General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Myth of Black-on-Black Crime
Last week, in Chicago, 16-year-old Darryl Green was found dead in the yard of an abandoned home. He was killed, relatives reported, because he refused to join a gang. Unlike most tragedies, howeverwhich remain local newsthis one caught the attention of conservative activist Ben Shapiro, an editor for Breitbart News. Using the hashtag #justicefordarryl, Shaprio tweeted and publicized the details of Greens murder. But this wasnt a call for help and assistance for Greens family, rather, it was his response to wide outrage over Saturdays decision in the case of George Zimmerman, where a Florida jury judged him not guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter in the killing of Trayvon Martin.
Shapiro, echoing many other conservatives, is angry over the perceived politicization of the Zimmerman trial, and believes that activists have injected race into the discussion, as if theres nothing racial already within the criminal-justice system. Indeed, he echoes many conservatives when he complains that media attention had everything to do with Zimmermans race. If he were black, the argument goes, no one would care. And so, Shapiro found the sad story of Darryl Green, and promoted it as an example of the black-on-black crime that, he believes, goes ignored. Or, as he tweets, 49% of murder victims are black men. 93% of those are killed by other blacks. Media dont care. Obama doesnt care. #JusticeForDarryl.
The idea that black-on-black crime is the real story in Martins killing isnt a novel one. In addition to Shapiro, youll hear the argument from conservative African-American activists like Crystal White, as well as people outside the media, like Zimmerman defense attorney Mark OMara, who said that his client never would have been charged with a crime if he were black.
(Its worth noting, here, that Zimmerman wasnt charged with a crime. At least, not at first. It took six weeks of protest and pressure for Sanford police to revisit the killing and bring charges against him. Indeed, in the beginning, Martins cause had less to do with the identity of the shooter and everything to do with the appalling disinterest of the local police department.)
But theres a huge problem with attempt to shift the conversation: Theres no such thing as black-on-black crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, youll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other.
What Shapiro and others miss about crime, in general, is that its driven by opportunism and proximity; If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, its because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as wellwhites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.
Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop. In Washington, D.C., for example, fewer than 10 percent of black youth are in a gang, have sold drugs, have carried a gun, or have stolen more than $100 in goods.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/the-trayvon-martin-killing-and-the-myth-of-black-on-black-crime.html
Response to morningfog (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Response to morningfog (Reply #2)
Name removed Message auto-removed
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)Response to BainsBane (Reply #9)
Name removed Message auto-removed
BainsBane
(52,999 posts)Why make a point of saying the article is factual incorrect. Do you know what the author's point is?
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Response to NoOneMan (Reply #3)
Name removed Message auto-removed
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)that is clearly implied. and it is true.
Response to arely staircase (Reply #8)
Name removed Message auto-removed
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Or worse.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)complete with statistics proving it. you are taking a quote completely out of the context of the article in which it only makes sense in order to make what point, I don't know. but probably not a good one.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Just Saying
(1,799 posts)Thanks MIRT!
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Just Saying
(1,799 posts)And lots of ammunition to fight the idiots who don't understand why Trayvon's case is important or who bring up Chicago murders as if they give a shit!
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Yes, most people are killed by someone they know. Mafia members know each other, gang members know each other, drug dealers know their suppliers and their customers, pimps know hookers and johns, thieves know fences, and so on. Get the idea? In fact, well over half of all murder victims have criminal records themselves.
With domestic violence murders, the murderous spouse (usually male) almost always has a record of violent behavior and often a criminal record. Living with a violent criminal is very dangerous.
Ozzie & Harriet won't kill each other, but Punch & Judy are prime candidates to be in a morgue.
annm4peace
(6,119 posts)our Minneapolis paper had an Commentary by "black man" but member of a right wing think tank in MN that produced Michele Bachman and other right wing nuts.
anyhow.. the commentary was the propaganda piece of black on black crime, the evil of hip hop music. blah blah blah...
but sadly the white hosts of a local progrssive radio show on am950 radio read the article and then asked callers if they agreed with this jerk and made many ignorant remarks.
Captain Stern
(2,194 posts)Most people that are murdered are murdered by someone they know, whether it be family, "friends", or whatever. It only follows that most black murder victims are murdered by other black folks, and that most white victims are murdered by other white folks.
That certainly doesn't mean black-on-black crime is a myth, and it doesn't mean white-on-white crime is a myth. It's just a statistic that is true, but is often misused.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)Specifically, this excerpt:
Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop.
This from the Bureau of Justice Statistics at: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4575
Violent Crime Against Youth, 1994-2010
Janet L. Lauritsen, Ph.D., Nicole White, Ph.D., University of Missouri
December 20, 2012 NCJ 240106
Presents patterns and trends in violent crime against youth ages 12 to 17 from 1994 to 2010. The report explores overall trends in violent crime against youth and examines patterns in serious violent crime and simple assault by the demographic characteristics of the victim, the location and time of the incident, weapon involvement and injury, the victim-offender relationship, and whether police were notified. Data are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which collects information on nonfatal crimes, reported and not reported to the police, against persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households.
Highlights:
In 2010, male (14.3 victimizations per 1,000) and female (13.7 per 1,000) youth were equally likely to experience serious violent crimerape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. In comparison, male youth (79.4 per 1,000) were nearly twice as likely as female youth (43.6 per 1,000) to experience serious violent crime in 1994.
Among racial and ethnic groups, black youth experienced the highest rates of serious violent crime in 2010. From 2002 to 2010, rates of serious violent crime declined among white (down 26%) and Hispanic (down 65%) youth, but remained the same among black youth.
From 1994 to 2010, youth living with an unmarried head of household were generally more likely than youth living with a married head of household to be victims of violent crime. During this period, the decline in serious violent crime was greater for youth in married households (down 86%) than the decline among youth in unmarried households (down 65%).
Press Release
morningfog
(18,115 posts)The OP, in that quote, is "crime rates". The stat you cite is "serious violent crime."
The OP quote starts by distinguishing that the paragraph is specific to criminality in general.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)I think my confusion arose from the fact that in the paragraphs preceding the one I quoted, the writer was speaking of violent crime. So I naturally assumed that when the writer injected crime statistics into the argument they were also referring to violent crime rather than to criminality in general.
left lowrider
(97 posts)I followed the logic of the article . . . and actually learned something.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)know those who shot them, regardless of race.
Victims of gun violence who did not previously know their shooters, as in a family member or friend of some kind, are much more rare.
There are a dispropotionate number of shootings in north Minneapolis where the victim did not know the shooter as either a family member or friend of some sort. These shootings result in innocent people dying, such as a 3 year old sleeping on his grandmother's couch. This happened to be a black on black crime.
I do not know the statistics nationwide. I do know this sort of crime is happening too frequently in both north Minneapolis and south Minneapolis.
"Theres no such thing as black-on-black crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, youll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other."
This statement contradicts itself.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Wringing ones hands that the perpetrator shares some characteristic of the victim is the classic way of avoiding any responsibility to do anything for the victims.
Black males are the single most vulnerable demographic in the US, but society doesn't care... so we put money, legislation, awareness and effort into reducing violence against the least vulnerable demographic.
PotatoChip
(3,186 posts)Thanks for the article.