Wouldn't Want To Go To School Today

On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:28:13 -0600, Rowley
wrote:

Reported murders? I seem to remember reading a book on journalism from
around the 40's/50's - think the book mentioned that some things were
"news" and other were not.....

Black/White Street Crime Ratios, adjusted for demographics:

Murder/neg. msltr.: 5.39/1
Forcible Rape: 2.89/1
Robbery: 6.55/1
Aggravated assault: 2.88/1
Burglary: 2.45/1

The white crime data include Hispanic crime. If Hispanic crime were
removed from white data, the black/white ratio would be even more
extreme.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/00crime4.pdf
______

And for you to blame crime on socioeconomics, please note that the
poverty rate in a recent year does not correlate well with the robbery
rates. The black/white poverty ratio (2001) was 2.3/1 (Hispanics not
included) based on the following poverty rates:
white: 9.9%
black: 22.7%
Hispanic: 21.7%

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/pover...v/hstpov2.html

2005:

Impoverished blacks 9,168,000
Impoverished total 36,950,000

Secondly, while you may argue that a hungry group would naturally
commit more robberies, what's your excuse for rape, murder, assault?

("Dat whyte guy makes more money then me,so I think I'll rape my
neighbor.") Huh!!!??!

Thirdly, the muscular thugs who are committing this savagery look
anything but hungry.

Finally, in a recent study of NFL players, it was found that their
crime rates were only slightly less than those of their respective
demographic groups in the general population. ("Pros And Cons: The
Criminals Who Play In The NFL" by Jeff yaeger and Jeff Benedict,
Time-Life Books)

Even Je$$e Jack$on was left speechless.

It ain't fiscal bankruptcy, but moral bankruptcy, aided-and-abetted by
the guilty white liberal girly men who continue to make excuses and
keep them on a victim plantatation of self-pity, anger, and hatred.

Way Back Jack wrote:

On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:28:13 -0600, Rowley
wrote:


Reported murders? I seem to remember reading a book on journalism from
around the 40's/50's - think the book mentioned that some things were
"news" and other were not.....


Black/White Street Crime Ratios, adjusted for demographics:

Murder/neg. msltr.: 5.39/1
Forcible Rape: 2.89/1
Robbery: 6.55/1
Aggravated assault: 2.88/1
Burglary: 2.45/1

The white crime data include Hispanic crime. If Hispanic crime were
removed from white data, the black/white ratio would be even more
extreme.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/00crime4.pdf

Ok, now show me the same statistics for 1930~1940~1950~1960..... I still
don't think that the olden days were all that more golden than the ones
today....

______

And for you to blame crime on socioeconomics, please note that the
poverty rate in a recent year does not correlate well with the robbery
rates. The black/white poverty ratio (2001) was 2.3/1 (Hispanics not
included) based on the following poverty rates:
white: 9.9%
black: 22.7%
Hispanic: 21.7%

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/pover...v/hstpov2.html

2005:

Impoverished blacks 9,168,000
Impoverished total 36,950,000

Secondly, while you may argue that a hungry group would naturally
commit more robberies, what's your excuse for rape, murder, assault?

Don't know... but in looking at the front page of newspapers from this
time of the year in 1931 - which is during the Great Depression - there
does seem to be a lot of similar crime that went on then... and it
doesn't appear to limited to just one ethnic group... well, that might
not be true - I didn't see any articles with hispanic ames and one the
one that mentioned "Negroes".... My guess is that news about those
demographics didn't show up in most mainstream publications at the time...

("Dat whyte guy makes more money then me,so I think I'll rape my
neighbor.") Huh!!!??!

Where are you seeing that given in the report that you provided a link to?

Thirdly, the muscular thugs who are committing this savagery look
anything but hungry.

Man as a species tends to be a pretty violent creature and territorial
by nature... Have you read any of the books by Desmond Morris, "The
Human Zoo" or "The Naked Ape"?

Finally, in a recent study of NFL players, it was found that their
crime rates were only slightly less than those of their respective
demographic groups in the general population. ("Pros And Cons: The
Criminals Who Play In The NFL" by Jeff yaeger and Jeff Benedict,
Time-Life Books)

Crime is all around us.... heck, is there really that much of a
difference between someone running a Ponzi scheme than someone simply
robbing a bank? Least when you run a Ponzi scheme, your wife gets to
keep a couple million.....

Hernandez v. Texas was about a case that involved one hispanic man
shooting and killing another hispanic man.... the murder itself wasn't
the issue of the case - the issue was that there wasn't any hispanic
people on the jury for the actual murder case - all the people on the
jury were Caucasians... in fact, there had never been any person of
color ever seated on a jury in that part of Texas... all that was "won"
by the Supreme Court decision was that the case was retried with actual
"peers" of the man who had been on trial... Even with hispanics on the
jury he was still convicted of the crime....


Even Je$$e Jack$on was left speechless.

It ain't fiscal bankruptcy, but moral bankruptcy, aided-and-abetted by
the guilty white liberal girly men who continue to make excuses and
keep them on a victim plantatation of self-pity, anger, and hatred.

Eh, statically - in 50 years or so, all of the lower states will all be
speaking spanish (well maybe not Louisiana, they will probably still use
french creole) ... and probably many of the upper ones will speak
spanish too..

¡Buenas épocas mi amigo!

Martin

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:40:33 -0500, Rowley
wrote:

Way Back Jack wrote:

On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:28:13 -0600, Rowley
wrote:


Reported murders? I seem to remember reading a book on journalism from
around the 40's/50's - think the book mentioned that some things were
"news" and other were not.....


Black/White Street Crime Ratios, adjusted for demographics:

Murder/neg. msltr.: 5.39/1
Forcible Rape: 2.89/1
Robbery: 6.55/1
Aggravated assault: 2.88/1
Burglary: 2.45/1

The white crime data include Hispanic crime. If Hispanic crime were
removed from white data, the black/white ratio would be even more
extreme.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/00crime4.pdf

And for you to blame crime on socioeconomics, please note that the
poverty rate in a recent year does not correlate well with the robbery
rates. The black/white poverty ratio (2001) was 2.3/1 (Hispanics not
included) based on the following poverty rates:
white: 9.9%
black: 22.7%
Hispanic: 21.7%

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/pover...v/hstpov2.html

2005:

Impoverished blacks 9,168,000
Impoverished total 36,950,000

Secondly, while you may argue that a hungry group would naturally
commit more robberies, what's your excuse for rape, murder, assault?


("Dat whyte guy makes more money then me,so I think I'll rape my
neighbor.") Huh!!!??!

Thirdly, the muscular thugs who are committing this savagery look
anything but hungry.

Finally, in a recent study of NFL players, it was found that their
crime rates were only slightly less than those of their respective
demographic groups in the general population. ("Pros And Cons: The
Criminals Who Play In The NFL" by Jeff yaeger and Jeff Benedict,
Time-Life Books)



Even Je$$e Jack$on was left speechless.

It ain't fiscal bankruptcy, but moral bankruptcy, aided-and-abetted by
the guilty white liberal girly men who continue to make excuses and
keep them on a victim plantatation of self-pity, anger, and hatred.


The data of course merely reinforce my non-scientific observations as
to how society has degenerated during my lifetime.

And it's not just crime.

When LBJ promised us cradle-to-grave entitlement, he told the mammies,
"Y'all don't have to get your baby's daddy to support ya; the gubmint
will support ya and ya sprogs."

Black out of wedlock rates 25% in 1963; today 70%

Whites jumped from 8% to 25%

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/pdf/nvsr50_05tb19.pdf

And it came to pass that his Great Society destroyed the family unit.

Way Back Jack wrote:
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:40:33 -0500, Rowley
wrote:


Way Back Jack wrote:


On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:28:13 -0600, Rowley
wrote:



Reported murders? I seem to remember reading a book on journalism from
around the 40's/50's - think the book mentioned that some things were
"news" and other were not.....


Black/White Street Crime Ratios, adjusted for demographics:

Murder/neg. msltr.: 5.39/1
Forcible Rape: 2.89/1
Robbery: 6.55/1
Aggravated assault: 2.88/1
Burglary: 2.45/1

The white crime data include Hispanic crime. If Hispanic crime were
removed from white data, the black/white ratio would be even more
extreme.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/00crime4.pdf


And for you to blame crime on socioeconomics, please note that the
poverty rate in a recent year does not correlate well with the robbery
rates. The black/white poverty ratio (2001) was 2.3/1 (Hispanics not
included) based on the following poverty rates:
white: 9.9%
black: 22.7%
Hispanic: 21.7%

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/pover...v/hstpov2.html

2005:

Impoverished blacks 9,168,000
Impoverished total 36,950,000

Secondly, while you may argue that a hungry group would naturally
commit more robberies, what's your excuse for rape, murder, assault?


("Dat whyte guy makes more money then me,so I think I'll rape my
neighbor.") Huh!!!??!


Thirdly, the muscular thugs who are committing this savagery look
anything but hungry.


Finally, in a recent study of NFL players, it was found that their
crime rates were only slightly less than those of their respective
demographic groups in the general population. ("Pros And Cons: The
Criminals Who Play In The NFL" by Jeff yaeger and Jeff Benedict,
Time-Life Books)


Even Je$$e Jack$on was left speechless.

It ain't fiscal bankruptcy, but moral bankruptcy, aided-and-abetted by
the guilty white liberal girly men who continue to make excuses and
keep them on a victim plantatation of self-pity, anger, and hatred.


The data of course merely reinforce my non-scientific observations as
to how society has degenerated during my lifetime.

And based on my own lifetime of experiences and perceptions - not a
whole lot has changed.... yet, I can recognize that there has been a
change in life here (in Texas) since the 1940s.... change continues to
happen.... Here in Austin, in the past ten years or so, a lot of
developers have been buying up huge tracks of land (a lot of which was
were people of lower social-economical means had been living for
years...) and then building huge hige-rises full of high priced
condos... so people got displaced... but the thing I wonder about is,
who is going to replace them? Who has the money to pay for any of these
new apartments? Are they just going to sit empty? Is someone going to
pay taxes on these things? If they end up being abandoned and then
becoming headquarters for some sort of criminal elements - who's the
blame for that?

And it's not just crime.

When LBJ promised us cradle-to-grave entitlement, he told the mammies,
"Y'all don't have to get your baby's daddy to support ya; the gubmint
will support ya and ya sprogs."

You got a date on when he made that speech? Be iteresting to listen to....

Recently picked up two audio packages at the local used book store...

"The Greatest Conflict: News from the Front Lines of WWII", historic
radio brodcats and news reports - Mill Creek entertainment - 20 disc set
/ 20+ hours

and

"History in Words: Civil Rights", greatest radio brodcasts and
interviews - Topics Entertainment - 4 disc set / 4 hours.

Haven't had time to listen to mucn more than the first disc of the
W.W.II set... looking at the box for the civil rights set, I see that
there is a 90 minute speech LBJ made in 1964... maybe I'll move that up
in my listening que...

Black out of wedlock rates 25% in 1963; today 70%

Whites jumped from 8% to 25%

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/pdf/nvsr50_05tb19.pdf

And it came to pass that his Great Society destroyed the family unit.


Define family unit - seems to me that most cultures have different ideas
of what makes a traditional family... and given that the US is a melting
pot of a lot of different cultures - it's not too surprising that things
got a bit dissolved over the years.... me, I blame the industrial
revolution more than the government... people like Henry Ford and his
assembly line.... and maybe Rosie the Riveter help things to change
too.... change isn't always something that is done for good or bad
reasons and the results of change aren't usually planned (and even if
they are most times the plans go awry..)

Recently watched a documentary on PBS... about how the late 1500's/early
1600's the bible was rewritten (based on combining two different
versions) into what we now call the King James version... Protestants
that didn't like that change moved here to America so they could use
their Geneva Bible.... yet we still somehow ended up using the KJV...

Martin

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 11:04:58 -0500, Rowley
wrote:

Family unit.

Ah yes, the family unit.

In today's society fraught with distraction and pop culture, it is
difficult for two parents to raise children. But when one of those
parents is absent, spreading his seed all over town to make more
babies for me to support, the burden on the remaining parent can be
unbearable.

What type of example does Pappy set? He should be supporting his
offspring, and not just financially, but also morally. He should be
home to ensure that they are studying their letters and ciphers
instead of running the streets. Then society wonders why little
Eboneesha and Shantavious cannot read. Of course, the solution for
the past 50 years has been to throw more money into the educational
pit. Hasn't worked.

Yep, the destruction of the family unit began with Uncle Lyndon.

Way Back Jack wrote:


The data of course merely reinforce my non-scientific observations as
to how society has degenerated during my lifetime.


Another book I found in my library that you might be interested in
reading...

"Criminology: Theories, Patterns, and Typologies" by Larry J. Siegel

I had forgotten I had it. I bought it to read back around 1995 (didn't
finish it as a few months later I started working on my teacher
certificate) - it's the Sixth Edition with was published in 1995.
Flipping through the pages it looks fairly up-to-date - with maybe the
exception of events since 9/11.... looking on amazon, I see that it's
now in it's 9th edition (dang... $113!! think I only paid about $45 for
the one I have - new.... talk about highway robbery....)

Martin

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 12:38:25 -0500, Rowley
wrote:


"Criminology:

Many forests have been destroyed for books that attempt to explain the
etiology of crime.

In fact, the answer is simple: moral bankruptcy.

Way Back Jack wrote:

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 11:04:58 -0500, Rowley
wrote:


Family unit.


Ah yes, the family unit.

In today's society fraught with distraction and pop culture, it is
difficult for two parents to raise children. But when one of those
parents is absent, spreading his seed all over town to make more
babies for me to support, the burden on the remaining parent can be
unbearable.

Have you ever seen the movie "Idiocracy"? Since you mention in your
original post that; "The old lady and I made the right choice not to
reproduce."... You might want to watch at least the first 20 minutes of
that movie..... Talking about some biting social commentary....

Martin

What type of example does Pappy set? He should be supporting his
offspring, and not just financially, but also morally. He should be
home to ensure that they are studying their letters and ciphers
instead of running the streets. Then society wonders why little
Eboneesha and Shantavious cannot read. Of course, the solution for
the past 50 years has been to throw more money into the educational
pit. Hasn't worked.

Yep, the destruction of the family unit began with Uncle Lyndon.

Way Back Jack wrote:

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 12:38:25 -0500, Rowley
wrote:



"Criminology:


Many forests have been destroyed for books that attempt to explain the
etiology of crime.

Eh... more forests today are probably destroyed just so that overweight
americans can eat hamburgers....

Martin


In fact, the answer is simple: moral bankruptcy.

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 12:55:30 -0500, Rowley
wrote:


Eh...

Recall the summer I was 14, having to walk home from downtown
Baltimore because the money was gone, eaten up by the pinball
machines, and other such nonsense, even carfare money. To get to my
white lower middle class 'hood, it was necessary to walk thru the
poorest ghetto in town. No one bothered me; did it many times, even
at night.

Fast fwd. 10 years, in that same ghetto, I dodged firebombs and rocks
while serving in the Army Natl. Guard during the MLK riots. Still,
there were quite a few areas of the city that were still livable and
civilized. Even well into the 1970s when I went rural, there were
livable areas.

It wasn't until 1984 that my parents gave it up. They tolerated the
insults, youths grabbing their crotches when they passed, auto
vandalism, theft of porch furniture, and two attempted burglaries. But
when two elderly ladies on their block were raped, one in daylight on
her front steps, they joined in white flight. At age 63, they didn't
want to uproot from the old 'hood where they raised their two boys,
but felt that they had no choice.