Thursday, May 22, 2014

Keeping Japan Japanese


The city that currently has the dubious distinction of being the murder capital of America is Detroit.  In 2013, the city recorded a murder rate of 47.5 per 100,000.  That’s 36 times the rate of Osaka.  But by Detroit standards it was low.  In recent years the homicide rate there has been closer to 60.

Why are your cities so much more peaceful than ours?  Is it because of America’s cowboy culture?  Our affinity for guns? 
Well, the areas where gun laws are loosest and gun ownership rates the highest tend to have the lowest crime rates.  The true explanation for the violence that plagues America’s cities is revealed when we look at the demographic breakdowns for crime commission within each city.  Again and again, we see the same pattern emerging.  The issue of violent crime in America is an issue of race. 

The best predictor of an area’s violent crime rate is not gun ownership or poverty.  The best predictor of the violent crime rate of any given neighborhood or city is the proportion of its population that is black.  Blacks commit 50% of all homicides in the United States despite being only 13% of the population.  In New York City, blacks make up 25% of the population but commit 80% of all shootings.  If we could solve the problem of black crime, we could have cities as safe as yours in Japan.

But no one knows how to solve the problem.  What we do know is that disproportionately high rates of crime among blacks are a global problem.  From the United States, to Brazil, and now to Europe, people of Sub-Saharan African descent consistently bring an elevated proclivity for violence wherever they go.  Blacks in London just a couple generations ago existed in such small numbers that they were barely visible.  Then, a trickle of immigrants turned into a flood.  Today people of African origin comprise 10% of London’s population but account for a more than half of its violent crime.

3 comments:

  1. But no one knows how to solve the problem.

    What would a libertarian solution be? (I do not ask this lightly since I have strong pro-liberty inclinations.)

    A libertarian solution would have to start with an open discussion about black crime. And not just simply the crime, but the political aspects of the violence. Look at Beat Whitey Night, Polar Bear Punching, the Zebra Killings, farm attacks in the rainbow nation of South Africa, et alia. Or the frequent statements by black leaders that the Long Hot Summer riots of the 1960s were really "uprisings" against YT. Black violence targets white people with the intent to terrorize them. It's all a sort of tribal warfare, where only one side is fighting. The result has been the ethnic cleansing of white people from countries they established (Rhodesia, SA) and cities their ancestors built (Detroit, Newark, Birmingham, and now it appears London et alia).

    Are libertarians going to discuss this openly?

    Here's the thing: obviously, there are criminal elements in every ethnic/racial group. But with blacks, it goes beyond sanity. Look at the well publicized figure of 25%+ of black men being under the custody of the criminal justice system. How can you have a civil society with that many people committing crimes (stipulated, much of this is for victimless crimes like drug possession; this is balanced by the unreported violence under the "no snitch" rule)?

    I suppose the libertarian solution would be for everyone to buy guns and use them in self defense. But given that 25% black men under custody figure, it's going to mean a lot of people blazing away at each other. And what will that do for the quality of life in such a city?

    Again, look at the politics. Supposing a black flash mob attacks a group of libertarians in a concealed carry state. The libertarians draw their (legal) firearms and gun down several of the malefactors. How do you suppose that is going to be spun in the mainstream media? Or among the usual suspects among race hustling reverends? Or by the Department of Justice?

    That's right. They are going to scream "racism."

    And what will libertarians do then? Run around in circles saying, "We're against 'racism' too." Or stand up and openly confront the race war being waged against white people. It is a fact that the vast majority of libertarians are white. And libertarians might ponder why all the outreach in the world has failed to mobilize large numbers of blacks in the ranks of liberty lovers.

    Could it be something to do with genetics?

    Robert Heinlein famously commented that "an armed society is a polite society." But there's a difference between the people who constitute the USNA at Annapolis, science fiction conventions or Bible Belt Missouri--and those roaming the 'hoods of Detroit, the banalieus of Europa and the newly integrated cities of South Africa--all of which are disintegrating into ruin.

    ReplyDelete
  2. WHAT IS FAITH?

    What is faith? Faith is believing in something you cannot prove.

    Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. (New International Version-1984)
    Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of thing hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. (New American Standard Bible)
    Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (King James Version)

    I have faith that Jesus is the Son of God. I have faith that He performed miracles. I have faith that Jesus was resurrected from the grave by God the Father. I believe this because I have faith that the historical record of the Bible is accurate, yet I cannot prove it. There are no living eyewitness to confirm that Jesus was who He said He was or that He was resurrected from the dead, I accept it by faith, I believe it, however, I cannot prove it.

    Atheists do not believe the fact that Jesus was the Son of God or that there even is a God, they cannot prove their unbelief, they accept it by faith.

    Romans 8:24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope, for who hopes for what he already sees?(NASB)

    We have hope we have been saved, but we hope because of faith. We cannot prove we have been saved. We believe that we have been saved because we believe, by faith, that the Bible is accurate and trustworthy.

    John 20:27-31 Then He said to Thomas, "Reach here with you finger, see My hands and put them into my side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing." 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!'29 Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed." ...... (NASB)

    Thomas had proof that Jesus was resurrected from the grave. Men today cannot prove the resurrection of Jesus from the grave, they accept it by faith.

    There were more than five hundred brethren, including the apostles, who saw Jesus alive after He faced death on the cross. They were eyewitnesses, they had proof of the resurrection of Jesus. (1 Corinthians 15:3-7)

    Those of us alive today have to have FAITH that the Biblical accounts of Jesus and His resurrection are true. We cannot prove they are true. NO ONE IS ALIVE TODAY WHO WAS AN EYEWITNESS TO THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS.


    FAITH IS BELIEVING SOMETHING YOU CANNOT PROVE!

    NOTE: Atheists believe, by faith, that God does not exists, but they cannot prove it.


    YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG. http//:steve-finnell.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. Where are the citations for these statistics? What study are you citing?

    ReplyDelete