fauxboken wrote:
any news on the white kids? are they recovering from the sucker punches? Or is "paralyzed in a coma" where things stand?

i guess in JC, before you hit on a girl (or grope one?!?!), you have to check to see if she's with an ugly, limp-dick, fobby, scumbag mutant. i truly hope these twats are beaten to a pulp in prison. more likely, they'll be welcome into a gang, become hardened, and then get deported to live in the tropics. so, i wish them guinea worm and a bangkok

dtjcview wrote:
Let's agree to disagree at this point

sinik wrote:


I really don't know why you are making this issue your personal crusade and I think you have chosen the wrong crime to take a stand on.

dtjcview wrote:

Sinik I posted BOTH the link AND the excerpt in my post. Your reply made NO distinction nor qualification between the two.

On post #36 I didnt care to repost your paragraph that included your rant on Asians, and idiotic assertion about my beliefs. I was answering your first paragraph. I didnt care to answer your idiotic and absurb claims in your second.

Crazy_Chester wrote:
I don't care about crime stats or who commits them. I am just pointing out what I consider to be lame journalism. The JJ's policy of giving a half-assed description of a perp in order to protect a group of people who may otherwise be offended is asinine. If they are going to print any kind of description at all, don't omit one of the most obvious characteristics. Printing facts in a paper does not create stereotypes.

icechute wrote:

I can read and comprehend. Sometimes even at the same time. Thank you.

What I come away with from your little textbook excerpt is that if I'm a victim of a crime committed by a white person, the percentages say I can, more than likely, ultimately go on with my life and that if I'm a victim of a crime committed by a black person, I, more than likely will end up in a cemetery.

Have I got that right?

by sinik on 2010/9/14 15:25:10

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

Quote:

by sinik on 2010/9/13 23:47:19

BTW the quote from the Wiki was almost entirely qualitative with the only figures given dating back nearly 20 years. 20 years ago the notion of an African-American president was a lot more remote than it is now.

Ok - let me summarise the wiki for Sinik, CC and icechute who don't seem to be able to read nor comprehend. The percentages of crime show little relative differences between races on commiting crimes. But guess who gets arrested the most? And Sinik, 2008 is 2 years ago, not 20. If you guys have something useful to say other than your stereotypical opinions, please back it up with some facts.

You are quite a tricky guy, aren't you? First, in post #36, you selectively lift a quote of mine but deleting some sentences so that it changes the meaning, then you claim that my use of the word "quote" above is referring to the link you posted rather than the quote you excerpted from the link. Nice one.

Er, no. Not our logic, YOUR logic. I think you need to explain why if the JJ includes race in the description that "creates a stereotype" but including other details do not.

We know the guy that tried to take over the Discovery Channel building a few days ago was Asian and the guy that shot 32 people at Virginia Tech was Asian. So do we think all Asian people are more likely to go crazy like that? Personally, I don't and don't think other people do. However, YOU, dtjcview, do think that other people will draw those kind of inferences from knowing details of ethnicity of people who commit crimes. I don't know why you would think that unless you, yourself believe that people of a certain ethnicity are more likely to commit crimes.

If you don't think that, what makes you presume other people will think it?

Crazy_Chester wrote:
I don't care about crime stats or who commits them. I am just pointing out what I consider to be lame journalism. The JJ's policy of giving a half-assed description of a perp in order to protect a group of people who may otherwise be offended is asinine. If they are going to print any kind of description at all, don't omit one of the most obvious characteristics. Printing facts in a paper does not create stereotypes.

dtjcview wrote:

Quote:

by sinik on 2010/9/13 23:47:19

BTW the quote from the Wiki was almost entirely qualitative with the only figures given dating back nearly 20 years. 20 years ago the notion of an African-American president was a lot more remote than it is now.

Ok - let me summarise the wiki for Sinik, CC and icechute who don't seem to be able to read nor comprehend. The percentages of crime show little relative differences between races on commiting crimes. But guess who gets arrested the most? And Sinik, 2008 is 2 years ago, not 20. If you guys have something useful to say other than your stereotypical opinions, please back it up with some facts.

dtjcview wrote:

Ok - let me summarise the wiki for Sinik, CC and icechute who don't seem to be able to read nor comprehend. The percentages of crime show little relative differences between races on commiting crimes. But guess who gets arrested the most? And Sinik, 2008 is 2 years ago, not 20. If you guys have something useful to say other than your stereotypical opinions, please back it up with some facts.

Quote:

summary from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States

Murder and non-negligible homicide
African Americans were arrested more than any other race for murder in 2008, making up 36% of all arrests. African Americans, constituting approximately 12% of the general population, were significantly overrepresented in the total arrests made. African Americans were also significantly overrepresented in victimization, representing 47% of all murder victims. White Americans and individuals of Other race were significantly underrepresented in cases of murder and non-negligible homicide in 2008.

Non-lethal violent crime
White Americans were arrested more than any other race for non-lethal violent crimes in 2008, making up 58% of all arrests. White Americans, constituting approximately 79% of the total population, were significantly underrepresented in the total arrests made. Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Americans, constituting approximately 4% of the total population, were also significantly underrepresented, making up only 1% of total arrests. African Americans were significantly overrepresented for non-lethal violent crimes in 2008, making up 39% of all arrests,

Property crime
White Americans were significantly underrepresented in all property crimes, as were Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Americans. African Americans were significantly overrepresented in all forms of property crime, making up 30% of all arrests.

by Crazy_Chester on 2010/9/13 10:32:12
...........................

You lost me at "blah, blah, blah".

They may as well leave out gender, build, height, and wardrobe, too. And perhaps go a little further and stop reporting on crimes all together. Then no one will get offended.

by icechute on 2010/9/13 10:47:24

...

Right. And this stereotype is because (unfortunately for those African-Americans who are law-abiding) a majority of crime is committed by them. Same for Hispanics.

This is not racism, but fact. And I'm sorry if it upsets the Utopian state of mind some people think we're living in.

by sinik on 2010/9/13 23:47:19

BTW the quote from the Wiki was almost entirely qualitative with the only figures given dating back nearly 20 years. 20 years ago the notion of an African-American president was a lot more remote than it is now.

summary from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States

Murder and non-negligible homicide
African Americans were arrested more than any other race for murder in 2008, making up 36% of all arrests. African Americans, constituting approximately 12% of the general population, were significantly overrepresented in the total arrests made. African Americans were also significantly overrepresented in victimization, representing 47% of all murder victims. White Americans and individuals of Other race were significantly underrepresented in cases of murder and non-negligible homicide in 2008.

Non-lethal violent crime
White Americans were arrested more than any other race for non-lethal violent crimes in 2008, making up 58% of all arrests. White Americans, constituting approximately 79% of the total population, were significantly underrepresented in the total arrests made. Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Americans, constituting approximately 4% of the total population, were also significantly underrepresented, making up only 1% of total arrests. African Americans were significantly overrepresented for non-lethal violent crimes in 2008, making up 39% of all arrests,

Property crime
White Americans were significantly underrepresented in all property crimes, as were Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Americans. African Americans were significantly overrepresented in all forms of property crime, making up 30% of all arrests.

dtjcview wrote:
"Regardless of their arguable accuracy, public focus on the disproportionate representation of minorities in violent crime rate statistics has led to both the general racialization of the discussion regarding crime[39] as well as to the emergence of a racial stereotype which characterizes young African American men as "inherently more sinister, evil and dangerous" than the young men of other racial groups, which Katheryn Russell-Brown has dubbed the "criminal black man" stereotype.[40] Research conducted over the last two decades on the public perceptions of crime reveals that 54% of surveyed White Americans believe that African Americans are more prone to violent behavior.[41] However, this perception of African Americans as inherently violent is not limited to the White segment of the population: the National Race and Politics Survey of 1991 recorded more than half of both White Americans and African Americans as being in agreement with the statement "Blacks are aggressive or violent". Further, nationwide research conducted in 2002 and 2004 revealed that the general public holds the belief that African Americans are involved in a greater percentage of violent crime than the official statistics actually indicate.[41]"

dtjcview wrote:
To chiefdahill, t-bird and sinik.

The JCPD are investigating the crime. Their primary aim short term is to find witnesses to the attack. Witnesses will likely have enough info from the JJ/JCPD published details to come forward.

At the moment, it's not a statewide, nationwide nor international manhunt. When it becomes such a manhunt, the local, state, federal and international police authorities will publish what details they see fit.

On general local crimes, publishing race generally serves no purpose imo. I'd leave it to the experts. As far as stereotypes go, this isn't my idea - its a well documented issue, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States

To quote:

"Regardless of their arguable accuracy, public focus on the disproportionate representation of minorities in violent crime rate statistics has led to both the general racialization of the discussion regarding crime[39] as well as to the emergence of a racial stereotype which characterizes young African American men as "inherently more sinister, evil and dangerous" than the young men of other racial groups, which Katheryn Russell-Brown has dubbed the "criminal black man" stereotype.[40] Research conducted over the last two decades on the public perceptions of crime reveals that 54% of surveyed White Americans believe that African Americans are more prone to violent behavior.[41] However, this perception of African Americans as inherently violent is not limited to the White segment of the population: the National Race and Politics Survey of 1991 recorded more than half of both White Americans and African Americans as being in agreement with the statement "Blacks are aggressive or violent". Further, nationwide research conducted in 2002 and 2004 revealed that the general public holds the belief that African Americans are involved in a greater percentage of violent crime than the official statistics actually indicate.[41]"

For me, I agree with JJs policy of leaving race out of the report unless it was directly relevant to the crime (hate crime, etc).

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

Boiled_Mussels wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

I posted your full quote. Simply put, posting race is unnecessary. It doesn't help the JC police find the perps. If they don't feel the need to post race, why do you think you know better?

So you mean to tell me that if someone just gets attacked, mugged or whatever, and the only description is "white t-shirt and a hat" that's enough? What about "hispanic male, approximately 5'9", white t-shirt, shorts, tattoos left arm, seen heading north on Erie St., etc? That would be racist I guess right?

The police publish the info that they need to identify the perps. For potential witnesses, the JC police believe that's all they need to publish to jog potential witnesses memories. If they're not putting out a "America's Most Wanted style all-points-bulletin" why mention race? They're looking for witnesses at the scene, at the time. If you were there at the time, you'd get the JCPD references. If you weren't, it's meaningless. That's a good thing imo.

Publishing race on every single mugging, bar fight, or whatever really achieves nothing except reinforce stereotypes.


There are too many armchair critics on this forum

dtjcview wrote:
Publishing race on every single mugging, bar fight, or whatever really achieves nothing except reinforce stereotypes.

dtjcview wrote:


Publishing race on every single mugging, bar fight, or whatever really achieves nothing except reinforce stereotypes.


There are too many armchair critics on this forum

sinik wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

Simply put, posting race is unnecessary. It doesn't help the JC police find the perps. If they don't feel the need to post race, why do you think you know better?

The more specific information you post, the more likely you are to find witnesses who saw the actual perp and the less chance you have of wasting police and the public's time with false reports.

If the victim dies (he was reported to be in critical condition on life support so that seems like a possibility), then this will be a murder investigation so this is not just some weekend street brawl we are talking about.

Do you really think the description of the second attacker has any chance of finding witnesses? I'll remind you that all we have been told is that he was wearing a Giants T-shirt, blue jeans and white sneakers. No height, no build, no race.

If this becomes a murder or attempted murder investigation I am sure the police will post a fuller description if they have still not located the second attacker.

Boiled_Mussels wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

I posted your full quote. Simply put, posting race is unnecessary. It doesn't help the JC police find the perps. If they don't feel the need to post race, why do you think you know better?

So you mean to tell me that if someone just gets attacked, mugged or whatever, and the only description is "white t-shirt and a hat" that's enough? What about "hispanic male, approximately 5'9", white t-shirt, shorts, tattoos left arm, seen heading north on Erie St., etc? That would be racist I guess right?

dtjcview wrote:

I posted your full quote. Simply put, posting race is unnecessary. It doesn't help the JC police find the perps. If they don't feel the need to post race, why do you think you know better?

dtjcview wrote:

Simply put, posting race is unnecessary. It doesn't help the JC police find the perps. If they don't feel the need to post race, why do you think you know better?

sinik wrote:

Er, no. Not our logic, YOUR logic. I think you need to explain why if the JJ includes race in the description that "creates a stereotype" but including other details do not.

We know the guy that tried to take over the Discovery Channel building a few days ago was Asian and the guy that shot 32 people at Virginia Tech was Asian. So do we think all Asian people are more likely to go crazy like that? Personally, I don't and don't think other people do. However, YOU, dtjcview, do think that other people will draw those kind of inferences from knowing details of ethnicity of people who commit crimes. I don't know why you would think that unless you, yourself believe that people of a certain ethnicity are more likely to commit crimes.

If you don't think that, what makes you presume other people will think it?

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

sinik wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

So given your tortured logic, both you and CC think all slim, tall Giant fans of an "unspecified ethnic group" are vicious thugs?

Er, no. Not our logic, YOUR logic. I think you need to explain why if the JJ includes race in the description that "creates a stereotype" but including other details do not.

..........

If you don't think that, what makes you presume other people will think it?

Perhaps because the police and JJ are looking for witnesses, and not create stereotypes. How does the JJ statement create stereotypes? Your logic is twisted... Nope, actually absurd.

dtjcview wrote:

Perhaps because the police and JJ are looking for witnesses, and not create stereotypes. How does the JJ statement create stereotypes? Your logic is twisted... Nope, actually absurd.