Blacks in the Real World
A primer for honest readers
by David Sims
BLACKS COMMIT crimes of (almost) all kinds more frequently than Whites do. An exception involves the abuse of the drug methamphetamine, which is the only illegal drug that Whites abuse at a higher per capita rate than Blacks do.
(In case that isn’t clear, Blacks abuse every illegal drug except methamphetamine more often than Whites do.)
And for a few crimes, the per capita perpetration rates between Whites and Blacks are nearly the same, such as DUI.
But by and large, Blacks are far, far more crime prone, as compared with Whites. The largest difference is found in robbery, of which Blacks commit 62% within the United States. The ratio of the perpetration rate for robbery among Blacks is 5.3 times higher than it is for the US population as a whole.
The ratio of the Black perpetration rate for robbery to that for Whites is considerably higher, partly because the US Department of Justice cheats: it considers Hispanic criminals to be “Whites” for statistical purposes. And the Black to White rate is also higher partly because “the US population as a whole” includes the Blacks among that population once again.
Put it into simple terms. Let’s shrink the US population into a racially representative society of 100 persons that contains 63 Whites, 12 Blacks, 15 Hispanics, and 10 others. In a certain year, each White commits one crime, each Spic commits three crimes, and each Black commits nine crimes.
In the real world, of course, members of groups don’t share in the perpetration of crimes evenly. Some are worse than others. Also, we might loosely refer to the “average” member of the group, although what we really mean is the average behavior of the members of that group. However, we’re keeping things simple here.
At the end of the year, there have been 63 crimes committed by Whites, 45 crimes committed by Spics, 108 crimes committed by Blacks, and let us say 20 crimes committed by others.
There were 236 total crimes in that year. The government decides to lump the Spics and the Whites together, calls the combined category “White offenders,” and publishes statistics that “prove” that equal numbers of crimes were committed by Whites as by Blacks in the year studied.
But, of course, that is a lie. And it is a deception beyond the lie.
First, though, the lie. Hispanics aren’t Whites. They are a different race. The truth is that Whites committed 26.7% of the crimes, whereas Blacks committed 45.8% of the crimes. Only by adding to the White crime percentage the extra 19.1% of the crimes which Hispanics committed do you reach a total equal to the Black percentage of the crimes.
And that’s why the Jewish-controlled federal government does it. They deliberately manufacture the illusion that Whites commit as many crimes, in total, as Blacks do.
Secondly, the deception beyond the lie.
What matters isn’t the total counts of crimes. When you are comparing two groups that differ racially, with the aim of determining which race engages in a particular form of behavior more commonly, you must “normalize” or adjust for the sizes of the two groups.
If you wanted to know whether the average Californian or the average Nevadan were the more crime prone, you wouldn’t simply compare the total number of crimes in California with the total number of crimes in Nevada. Since California has a much larger population, it is reasonable to expect California to have a much greater number of crimes. If you erroneously judged them by the total number of crimes committed in their respective states, you’d declare the average Nevadan to be better than he really is, and you’d conclude that the average Californian is worse than he really is.
Only after you have divided the total counts by the sizes of the populations of the respective states do you have a measure by which to decide whether the Californians are more criminal than the Nevadans, or whether it is the other way around. The measure is called “the per capita rate.”
When the groups are different races, rather than the residents of different geographical regions, the correct procedure to follow remains exactly the same.
Since in our thought experiment Whites were 63% of the population, and Whites committed 26.7% of the crimes during a year, we can say that the White crime rate is 0.424.
Similarly, since Hispanics were 15% of the population and committed 19.1% of the crimes, we can say that the Hispanic crime rate is 1.273.
Likewise, since the Blacks were 12% of the population and committed 45.8% of the crimes, we can say that the Black crime rate is 3.817.
The “others” who were the remaining 10% of the population committed 8.47% of the crimes, and so had a crime rate of 0.847.
And that’s (approximately) the true measure of the races with respect to criminality. I invented the model, of course, but what comes out of it reflects the crime statistics collected over several decades by the federal government.
That is, you get a model that most accurately reflects real-life crime data if you assume at the start that, compared with Whites, Hispanics are 3 times more likely to commit crime and blacks are 9 times more likely to commit crime.
* * *
Source: David Sims