There are some studies about genes and gene pairings they keep finding from violent criminals that are more common to some races/ethnicities. Sometimes referred to as the warrior gene. I don't know too much about it. Some studies also how that interacts with alcohol/drug use.
Finns often do great in those and there might be some validity why select drinking establishment refused to serve to finns or indians in parts of America in the 19th and early 20th century.
I have supporting data and citations to prove that Barry's wife is very aggressive
"Druff would suck his own dick if it were long enough"- Brandon "drexel" Gerson
"ann coulter literally has more common sense than pfa."-Sonatine
"Real grinders supports poker fraud"- Ray Davis
"DRILLED HER GOOD"- HONGKONGER
This blogger, self-titled "Race_Realist" on Twitter, presents a cogent argument against the connection between race-based differences in testosterone and crime.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/201...t-cause-crime/
The issue is not race, it’s poverty. It’s really hard to get out of poverty and to not pass it on to your children. Whites are just as unlawful when they are poor as any other race, they are simply given lighter sentences or the benifet of the doubt much more often.
We pray for understanding as we all occasionally request back door action by accident, when we tried to call an electrician. It happens, it simply happens.
"Druff would suck his own dick if it were long enough"- Brandon "drexel" Gerson
"ann coulter literally has more common sense than pfa."-Sonatine
"Real grinders supports poker fraud"- Ray Davis
"DRILLED HER GOOD"- HONGKONGER
We pray for understanding as we all occasionally request back door action by accident, when we tried to call an electrician. It happens, it simply happens.
Data is challenging to find. Nobody will attach themselves to data that suggests race is a larger indicator of crime than socio economics and with good reason, even if it's fact you will be accused a racist and they will come for your job or funding.
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sourc...b8fGOD4oEkzuX3
When it comes strictly to homicide, race in the USA is a stronger indicator than socio economics. The more important question is why do people look for such simplistic answers to these difficult questions. Surely the race disparity problem in the USA is part racism and part cultural.
Big league interview with a WHOLE lot of new things to talk about. Apparantly the unedited version is the ramblings of a man that can not stay focused.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/2...ction=Politics
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/2...QECAEYAQ%3D%3D
Last edited by vegas1369; 12-28-2017 at 09:31 PM.
It really doesn't matter. Because if the data doesn't support your feelings, you just hand waive it away anyways. For example, any data indicating race is an positive correlate in crime rate is just hand waived away by saying it is solely because the police and justice system are biased.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chaps' 2017-18 NFL $$ Thread
Sudhir Venkatesh pretty much said that the reason crime rates went down in major cities is because black women were able to easily get abortions. He made this a chapter in his NYT Best Seller book.
Last edited by El Gallo; 12-28-2017 at 08:02 PM.
We pray for understanding as we all occasionally request back door action by accident, when we tried to call an electrician. It happens, it simply happens.
Conclusion of that study...
"Multivariate regression results for ninety-one cities showed that while total inequality and intraracial inequality had no significant association with offending rates, interracial inequality was a strong predictor of the overall violent crime rate and the Black-on-Black crime rate"
...i don't really disagree with it. It's a single study and it only covers violent crime. Delightful conclusion you can make from it, is that if you want to lower violent crime rate, one way to do it is either improve minorities economic situation or worsen the majority's economic situation. In other words it's for affirmative action.
This is going to blow up over the next several days...
Shades of delusion and Nixon.On China: Trump said he'd "been soft" on China in terms of trade so far, but "Oil is going into North Korea. That wasn't my deal! If they don't help us with North Korea, then I can do what I've always said I want to do."
On his policy chops: "I know the details of taxes better than anybody. Better than the greatest C.P.A. I know the details of health care better than most, better than most." He said he knows more about the "big bills… than any president that's ever been in office."
On Roy Moore: He said he only made the endorsement because "I feel that I have to endorse Republicans as the head of the party."
Will he order DOJ to investigate Clinton? "I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department. But for purposes of hopefully thinking I'm going to be treated fairly, I've stayed uninvolved with this particular matter."
On Jeff Sessions: "I don't want to get into loyalty, but I will tell you that, I will say this: Holder protected President Obama. Totally protected him. When you look at the things that they did, and Holder protected the president. And I have great respect for that, I'll be honest."
On Paul Manafort: "Paul only worked for me for a few months. Paul worked for Ronald Reagan. His firm worked for John McCain, worked for Bob Dole, worked for many Republicans for far longer than he worked for me. And you're talking about what Paul was many years ago before I ever heard of him. He worked for me for — what was it, three and a half months?"
On the media: "Another reason that we're going to win another four years is because newspapers, television, all forms of media will tank if I'm not there because without me, their ratings are going down the tubes. Without me, The New York Times will indeed be, not the failing New York Times, but the failed New York Times.... So they basically have to let me win. And eventually, probably six months before the election, they'll be loving me because they're saying, 'Please, please, don't lose Donald Trump.' O.K."
On bipartisanship: Trump said of centrist Democrats like Joe Manchin, "He talks. But he doesn't do anything…. 'Hey, let's get together, let's do bipartisan.' I say, 'Good, let's go.' Then you don't hear from him again." Trump did say he thought there was a chance of bipartisanship on health care, infrastructure and DACA
https://www.axios.com/trump-talks-mu...520584187.html
Last edited by vegas1369; 12-28-2017 at 09:31 PM.
Not quite. You first said that it was scientifically reasonable to believe that blacks commit more crimes because they tend to have higher testosterone levels.
Then you made an appeal of sorts to political correctness to not actually scientifically examine that notion.
Which, in summary, allows one to continue to believe in that "perfectly reasonable hypothesis" without having to actually test it.
There are currently 41 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 41 guests)