Quote of the Day: Statistical Edition

“(New York Times columnist Charles) Blow’s fear that his children will be blown away by a white is particularly ludicrous in New York City. Blacks commit 80 percent of all shootings in the city — as reported by the victims of and witnesses to those shootings — though they are but 23 percent of the population; whites commit 1.4 percent of all shootings, though they are 35 percent of the population. Add Hispanic shootings to the black tally, and you account for 98 percent of all of the city’s gun violence. In New York, as in big cities across the country, the face of violence is overwhelmingly black and Hispanic.” Heather Mac Donald


  1. avatar Derek says:


  2. avatar Charles says:

    Whoa! She just painted a target on herself, metaphorically speaking, of course.

    1. avatar Ropingdown says:

      She’s got good company on the front page of the NY Post today. (Excuse me for jumping….): Trayvon Tragedy Hijacked by Race Hustlers: http://www.businessinsider.com/backlash-explosive-new-york-post-cover-says-the-trayvon-martin-shooting-is-being-exploited-by–race-hustlers-2012-3

  3. avatar GS650G says:

    I saw this WaPost story where a black father tells his black son about the Black Man Code so that he doesn’t get mistaken for a hoodlum and killed accidentally. How about bucking the trend and telling his son not to dress like a gangster, get involved in crime, and keep his nose clean.
    But no, it’s now a war on young, innocent, harmless black men and it’s CCW armed white people doing it all.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      Hey, no! “Dress like a gangster” is a good thing, if possibly a little over the top. The stereotypical gangster looked pretty good. You know, shirt and tie a minimum, usually a suit and hat.

      Now gang members on the other hand…

      1. avatar Yeah, that guy... says:

        Excellent point.

        1. avatar Matt G. says:

          I like to separate the terms into “gangster”(Al Capone, Babyface Nelson)

          and “ganksta”(most every dooshbag I’ve seen, ever)

  4. avatar Levi B says:

    But holding communities responsible for what those communities teach their children would be racist!

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Its more like, fixing the problem would remove power from those community leaders. I believe some of the community leader need the conflict to keep themselves in power. Much like the Union Leaders and much like the Democrates in general. Its the crises that gives them power as long as its not fixed, they stay in power. There is also a victom mentality that is set in by many community leaders. The problem continues because nobody wants to talk reality, its better to protest and make noise in the media than focus on the real problems — in the liberal world, it is always someone elses problem other than my own.

      IMHO, in the end it comes down to jobs and economic oppurtunity and the USA no longer needs low skilled jobs and the Union led Teachers and Administrators have done a piss poor job of educating people for higher skilled jobs. Parents are partly to blame as well as other factors. Without a access to good transportation and good job skills, many communities are limited to the best jobs they can get as long as the bus can get there. And since in many places we have allowed blight and the collapes of schools to depress the population, we get what we get.

  5. avatar Jason says:

    U.S.-wide, blacks kill whites at a rate 13x higher than the other way around. But if you notice these hate facts, you’re a racist.

    1. avatar Matt H says:

      I’m not so sure I agree with accounting for population differences to arrive at that 13X number. Those population differences are what they are. So why worry about what the homicides would be if the populations were equal? If the populations were equal, we can’t assume the interracial homicide proportions would still be the same.

      Even with it only being roughly a 2X disparity, the Trayvon Martin shooting can still be called atypical, and certainly no reason for the wholesale abandonment of stand-your-ground laws. It’s also clear the notion that young black males are in daily mortal peril from racist whites is preposterous.

      1. avatar Jason says:

        You don’t understand rates, do you? We’re talking about deaths per 100,000, the same as you would if you were discussing a disease. The comparison to “if the populations were equal” is merely another way of illustrating the point. But the rates are what they are. 13x. Not twice.

        1. avatar Matt in FL says:

          That young lady must have some other astonishing assets to counterbalance the lack of intelligence she demonstrates in that video. I’m pretty sure I know 6 year olds who could pick up the concept faster than that.

          If it was fake (and I don’t think it was), that was an Oscar-worthy performance.

        2. avatar Matt H says:

          Not to defend her at all, but who’s dumber, the one who doesn’t understand rates, or the one making a video from behind the wheel at 80 MPH?

        3. avatar Matt H says:

          Did I ever question that the rates are 13X higher? No. I’m saying that rates are not relevant here. It’s an inappropriate extrapolation. It’s like when politicians propose raising tax rates and assume people will continue doing or reporting the same amount of the taxable activity they do now. They can’t explain it when raising rates actually causes revenue collections to go down.

          If whites and blacks had equal populations, that’s a radically different situation than we have now, so who knows how that would change crime or any number of other things?

        4. avatar Jason says:

          The rates are completely relevant. They represent risk. A white person’s risk of being murdered by a black person is 13x higher than a black person’s risk of being murdered by a white person.

          If the risk of murder is not relevant to you, why are you reading a site that is as concerned with self-defense issues as this?

        5. avatar Matt H says:

          It depends on which risk you’re interested in. Do you want to know the risk that a white person will kill a black person, or the risk to a black person of being killed by a white person (and vice versa for both)? The former has a ratio of about 13.1; the latter has a ratio of about 3.1 according to the numbers in the link you provided. So I stand corrected it’s not 2X.

          In your initial comment, you had it worded consistently: blacks kill whites at a rate 13X higher than the other way around. But in your latest comment, you worded it in terms of risk to the victim population. If that’s what you’re interested in (and I would agree) then the correct ratio is about 3X.

        6. avatar Moonshine7102 says:

          “If whites and blacks had equal populations, that’s a radically different situation than we have now…”
          Yes, and if your Aunt had balls, she’d be your uncle. Your statement and mine are identical in one important respect: they imply that because things COULD be different, this somehow lessens the importance of what happens here in reality.

  6. avatar Aharon says:

    Good post and good comments.

  7. avatar NR says:

    Something to keep in mind: people are prejudiced. Societies are racist. Not the other way around.

    What’s the difference? ‘Prejudiced’ is an adjective. ‘Racist’, all to often, is a noun– we say “He’s a racist”, implying that the racism is an inherent and unchangeable aspect of that person’s identity, as opposed to set of opinions that might change over time.

    You see the rhetoric, there? Prejudice becomes the unforgivable sin. A “racist” isn’t really even human anymore. The stigma prevents people from admitting the small ways in which everyone in prejudiced (if a guy asks you for a light in a parking lot at night, who intimidates you more?). That in turn prevents us from thinking clearly and realistically about the problems we have in this country because of race issues, and prevents us from solving them.

  8. avatar Alfonso says:

    Racist white woman is racist.

    1. avatar Moonshine7102 says:

      How so? If she’s making up facts to paint blacks as somehow predisposed to violent crime, that’s racist. If she’s quoting actual statistics from a reliable source, that’s not racist no matter how much you dislike the facts she presents.

  9. avatar Allan Delsard says:

    Heather Mac Donald for VP!

  10. avatar James says:

    Based on the responses I got when I cited similar facts and figures in the comment sections of other articles posted here, and since statistics and basic math are clearly biased in favor of the white devils, I believe the only pertinent response to this article can be:


  11. avatar Ralph says:

    I thought the article was bullsh!t because she spent the first paragraph throwing Zimmerman and SYG under the bus without adequate facts, which is nothing more or less than what the racial arsonists are doing. Her view of SYG and the defense of justification is also highly distorted and frankly just wrong.

    She doesn’t seem to mind racial politics. She just wants to control it.

  12. avatar Totenglocke says:

    To US NY logic, clearly the solution is to ban blacks and hispanics from owning guns.

    1. avatar Matt G. says:

      That’s exactly what they are trying to do with high license fees, ATF fees, and “may issue” laws.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email