White Privilege?

[TLDR20]

I never said the media debunks anything. Also when conducting studies of social issues, it is primarily done through polling. I will agree in the medical and science world's, it's a big deal. In the social realm, "things" like white privilege, when proven to be false are not made to be as big of a deal. And often are cited in political arenas by politicians and political talking heads, even after they have been clearly proven false.

Let's take the a false narrative like concealed carry would raise the amount of homicides in America. That was the talking points in the mid 90's for the liberal agenda. 20 years later, there has been countless studies showing that homicides decreased after concealed carry became law. Some that were not well researched that tried to push the old agenda but due to CDC and the FBI Keeping close study, the naritive was debunked through unbiased research over a long period of time. However, when ever the issue is brought up, these findings are never discussed, but others are used, like homicides in the UK vs the US per capita, etc.

My overall point, many of the socially based studies on a wide range of issues, are very narrow and do not reflect actually social norms. What might be so in the area surrounding the a study at Harvard, is probably not so in the area surrounding Texas A&M. There is no one mold, hints the difference in cultural and social norms across our country...but I digress.

So the CDC didn't study gun crime from 1996-2012. They are still barred by Congress from doing so. They have released a single paper about a single city in the last 20+ years.

 

[BloodStripe]

Profiling is a legitimate mechanism / tool of security and crime prevention. Also used widely for counter-terrorism. It is used the world over for probable cause coupled with clearly identified indicators to stop and question. "Predictive profiling" assists in the interception of those meeting certain objective criteria, that possess high risk behavior matching specific indicators. Racial profiling and the legitimate use of Predictive profiling are entirely different. This is used widely in airline, maritime and general security applications.

I was talking about racial profiling where I was just saying profiling. I thought that was a given, but I guess not.

Fact: 13% of African Americans were pulled over in 2011, compared to 10% of white Americans. Further, a lower percentage of white drivers stopped by police in 2011 were searched (2%) than black (6%) or Hispanic (7%) drivers.

Of these, over 50% of white drivers were stopped for speeding. Care to guess without looking it what percentage of blacks were stopped for speeding? I'll give you a hint, it's a double digit difference. Where I'm going with this is, the police are using other reasons to pull over more blacks than whites (percentage wise) and then searching them at a higher rate. Why is that do you think?

 

[Florida173]

Fact: 13% of African Americans were pulled over in 2011, compared to 10% of white Americans. Further, a lower percentage of white drivers stopped by police in 2011 were searched (2%) than black (6%) or Hispanic (7%) drivers.

What do you think that tells you? Because it hasn't been adjusted for population. I deal with this all the time in my job to make the numbers say what ever they need to say.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

So the CDC didn't study gun crime from 1996-2012. They are still barred by Congress from doing so. They have released a single paper about a single city in the last 20+ years.

Hmmm I've read several reports from the CDC that tracked homicides by city and cause (i.e. X number of homicides caused by X Y Z reason's). It wasn't gun specific, but believe they did list cause of homicide (i.e. blunt force, stab wound, gun fire, etc) could be wrong, I'll have to check that.

Funny,out of everything I wrote that, that was what you chose to respond to vs what we were actually discussing.

What do you think that tells you? Because it hasn't been adjusted for population. I deal with this all the time in my job to make the numbers say what ever they need to say.

I'm sure it will be spun by some one, but blacks make up 13% of the population, however acount for 52% of the "NATIONAL" crimes being committed. That's not talking traffic stops, we're talking robberies, rapes, assaults, homicides, etc.

There is a reason why blacks are being profiled, and it's because they are committing over half the national crimes and make up barley overy a tenth of our national population. It's completely lopsided and that is what the American police officer see every single day. That's not racism, that is just the cold hard facts.

 

[Gunz]

Leftist Liberal Commie Democrats (see? I'm profiling ), will tell you that the number of minorities in our prisons far outnumber whites, not because they are guilty of anything, but because the police and the courts are racist. If you ask the prisoners themselves (and I've been to a few prisons, not as a resident), they have all been framed. If you ask LEOs who work in cities where most of their 9-1-1 calls originate from between sundown and sunup, they will probably tell you the 'hood. They are not arbitrarily going into the 'hood to harass and arrest black people, they are being called there by residents and responding to situations.

 

[TLDR20]

Hmmm I've read several reports from the CDC that tracked homicides by city and cause (i.e. X number of homicides caused by X Y Z reason's). It wasn't gun specific, but believe they did list cause of homicide (i.e. blunt force, stab wound, gun fire, etc) could be wrong, I'll have to check that.

Funny,out of everything I wrote that, that was what you chose to respond to vs what we were actually discussing.

That was 1/3 of your post.

 

[Diamondback 2/2]

That was 1/3 of your post.

Set as an example, and not necessarily specific to the topic. Just an example.

So do you believe that white people or at least the majority of white people are racist? Do you believe that white people, regardless of economic class, are treated better than blacks? Do you believe that only white people have social privileges and that black or hispanics, or whoever can not be privileged over a white person, in their particular community?

If I went to a McDonald's store in a black community to apply for a job. Would I be hired over a black person because I am white? If the situation was flipped, would the black person get the job over the white?

I get that this is a touchy subject for many. But I'm am pretty tired of being told I'm privileged or that I'm a racist or any other stupid bullshit that isn't true. I don't particularly align my self with any politics, I prefer to stay independent so that I can call bullshit where I see it. The political correctness is keeping a lot of people from speaking up and calling bullshit. On things like black people can't be racist, that white people are privileged, etc.

The black community knows thats bullshit. And so you know there is a major difference between the gangsta thugs who rob, rape, murder, and the rest of the black community. The black community doesn't like those thugs either. But they are afraid of reprisal. It's been that way for decades.

Blaming white people, the police, the fairy fucking godmother, won't change the truth, it won't fix the problem, and it's nothing more than bread and circus, while our country gets more and more divided, more and more in debt, and more and more corrupt.

 

[Etype]

...

Blacks commit crimes at a proportionately higher rate than whites- that's not white privilege, that's self-imposed black disadvantage.

 

[Mad boomer]

I was talking about racial profiling where I was just saying profiling. I thought that was a given, but I guess not. Fact: 13% of African Americans were pulled over in 2011, compared to 10% of white Americans. Further, a lower percentage of white drivers stopped by police in 2011 were searched (2%) than black (6%) or Hispanic (7%) drivers. Of these, over 50% of white drivers were stopped for speeding. Care to guess without looking it what percentage of blacks were stopped for speeding? I'll give you a hint, it's a double digit difference. Where I'm going with this is, the police are using other reasons to pull over more blacks than whites (percentage wise) and then searching them at a higher rate. Why is that do you think?

There's merit to your statements, and on it's face there's a problem, there seems to be a disparity in treatment, with regard to routine contacts with Police. Without looking further in depth and doing an exhaustive analysis or cross referencing the factors. The DOJ validates most of your numbers.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Traffic Stops

"The color of crime" the stats in this report / anylsis editorial were take directly from the DOJ.
The Color of Crime

"Fact check do black Americans commit more crime"
FactCheck: do black Americans commit more crime?

"Race and crime in the United States"
Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Who kills police"
Are black or white offenders more likely to kill police?

"US crime in black and white"
Us Crime in Black & White - Infogram, charts & infographics

Depending on the source but generally: Blacks make up approx 12% of the population and account for over 50% of the criminal homicide and over 78% of their victims are other blacks. Whites are the most preferred victim pool by all offenders across the spectrum. There are many graphs and such available, open source.

My assertion is the black community has a violence problem, Police are more likely to target black community members in specific districts / areas based on the likelihood of criminal conduct in those areas. As well as a proliferation of violence and criminal conduct. I would like to see maps indicating the areas / regions of this heavy traffic enforcement and see how they overlap with known high crime areas.

In one unnamed city in California, over the last 6 years there has been an influx of people from the South LA area. This city was primarily white with a small black and hispanic representation, middle class and rural. The recent implants are being moved out of the ghettos to this community, offered free housing to "improve their lives". In this period of time over 7000 people have been moved into the city limits. Crime, drugs, violence and homicide have skyrocketed. The previous white, black and hispanic population is moving out, property value has plunged people are basically giving their homes away to get out. In this small city we know of over 1250 outstanding active warrants for arrest. Occasionally the worst offenders, known violent offenders are targeted and added to a bi-monthly / monthly hit list. This is coordinated with the CA-DOJ and multiple agencies for sweeps. If you drive in this city you will be stopped, you speed, have a tail light out and make any traffic violation you will be stopped. I have a badge and have been stopped three times. I was written a traffic ticket for speeding once by the CHP (Triple A with a gun) ;). You hang out on the corner in day time with a bag in your hand, or at night or involved in suspicious activity you will be stopped and questioned. The overwhelming population in this area is now black and a large criminal element is residing therein.

Do you think this is racial profiling?

 

[amlove21]

Blacks commit crimes at a proportionately higher rate than whites- that's not white privilege, that's self-imposed black disadvantage.

They are more likely to be involved in violent crimes, and black males were involved in 52% of murders while only making up 13% of the population from 2008-2013 (multiple studies, easily google-able).

Your statement is bothersome though, for this reason- so, let's say blacks do actually 'commit crimes at a higher rate than whites'.
Is it fair for our judicial system to discriminate against, target, and ultimately punish blacks with prison sentences 20% longer than their white counterparts?

For the sake of discussion- 2 carbon copy humans. Same history. Same crime. Same backstory. Same judge and jury. One human is black, the other is white. The black human gets punished much more harshly than the white human simply because that human is black. Isn't that the definition of systematic racism?

Question 1- What would your advice be to that black guy that just got 12.5 years when his white twin got 10 years for the same crime? "Shouldn't have been black?"

Question 2- Would you like to be a black man in America? Do you feel that, regardless of the fact that LOTS and lots of white people feel the same way that you do, you would be able to live an unmolested, fair and just life in America with no fear of racism impacting you?

 

[Etype]

They are more likely to be involved in violent crimes, and black males were involved in 52% of murders while only making up 13% of the population from 2008-2013 (multiple studies, easily google-able).

Your statement is bothersome though, for this reason- so, let's say blacks do actually 'commit crimes at a higher rate than whites'.
Is it fair for our judicial system to discriminate against, target, and ultimately punish blacks with prison sentences 20% longer than their white counterparts?

For the sake of discussion- 2 carbon copy humans. Same history. Same crime. Same backstory. Same judge and jury. One human is black, the other is white. The black human gets punished much more harshly than the white human simply because that human is black. Isn't that the definition of systematic racism?

Question 1- What would your advice be to that black guy that just got 12.5 years when his white twin got 10 years for the same crime? "Shouldn't have been black?"

Question 2- Would you like to be a black man in America? Do you feel that, regardless of the fact that LOTS and lots of white people feel the same way that you do, you would be able to live an unmolested, fair and just life in America with no fear of racism impacting you?

That seems like a narrow scope of information to form an opinion off of. Since they commit crimes at a higher rate, there's a greater chance they have prior convictions.

No, I wouldn't want to be a black person, just like you wouldn't; just like most blacks wouldn't want to be white. That's a ridiculous question.

 

[AKkeith]

They are more likely to be involved in violent crimes, and black males were involved in 52% of murders while only making up 13% of the population from 2008-2013 (multiple studies, easily google-able).

Your statement is bothersome though, for this reason- so, let's say blacks do actually 'commit crimes at a higher rate than whites'.
Is it fair for our judicial system to discriminate against, target, and ultimately punish blacks with prison sentences 20% longer than their white counterparts?

For the sake of discussion- 2 carbon copy humans. Same history. Same crime. Same backstory. Same judge and jury. One human is black, the other is white. The black human gets punished much more harshly than the white human simply because that human is black. Isn't that the definition of systematic racism?

I agree with @Etype.

Finding a carbon copy person with identical history but with a different skin color is next to impossible.
I think this is what skews the "black person gets worse punishment for same crime" data. They aren't the same people. They don't have the same history. There's too many factors to throw that blanket statement over an entire court case.

 

[Florida173]

That seems like a narrow scope of information to form an opinion off of. Since they commit crimes at a higher rate, there's a greater chance they have prior convictions.

No, I wouldn't want to be a black person, just like you wouldn't; just like most blacks wouldn't want to be white. That's a ridiculous question.

Five years after release from prison, black offenders had the highest recidivism rate (81 percent), compared to Hispanic (75 percent) and white (73 percent) offenders.

Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010

 

[busyworks]

I'm really sick of everything being the governments fault. EVERYONE plays the victim card now. It's honestly disgusting.

There's no boogieman out there making life hard for whatever racial/gender/social group is currently feeling like they're being conspired against.

 

[amlove21]

That seems like a narrow scope of information to form an opinion off of. Since they commit crimes at a higher rate, there's a greater chance they have prior convictions.

No, I wouldn't want to be a black person, just like you wouldn't; just like most blacks wouldn't want to be white. That's a ridiculous question.

I agree with @Etype.

Finding a carbon copy person with identical history but with a different skin color is next to impossible.
I think this is what skews the "black person gets worse punishment for same crime" data. They aren't the same people. They don't have the same history. There's too many factors to throw that blanket statement over an entire court case.

Keith, no, it's not that impossible at all. All you have to do is look at court cases for crimes- like, aggravated assault for example. Find a white guy with no priors, and a black guy with no priors. Compare those sentences, and see who gets a longer sentence. The studies posted here show that those black guys get sentences 20% longer across the board.

I wanted to use the facts of the study and take away all those other things that whites usually say ("they're probably criminals anyway/history of convictions/etc") by way of a thought experiment where we had two identical humans in order to actually talk about the issue, not preconceived notions about black culture. Unfortunately, looks like it didn't work. So, whether you agree with the data or not, whether you believe it or not, it's a true statement.

E, same response. It's ok if you think that it's a narrow scope but blacks are punished at a higher rate compared to white people with similar histories and prior criminal conduct. So, regardless of what the rest of the black community does, how often they commit crimes, or any other metric we can look at, the fact remains. Our judicial system unfairly punishes black people even when they do the same things as whites.

To close out- no, it's not a ridiculous question at all. When BLM or whoever wields the WP argument, they're looking for whites with answers like yours.

You'll readily admit you wouldn't trade your race in this country. I can't honestly say I would either, because I think we both agree that choice would a change our lives a great deal. Then you and I would have to deal with racism, violence at a much higher rate, a judicial system that punishes us unfairly, harassment from law enforcement at a higher rate, and whites that hear us talking about our very real social issues and dismiss us as "whiners" and "complainers" and "players of the race card".

I can't speak for 'most blacks' like you did, but I will tell you this- I would be willing to bet a majority of blacks would 100% want to be treated as if they were white. And that's what WP is about- no, you wouldn't be black because you'd have to deal with those issues but you'll sit here and say "Well, they commit more crimes and they should just shut up I am sick and tired about hearing them complain about how bad they have it."

 

[Beagle]

My professional experience with the legal/justice system in the military and the civilian side is it's crazy, unfair and doesn't make sense. In addition I was a jury member for a civil trial that last over a month and it's the craziest thing I have ever seen.

I have seen minorities get screwed since they didn't have money for a good attorney.

 

[compforce]

I've been staying out of this one up until now. Here are some thoughts:

1 - I agree that the standards for court imposed sentencing should be the same regardless of race, color, creed or any other factor other than the actions and results of those actions. I am also firmly opposed to ANY law based on race, whether it defines different punishments or different favorable actions.

I have seen minorities get screwed since they didn't have money for a good attorney.

Is that a result of them being a minority or is that the result of them not having money? The two are not necessarily related. The folks arguing WP would say that they don't have money because they are a minority. I would suggest that in today's world that is not a direct causality. There are plenty of caucasian, male, qualified applicants for jobs that are passed over because of required percentages of minority hires. This isn't imposed by laws forcing the hiring, but rather through tax credits for maintaining a higher percentage of minority employees. The credit is big enough that a company that didn't maintain those percentages would be giving up a sizable advantage to competitors. The end result is that companies are incentivized to hire less qualified people that happen to be a member of a minority. There are plenty of caucasians that cannot afford a good attorney. There are also plenty of minorities that can afford a better attorney.

2 - WP is used as the explanation for quite a few things, from career and financial all the way to treatment by the criminal justice system. I think that much of it has nothing to do with race. Are there racists, emphatically yes, but they live on all sides of the population. For every group, minority or not, it's "OK" to make fun of the others and everyone laughs until it's their own group that is targeted. (it's not OK, but the prevailing belief is that it is as long as it is only discussed within their own group). Ultimately, in my eyes, the whole WP argument boils down to the person's own sense of victimhood. If a person believes that they are treated unfairly, they will believe they are a victim and that the rest of society owes them something.

3 - Education... Did you know that a white male now personally pays more than triple on average to go to college than a minority or female? This is because the system is heavily weighted towards minorities (with the exception of Asian-Americans, who actually average the highest cost) having their education wholly subsidized. While it is true that minorities that pay for their college pay the same amount on average as non-minorities, the number that have to pay anything is so incredibly low that the end result is much higher average tuition for caucasians.

Investment in higher education by race and ethnicity : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

I firmly reject the idea of White Privilege. I know that the response would be "you're white so you're just ignorant of your own privilege". Bullshit. I promise that if you knew my personal history you would be shocked at just how little my race has had to do with where I've been and where I've gone with my life. If you can think of a disadvantage (other than race or handicap) that a person has had to overcome, I've lived it.

I think that quite a few people on all sides of the aisle have forgotten the meaning of the statement "content of character, not the color of skin". I believe very firmly in the idea that we are individuals and that each of us should live our lives and feel the consequences, both positive and negative, based on our own actions. Not those of others in a group that we happen to belong to; Not those of people who are no longer alive; Not those of anyone other than ourselves.

The rallying cry should be "judge me for myself" not "check your privilege" Anything else just continues to create racial divides, tension and racially motivated violence.

 

[TLDR20]

Investment in higher education by race and ethnicity : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

I don't know where or how you came to the conclusion you did, but that paper doesn't support your claim.

Key quote: "Controlling for these important factors we find that whereas the decision whether to invest may be different for Asians ,African Americans, and Hispanics, the amount of investment for the most part is not significantly different from whites. "

 

[amlove21]

2 - WP is used as the explanation for quite a few things, from career and financial all the way to treatment by the criminal justice system. I think that much of it has nothing to do with race. Are there racists, emphatically yes, but they live on all sides of the population. For every group, minority or not, it's "OK" to make fun of the others and everyone laughs until it's their own group that is targeted. (it's not OK, but the prevailing belief is that it is as long as it is only discussed within their own group). Ultimately, in my eyes, the whole WP argument boils down to the person's own sense of victimhood. If a person believes that they are treated unfairly, they will believe they are a victim and that the rest of society owes them something.

Agree with some, disagree with most. I want to talk about your point 2 though, because I feel like you're either focusing on the wrong thing or you don't fully understand the topic.

Remember that the base claim for the whole WP argument basically boils down to, "There is a problem with racism in America, blacks are discriminated against, and white people dismiss this fact out of hand and have never had to deal with our issues and therefore don't understand them." If you replace the specific groups and verbiage, you can get to any 'privilege' sort of argument. Feminism, LGBTQ, whatever. "Just because you haven't had to deal with being a woman in America it doesn't mean these things aren't happening. To believe differently is male privilege."

It's not that blacks "feel" as if they're treated unfairly and are crying foul, it's that blacks (and other minorities in this country) are actually treated unfairly and they're crying foul. Thicker skin doesn't fix the problem. Being able to take a joke isn't going to fix the problem. In this case, society actually does owe them something.

 

[compforce]

I don't know where or how you came to the conclusion you did, but that paper doesn't support your claim.

Key quote: "Controlling for these important factors we find that whereas the decision whether to invest may be different for Asians ,African Americans, and Hispanics, the amount of investment for the most part is not significantly different from whites. "

The important factor they controlled out was the people that were fully subsidized. I acknowledged that in my post. The details are in the raw data which is linked in the article. You can also look at table C-2 which shows the disparity pretty clearly. This is very likely a study that was gone into with a predetermined conclusion. It is intellectually dishonest of them to claim a control on a portion of the population that significantly affects the metrics that they are studying. They explicitly mention this in one portion of their individualized findings.

African American young adults tend to have lower rates of college attendance and, among those who decide to attend college, a lower probability of having any tuition expenditure, even when family permanent income and education level are considered. However, of those who have any tuition expenses, the levels of expenditures are not significantly different from those of White families. The primary contributing factors to lower levels of household tuition expenditure by African Americans are socioeconomic differences, a lower likelihood to attend college, and the higher likelihood of having no expenditures even when one decides to attend college.

It's not a decision to invest if there is no cost to the investment. Therefore they just remove all of the people that didn't pay anything and are skewing the final result away from where they want it to be.

Slightly different question, but similar results (this is spreading all tuition across all households regardless of college attendance):