe there is an offence of racially/religiously aggravated homicide, but I do find it strange there are no statistics available with it being a specific aggravating factor in the sentencing guidelines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 24, 2024 7:47:15 GMT
Perhaps propensity is the wrong term since it hints at an innate characteristic, a taboo for liberals when applied in racial circumstances. Likelihood may be preferable, as in: How likely is an average black to commit an interracial homicide compared to an average white?
We get to the same answer in the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Equivocal on Apr 24, 2024 7:54:29 GMT
Perhaps propensity is the wrong term since it hints at an innate characteristic, a taboo for liberals when applied in racial circumstances. Likelihood may be preferable, as in: How likely is an average black to commit an interracial homicide compared to an average white? We get to the same answer in the end. Yes. I don't suppose propensity is a good fit for Argon molecules. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 24, 2024 7:56:50 GMT
I'd like to remind you that this thread is in the Mind Zone (on purpose). If you can't deal with with the views presented in a sensible and respectful manner it would be better if you refrained from comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Equivocal on Apr 24, 2024 8:04:12 GMT
I'd like to remind you that this thread is in the Mind Zone (on purpose). If you can't deal with with the views presented in a sensible and respectful manner it would be better if you refrained from comment. If you feel there has been a breach of Mind Zone rules, please feel free to report the transgression.
In the meantime, I shall comment where I choose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 24, 2024 8:07:47 GMT
I'll turn the other cheek this time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Equivocal on Apr 24, 2024 8:14:05 GMT
I'll turn the other cheek this time. Fine, and back to the subject.
Do you know if there are any stats available on the perpetrators/victims of racially aggravated homicides? I haven't been able to find anything current.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 24, 2024 8:55:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Equivocal on Apr 24, 2024 9:44:58 GMT
Thanks. I looked at the CPS 2018/19 report from the link in the MoJ. As you say, it looks at strands. On racially/religiously offences it gives the split of defendants as:
In 2018–19, 57.2% of defendants in cases flagged as racially and religiously aggravated were
categorised as White (a fall from 64.4% in 2017–18), with 51.8% being identified as belonging to
the White British category; 6.6% of defendants were identified as Black, down from 7.2% in
2017-18; and 4.8% were identified as Asian, a slight fall from 5.1% the previous year.
It doesn't help with homicides directly, but shows White and White British as underrepresented in proportion to their share of the population for the particular strand. Whether that's a guide to levels of racism or a reflection of the different racial groups' propensity to commit crime is mute.
It certainly doesn't support the idea that racially aggravated homicide against white people is vanishingly small in comparison to racially aggravated homicide against minorities.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 24, 2024 12:42:23 GMT
I'll turn the other cheek this time. Fine, and back to the subject.
Do you know if there are any stats available on the perpetrators/victims of racially aggravated homicides? I haven't been able to find anything current.
I believe the reason for your failure to find useful statistics to support or undermine either argument is down to government policy as superficially brushed over here www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ethnicity-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2022/statistics-on-ethnicity-and-the-criminal-justice-system-2022-htmlI do not refer to any actual figures, but to the sycophantic ramblings in the precursor / executive summary which state categorically that the MoJ have gone out of their way to present figures showing ethnicity in the criminal justice system in a way that PREVENTS them from providing reliable information to support either viewpoint This government censorship through release of limited propaganda unable to be used in a concrete form should be called out fir what it is. |
|
