Public Highlights Mass Murders, Ignores Most Murders: Racism?
Cornel West recently expressed his belief that the concern Americans have about mass murder reflects a racist lack of concern with the real problem with murder, which is largely black on black.
He has one valid point: mass murders get very disproportionate coverage. In 2011, there were just under 14,000 murders in the U.S.; all the mass murders combined each year are less than 1% of that. Why do they get so much attention?
I can see why Professor West might assume that racism is at the core of this overemphasis. The most common murder in the U.S. is a black or Hispanic young man killing another black or Hispanic young man, usually in a dispute over drugs, gang affiliation, or territory. In some cities, not only are murderers overwhelmingly people with criminal records, so are their victims.
Not everyone with an arrest record is a criminal, of course, and there are doubtless some victims who did something stupid at age 17 or 18 and have been respectable citizens for the last thirty years. But this is part of the apparent indifference of Americans to the depressingly common murders in urban America: many of the victims are part of a criminal subculture, and it is very easy to see these as at worst minor losses for our society. The more cynical might regard these as net gains.
There is more concern about the completely innocent victims who have the misfortune to live in these urban combat zones, but unfortunately, the old saw of journalism that “dog bites man isn’t news; man bites dog is” applies here as well. It is precisely because poor minorities killing their neighbors is so depressingly common that it fails to capture the public interest. And to be fair to Professor West, there is probably some truth to the assertion that most Americans don’t pay much attention to inner-city crime because the victims don’t look like most Americans. The more that someone looks like you, or a friend, or a neighbor, the more you can identify with that person’s suffering.
There is one more aspect of this: the average murder in America takes place in a relatively small number of neighborhoods.
If you live in a part of America that is predominantly white, your risk of being murdered is greatly reduced. If you live in one of these areas and you do not have family or friends who are mentally ill or substance abusers, your risk of being murdered is very low. This is why low gun control states like Idaho, Montana, Minnesota, and North Dakota have murder rates lower (often much lower) than their restrictive gun control Canadian prairie province neighbors. These white non-Hispanic states have murder rates that compare favorably to overall European murder rates.
This is why these random acts of mass murder provoke such anxiety and handwringing from not only journalists and politicians but also from average Americans: you cannot avoid these horrible crimes by staying out of minority neighborhoods, nor can you avoid them by staying away from dangerous acquaintances. It is very easy for most Americans to see the average, generally not well-publicized murders as an unfortunate but not terrifying situation because they are far away and affect people unlike themselves. Monstrous crimes like Newtown are terrifying even though they are quite rare, because they are unavoidable unless we deal with the root problem for most of these: deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill.
One of the great tragedies of the degradation of the academic community is how many people holding academic appointments engage in reductionistic thinking: they pick one single factor to explain a problem, and ignore other possible causes. Murder in America is not one thing; it is many things. Inner-city drug gang murders have one set of causes; random acts of mass murder have a different set of causes; revenge killings by disgruntled former employees have yet a different set of causes; domestic violence murders are again different in origin. When the mainstream media encourages reductionistic thinking by giving those who promote these single-factor explanations a platform, it makes it more difficult to have a serious discussion about complex problems. This does not serve the public interest in making good public policy.
I don’t quite understand paragraph 7. You seem to be saying that the Canadian prairie provinces are full of non-whites, substance abusers, or the mentally ill. I think you meant to make a point about the ineffectiveness of gun control, but it doesn’t connect.
Unfortunately, that is too true. The areas with the high rates in Canada are in fact the areas with the highest concentrations of Indian people. The conditions on Indian reserve include enormously high rates of alcohol and drug abuse. See Nunuvit, for example.
My point is that if gun control was an important part of what determines murder rates, Manitoba would not have more than 3x the murder rate of Minnesota, its neighbor to the south. Something more important must be in play.
You told me something I didn’t know, Clayton, and which is very relevant to the debate.
Thank you
I concur.
One quibble with an assertion in the article:
“And to be fair to Professor West, there is probably some truth to the assertion that most Americans don’t pay much attention to inner-city crime because the victims don’t look like most Americans. The more that someone looks like you, or a friend, or a neighbor, the more you can identify with that person’s suffering.”
Uh, no.
It’s that those victims don’t ACT like most Americans.
It’s not even that the people living in dangerous neighborhoods don’t act like normal Americans. It is that we cannot help people who are unwilling to be helped.
During the O.J. Simpson trial, the defense insinuated that police investigator Mark Furman was a racist because in private conversation he had once suggested that gang member should be exterminated. That is the problem — the people who are at risk of dying in the crossfire of gang warfare DON’T WANT the extermination of the gang members whose existence threatens their lives.
If they prefer to risk death in the crossfire and to risk their children’s lives, what power do I have to overrule them?
Its tribal instincts verses a higher thought process.
Conservatives will viciously bash RINOS who do nothing to support their best interests, but blacks can never criticize other blacks “in front of Whitey”…
Even when they kill, or (politically) rob them blind and keep them enslaved.
They will repeatedly “vote in” the absolute worst of their kind, purely because he’s a BLACK politician.
Any politician or “leader” who is perceived as “critical of the tribe” is discredited or destroyed for airing the laundry.
Clarance Thomas anyone?
When I am indifferent to gang bangers killing other gang bangers, it is not racist. I am also indifferent when mafia-types kill other mafia-types or Neo-Nazi gangs kill other neo-Nazi types. It isn’t about race, I am simply indifferent if “criminals” kill other “criminals” no matter what color. I watched this show on cable called “Gangland” which highlights gangs in various cities around the US. All these gangs have something in common, and that is they are criminals, and they care nothing for a safe, clean and peacful community. Since that is my goal, then they are all striving for somthing that is completely opposite of my goal; hence the indifference when they kil each other.
Yes, Indeed. Any small area of land with a large metropolitan cluster would in many cases be more reprsentative of the overall population of the Earth. Then all one has to do is compare this arbritary space with a much, much larger one with limited population and limited demographics. Also it is very effective to present the statistics of a subset within a subset to an all inclusive set, for example young non-whites compared to all young people everywhere. The left makes these interesting contrasts all the time and then elaborates on them. My favorite example is the people agast at the USA having a greater prison population than Turkey a state half the size of Kentucky where most suspects don’t even make it to the Jailhouse. Very well presented set of facts. Statistics, I think.
I agree about where most suspects don’t even make it to the Jailhouse but you must be more careful with your facts—Turkey has eight times to area of Kentucky and 18 times the population(74 million vs 4.3 million)
Most of the people pushing the idea that, if we only outlaw guns the problem will be solved, have no interest in actually solving the problem to begin with. Government is not now nor has it ever been about solving anything. Government is about creating an agency to manage the problem in perpetuity and occasionally about creating the problem so it can be managed. Case in point prior to 9/11 it was permissible to bring a box cutter on a plane this was not a failure of security but in the aftermath somehow it became necessary to form the TSA. Other agencies set performance goals such as air quality and when these goals start to be met rather than claim success new goals are put in place that can’t be met. Does anyone really believe Al Sharpton, or Jessi Jackson want to end racism and put themselves out of a good paying job where people pretend to care what they think?
Big Govt,Jessy Jackson and Al Sharpton are doing the best they can.An attempt in the wrong direction is still an attempt.Their compass is wrong.I once rented out a forth floor apartment.Got some calls that water was coming through the ceilings in the bottom 3 floors.When i arrived to fix things i find the couple furiously trying to mop the floor and clean things up. I look around and they had forgotten to turn the faucet off! High out of their minds on drugs!The big crazy pill they keep taking is that pregnancy out of wedlock,cash for new babies,food stamps for the lazy,free food for the obese and no personal responsibility are O.K. Benjamin Franklin said welfare should be uncomfortable.
Nailed it to the wall.
Larry Correia refutes the gun-grabbers’ arguments once and for all.
Our Founders were right; it’s our own government that we really need firearms to defend ourselves against.
So who commits MOST of the Murders and the violent crime in the USA. Well surprise surprise OVER 50% of all the murders and OVER 60% of all the violent crime in the USA is committed by BLACK YOUTHS between the ages of 15 and 25 (think Trayvon Martin0 who comprise LESS than 2% of the population.
So forget gun control violent crime and murder in the in the USA could be HALVED at a stroke by taking all the BLACK YOUTHS off the streets.
No wonder the Black Race Hustlers and the moronic Lame Stream EneMedia and Left wing moonbats don’t want to have a serious discussion of the situation.
Leftwingers prefer the Magaret Sanger Final Solution, deal with them before they leave the womb. Eugenics for a brighter tommorrow!
What about the 43% by whites and the percentage in which data is unable to determine race of the perpetrator of homicides? Your suggestion of “taking all the BLACK YOUTHS off the streets…” would only do what? Transpose the white 43% homicide rate to 95-98%?
So what’s the BEEG FREEKIN DEALIO about getting the couriers off the streets? It’s not like killing the messengers, or is it?
Highly respect Mr. Cramer’s work and look forward to reading it. Willing to hedge a bet that controlled substances facilitate moral lobotomies…
The ‘white’ murder rate includes the ‘hispanic’ murder rate
In 2011 there were 32,367 deaths via motor vehicle in the US. Twice the number of deaths from guns, and 100 times the number of murders involving rifles of any type. In the United States in 2000, 6,466 children (0-18) were killed by automobiles, 323.3 times more than we killed in CT, yet no outcry for a ban on car ownership.
“This does not serve the public interest in making good public policy.”
Enforcing criminal law, rather than sympathizing with “social deviants,” by police, judges, juries, and debating grass roots citizens, while claiming “cultural causes,” whether “single factor” or not, would make good public policy. The crime is violent behavior harmful to another or others. Cause of such behavior in retrospect, except when needed in self or others’ defense, is irrelevant.
“Crazy” behavior, whether classified as a misdemeaner, as is the case with stalking in many places, or a felony, usually leads to worse crazy behavior. Why are those who have exibited such violence ever let out of prison? Why don’t predators spend the balance of their lives in isolation, where they can harm nobody? Why are violent criminals permitted contact with the outside world while incarcerated, and why once arrested are they ever granted bond? Why ever parolled? Could all this be because it provides unlimited, steady, job security for the whole legal profession?
A total annual murder rate for 2011 listed was 14,000, but how many missing, never to be found men, women, and children, were also murdered? Is the US murder rate really higher than in Europe? I find other reports say otherwise.
Lately there is much talk of protecting children from predators, a noble cause, but why not protect everyone? Does not a man or woman bleed and die, physically and psychologically, from such harm? How about the harm to the parents and brothers and sisters, friends and lovers, of the raped and murdered? How many lives should one predator be allowed to destroy before he’s permanently, legally incarcerated for life? There walk among us – it makes no difference in outcome whether due to nature or nurture – those from whom all need protection. Those souls must be left to heaven to sort out because we lack the ability to change them. We either accept that, or we are partners in their vilent crimes.
No government has more than two choices,
1. Provide for the common defense against predators, foreign and domestic, and 2. Go through useless defensive pretense motions.
Follow the money, for it’s to be found in the second choice.
Last week i had a friend slammed to the ground for driving his scooter with an illegal helmet,and trying to swallow a small bag of pot.All this drama over nothing,in a neighborhood like mine with clusters of child molesters living all around.Check it out online,you’ll be shocked!
So…
What you’re saying is…
He was he was driving while impared,
(like, High As A Kite?)
And failed to follow instructions?
(like Policeman said, “sure, go ahead and have that Organic Hemp Snack, I can wait”)
Stoners on scooters = Fail
Next?
Uuugh. Why are you drug warriors completely ignorant of that for which you want to maintain a massive beurocratic police state?
Back when we were voting on an initiative to make pot legal in Alaska, I tried to get various smokers to go and vote. They refused.
Why?
Making pot legal would mean they could no longer make money selling weed.
Surprising just who supports the drug laws, eh?
While Professor West may have a point about the under-reporting of black on black crime, let me submit a caveat. When it is under-reported, he claims it is due to racism. If a brave reporter were to tackle the question and do an accurate job of assessing the problem, Cornel West would brand that reporter as a racist.
So what is Professor West’s reaction to Tanner Colby?
West has made a career off his bitter obsessions with race by claiming whites are the real problem when a black man sneezes. The fact is that we’re talking about a culture that has institutionalized and celebrates sociopathy. Let fools heal themselves; whether I pay attention to fools or say “gezundheit” isn’t going to cure stupidity.
Who are you, Fail Burton? I think I’m in love.
My best friend Success Schmitz needs a partner.
This conversation shouldn’t be about gun control – it should be about whatever societal/cultural mindset that keeps our inner-city black communities looking and operating like a war zone.
I recently had to work in an inner city ghetto. Where I was working was behind fences with security guards. When we, my co-workers and I, went into the neighborhood outside the fence during daytime in groups, we were surprised at the open evidence of crime and that the people there just accepted it as normal. We discussed how that if we had so much evidence of crime in our home neighborhoods we would be at city hall demanding something be done or move away.
Just like it is in the Dark Continent……
With the issue of black-on-black crime, we conservatives are damned as racists no matter what we say.
If we do talk about black-on-black crime, then we get accused of “racist fearmongering” for daring to talk about all those black murderers.
If we don’t talk about black-on-black crime, then we get accused by Cornel West and others of racism for apparently ignoring all those black victims.
The solution to this conundrum is obvious: Cornel West should demand to know why the Congressional Black Caucus doesn’t talk about black-on-black crime either.
There is little profit in that. Shaking down white Europeandom is where it’s at.
Bingo!
Same with ISLAM…
Loot, steal and subjugate with violence civilizations more advanced than your own.
Any wonder that Louie-louie Farrakhan gets so much “street cred?”
Actually, governmental agencies and congressional internal committies along with numerous external organizations working with congress and govermental agencies addresses black crime, etc. Use to be, crime and punishment, had a permanent home in political campaign discourse Now its not so much! The states and federal government no longer want to talk about the economic cost of crime much less the national moral decay across ALL socioeconomic lines.
He’s an unintended consequence of affirmative action. He’s a Johnny One-Note on social commentary: Racism lies at the root of all that is evil. It’s worked for him: A flimflam huckster gets to be a university professor. Ahem, “Dr.” West, what have you done for YOUR people lately?
for my people whiteboy as any fool can plainly see I got myself a big professorship didn’t I and when they kicked me outta that one I got myself another and all the other professors in the world can’t take it away neither ’cause they know I’m just as smart as they are hah hah which ain’t saying much I admit but the money is good and I don’t do shit for so I’m a model and an inspiration to all how did obama got where he did think about that
Blaming whites when blacks kill blacks is like blaming cats for dog fights.
If you regard other people as moral agents who are created in the image and likeness of God, as the Bible tells us, there will still be crime in the world, but you will also be bringing out the best in most people.
On the other hand…
If you regard other people as talking monkeys who ought to be manipulated by social engineering, you can guess what they will act like.
I know longer care if they are whacking each other with a mad happy abandon …as long as it is only ” they ” who are getting whacked then it’s the more the merrier …. I live in Wilkes Barre, Pa …..years ago we here in the city and even county could count the number of murders in a year on less than the fingers of 1 hand…. today with the increased use of sec 8 some years we run out of fingers and toes and this is a old coal mining community of about 42,000 in the mountains of Pa and the ner do wells when you read the story of some act of insanity in the local paper all most always has a line like ” jovan butler formerly of Newark …. Camden …. Philly …… NYC…. was arrested ” just a couple of months ago a gentleman and his step brother were arrested for a triple murder ( he shot 4 ….one of the ones who died was a 15 year old girl from a catholic high school ) in a small town of 6,000 just across the river ….. about 2 miles as the crow flies from my front door …… a few weeks later he was arrested for a another murder he had committed 2 days before in the middle of the day in the middle of the street …. he was from Philly ….. within just a block or 2 of my home I can’t count the number of murders ….. shootings …..stabbings ….rapes and robberies over the last few years ….. I no longer care
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, that’s what happens when a large aggregation of population in one locale no longer considers themselves and each other to be moral agents who are responsible for their own actions.
They learned to see it that way from the liberals.
For a very good look at drug crime and what it does to a community, pull up the series “The Wire” and sit down for some education.
Some of the problem is caused by prohibition of drugs, but much of the problem is that intoxicated people do pretty horrible things.
” that intoxicated people do pretty horrible things”
Yeah, no sh*t
Hence the common place notion that ‘drugs” should be illegal.
The government’s go no business “regulating” the manufacture sale and taxation (and making a profit?) from chemical slavery
Alcohol CAN be social, and it is (sort of) like a “food”.
Beer, wine, glass of whiskey after dinner…and even THEN its problematic for alot of people (innocent bystanders victim of the “horrible things” drunks do)
But theirs nothing “social” or “food-like” about smoking crack, and I damn sure dont want the “extra hurdle” of trying to keep my teenage kids from smoking pot because its “legal” and available at 7-11 stores.
Where drug use is accepted as “The Norm” and “no big deal” is the Ghetto.
Part of the reason the Ghetto IS the Ghetto, is what drug use does to peoples morals.
Starting with a Blunt.
I take a more libertarian view towards drugs. Legalize everything.
The short term effect of this would be almost Darwinian. A lot of idiots would check themselves out of the gene pool and good riddance to them. Following the initial purge, drugs would lose their glamor, power and appeal. Yes, some people would continue to do drugs but most would spurn them altogether and there would be a small number who would actually do them in moderation.
The much larger effect is that an entire multinational criminal enterprise would evaporate overnight. No more cartels, no more street pushers, no further need to engage in criminal activity to pursue a habit.
And once the illusionary appeal of being a drug dealer is no longer presented to ghetto kids, they won’t gravitate to drug dealing gangs. Drugs will be sold by ordinary, legal merchants, no different from liquor stores. Ever hear of a ghetto kid aspiring to be a liquor store owner?
Yeah, BUT…
A lot of those “idots” would be Kids, like mine, lulled into a sense of complacency (“how bad could it be if its LEGAL?”) who’ll end up with their lives destroyed by it.
Thats why I’m against it. Its hard enough to filter out the negative influence from society at large with your kids anymore. Upping the bar one more notch, and forcing us “square un-cool” parents to keep our kids away from Gateway Drugs like Pot, when its a Retail Item for sale at The Mall (and you KNOW they will aim it to the kids) is a dangerously bad idea.
“My mom wont let me drink Red-Bull, because its got too much caffeine in it for someone my age”
Good luck with THAT, huh?
So, lets not put Marijuana on the same shelf, OK?
And no, I never heard a ghetto kid aspiring to a liquor store owner, or any KIND of business owner for that matter…
Because they’re all “budded-up” on 40′s and Blunts, all cool lazy and “going nowhere” because its culturally acceptable…
When Getting High has no stigma, neither does dropping out of school, or having children at 15.
Its called a “vicious cycle”.
And the Grown-ups in the room would prefer our children no be seduced into one, thank you very much
‘A lot of those “idots” would be Kids, like mine, lulled into a sense of complacency (“how bad could it be if its LEGAL?”) who’ll end up with their lives destroyed by it. ‘
Coincidentally, it’s already MUCH easier for your kids to obtain and smoke a bowl than it is for me. If your kid tells you he doesn’t know where to get weed, he’s either a liar that’s smoking it already or is afraid of your over-reaction.
“When Getting High has no stigma, neither does dropping out of school, or having children at 15″
And of course getting high does have plenty of stigma and yet the drop out rate is already ridiculously high.
Basically, you should just admit that you’ll criticise liberals for treating the Constitution in a progressive manner to control peoples lives, but you see no problem when you do the same thing. You and all you drug warriors are cowardsw that cant stand the thought of people living their own lives even where it doesn’t infringe on someone else’s rights.
‘Where drug use is accepted as “The Norm” and “no big deal” is the Ghetto. Part of the reason the Ghetto IS the Ghetto, is what drug use does to peoples morals’
Ignorant statement bordering on idiotic. There’s plenty o drug use in places like Wall Street, DC and in middle class neighborhoods. Drug use doesn’t do anything to people’s morals, it just removes the inhibitions to show them. I know PLENTY of people that smoke the weed regularly and they manage to get outta bed every day, go to work, support their families, be good parents and commit violent crime.
oops, not commit…
I know its pretty easy for kids to get pot.
Especially rich white kids out here in the Burbs…the beautiful, bored offspring of busy exectutive Dads and their #3 Trophy Wives…
The spoiled kids with disposable incomes and shallow, meaningless lives..
It was pretty easy when I was in High school, too.
Some things never change.
But it was NOT as easy as getting a bag of chips and a soda..
And thats the whole point.
The fact that it was ILLEGAL, and you had to engage in some shady activity getting money to the “friend of a friends friend” who “can get some for you”, without getting ripped off, or busted, made the whole thing a lot less “appealing” for some kids worried about their future.
It made it easier for parents to “forbid” it, and the kids had a bit of fear/difficulty getting it, because IT WASNT FOR SALE AT 7-11.
I know plenty of Stoners today. Most of them are “harmless”, but exactly zero of them do I/would I trust with my car, my safety (Im a firearms instructor), my finances, a home repair/construction project, or anything else that requires FOCUS.
“I know plenty of Stoners today. Most of them are “harmless”, but exactly zero of them do I/would I trust with my car, my safety (Im a firearms instructor), my finances, a home repair/construction project, or anything else that requires FOCUS.’
No, you just wanna ignore the 4th and 5th ammendments at a minimum, on top of the scores of legalized murders at the hands of the feds and ruin lives and throw those ‘harmless’ people in jail. THATS my point. ALL your arguments are based on blaming someone else for what you cant seem to educate your children about.
I’m a firearms instructor and RSO as well. Ya know, stoners typically have enough self control to not show up stoned. Sorta like 99.99% of gun owners are responsible people but that never stopped you progressives from blaming EVERYONE because someone is evil.
Perhaps its better if I ask if you drink alcohol and when you stopped beating your wife.
In all of the states that have just legalized Pot, they are now moving to increase the size of Gov’t to handle all the extra addiction problems they will have to deal with. So the tax money they hoped would increase their State revenues, are now being used to fund new Gov’t departments created to handle the problem that will be exacerbated by the new legalization. End result; bigger gov’t, greater gov’t debt, and a larger percentage of the population who will be dropping out of a productive lifestyle. Yeah for the liberals!!!
Sorry man, been there & done that. I can tell you for every 1 person that smokes pot and has “normal and productive” life there are 20 that don’t. As someone with firsthand experience I can tell you, DRUGS ARE BAD! I hope I can mange to keep my kids from extensive use, I proabably won’t be able to keep them from trying them but I hope I can prevent them from wasting their late teens/twenties being a “pothead”.
‘I can tell you for every 1 person that smokes pot and has “normal and productive” life there are 20 that don’t. As someone with firsthand experience I can tell you, DRUGS ARE BAD! ‘
Of course, you have no evidence to back that up.
And I sure as hell hope you dont have any firearms because some people misuse them. I sure as hell hope you dont drink because some people cant control themselves with booze and beat their wives.
Sorry man, you liberals will never be able to control people. We already proved prohibition doesn’t work. Drugs and guns and booze arent bad, they’re just a thing. The idiots and scumbags that misuse them are bad.
Cornel West can jump in a lake.
No one says anything about black on black gun deaths because if any WHITE person says anything he/she is immediately called a racist. So, white folks say nothing at all.
Cornel West cannot have it both ways. He, and the poverty pimps that are considered black “leaders,” have created this Orewellian double-speak culture in which it is simply unacceptable for whites to criticize ANY aspect of blacks murdering each other.
Of course, you also see that the so-called black “leadership” also says nothing about it.
West and his left wing cronies – black and white – have made it impossible to even discuss the social pathologies that are endemic within the black inner cities.
So, Mr. West, you and your uber liberal black and white pals are the REASON, THE CAUSE why no one talks about black murder rates.
Frankly, IMHO, the black “leaders” , Mr. West, and their liberal progressives WHITE pals are simply enablers that must keep inner city blacks “in their place” so that they, West et. al. can inflate their egos and appear concerned and “moral,” while they bulk up their own influence and most importantly, their bank accounts.
The black “leadership” and their white uber rich liberal progressive pals in the democratic party are just disgusting, reprehensible vermin that purposefully and intentionally keep poor inner city blacks poor so that they can maintain their own political power and wealth.
Mass murder gets attention because of the fact that so many people are killed in a single episode. It’s not racism to give such incidents a lot f attention. The same could be said of any mass incident. Thousands die on the roads each week in individual car accidents. Do we hear about those outside our local area? Not likely. But if there were a massive pile up on an interstate that led to mass casualties you would definitely hear about it.
If all the students at Sandy Hook were minorities I’m sure the outrage and reaction would have been the same.
Cornell West and the rest of the racism industry get publicity and income from constantly stirring the pot. It suits their needs.
Re:
“Cornell West and the rest of the racism industry get publicity and income from constantly stirring the pot. It suits their needs.”
We should not give this Cornell West any publicity at all. Why feed him (them) this way?
A similar mass murder in an inner city school would be a 1-2 day story. I don’t attribute it to racism per se, but more to the fact that upper middle class white people in mourning make better TV than black, single mom crack addicts.
I hate to say it, but to a certain extent West is right: in the Chicago media–the ten o-clock news for example–murders on the South and West sides, daily ocurrences, are routinely reported. The reporters only wake up and the public only considers the news _serious_ if these acts start happening on the north side or the downtown neightborhoods where the White people live. Same thing with fires; it is nothing to hear over the course of the winter several routine news reports about whole Black families perishing in inadequately-heated houses. Everyone heaves a sigh of sadness and then on to the weather. Somehow that’s business-as-usual.
I despise the race industry, but we make no headway against society’s problems if we dismiss out-of-hand every criticism. Some of them are legit.
And I acknowledged that there is some truth to that criticism: when it affects people that look like the mainstream news media, it matters. Otherwise, it’s “dog bites man.”
Cornel West is right, it’s racist…racist by every politician who treats minorities as fiefdoms, which is every Democratic/liberal/marxist politician, primarily the black ones.
But the rest of the article is interesting as well. The idea that these mass murders are so disconcerting because they are something that avoiding trouble can’t protect us against is spot on. Of course, the fact that the despicable and corrupt media exploits every single mass murder (as well as the headline news murders of seemingly every pretty young white woman or cute white child) is like pouring gasoline on the fire.
It’s also good to hear at least one writer actually put down on paper that the murder rate in those parts of America that are isolated from the drugs and violence of the inner cities are at least as safe as the self-satisfied European countries (actually much more safe if you expand the definition of safe to include all violent crime). Similarly, the life expectancy in those parts of America that aren’t filled with crime or recent “immmigrants” is at least as high as the life expectancy of the highest European countries.
But that doesn’t fit the control-freak, power-mad agenda of the politicians and cynical, self-interested “journalists”, so you will never hear about it.
In 2011, there were just under 14,000 murders in the U.S.; all the mass murders combined each year are less than 1% of that.
True as it goes but I suspect the actual number is even less than a magnitude less than 1%
Let’s see: 1% of 14,000 would be 140. Newtown was 26 dead; Aurora was 12 dead; Clackamas Mall was 2 dead (plus the shooter’s suicide); Cafe Racer in Seattle was 6 dead. There were many others that received no national attention. All of them combined probably came to about 100 — or less than 1%.
So, as an attorney, life and death is nothing but numbers. As an attorney, try associating 12.6 thousand homicides in 2011, too families and friends. I’m betting if it were your family members slaughtered by a gunman, you wouldn’t just relate to them as simple numbers to be placed in the killed column of data. As an attorney, can you provide how many laws have been passed and enacted but for abuse and irresponsiblity? Thank God the overwhelming majority of americans do not rationalized like some do!
As an attorney, you should be well addressed with the facts of gun crimes in addition to gun deaths. The gun issues being discussed in America today, I’m certain will expand beyond its narrow focus as gun rights abuses swings more drastically in the future. Just haven’t had enough middle and upper income whites to lose their family members yet.
Never let a crisis go to waste right?
Do you think we should ignore the deaths of kids in Chicago?
<a href="http://gunowners.org/fs0404.htm"More than 2 million crimes — including rape and murder — are prevented annually by guns in the hands of private parties.
That depersonalization is what you have to do to make good policy. Personalized tragedies lead to idiotic, overreaching, or arbitrary laws. Emotion is not a suitable replacement for cold logic when you’re crafting rules for a broad population.
Depersonalization of crime victims names, ages, race and genders for policy makers is as you say, a prudent matter. Depersonalization of constiutional protections for life and liberty of any class of human citizens on the other hand, is not prudent. We’re not talking about squirrels and gun violence and homicides — we’re talking about human life and family members! If we really depersonalize human life more than what is apparent today, then this nations society is truly lost.
Sorry Claton, confused your bio/occupation with another but the message remains the same.
The message that you are not capable of rational though? Yah, that message remains.
A good reason you don’t hear or see much reporting about the latin/latin or black/black crime is because these high rise dwelling fashionable intellects, acting as a “news commentator”, hasn’t the guts to enter any of these neighborhoods to investigate. They simply get their news feed from local TV & radio stations from their penthouse, and then get some controversial “professor”, like West, to inflame the discourse on a national network.
“If it bleeds, it leads” is still the mantra of the main stream press, and it is selling commercial space to any business that has the money to pay for this tripe.
And appearing as bleeding hearts with so much over-lubricated compassion, gets the cheap audience they deserve.
With the constant bombardment of ignorance coming from the White House on down to the local school crossing guard, America is on a collision course with its own mandated functional illiteracy.
It is an interesting way to look at it. Maybe Cornel West has a point.
Probably it is more complex than what Cornel West says, but it is hard to calculate. For instance, if there were a mass school shooting in a predominantly black elementary school in Chicago for instance, then you could gauge the difference in media response: Chicago vs. Newtown.
But thank God there hasn’t been a mass school shooting in Chicago like that.
In 2012, Chicago had 43.25 people murdered per month, and scores more injured. I think this surpasses Sandy Hook.
If these crimes were reported on a routine basis, the only changes would be the names, dates, and number murdered.
Why don’t they bus in these professional race hustlers, with their supporting cast of news hustlers, to quell the violence?
No, comparable would be a mass shooting and in a school. But thank God there is no example like that.
The irony is the person(s) West should be yelling at are — based on their stated goals — the types like Piers Morgan, who are only harping on about banning assault rifles. That was the best part of Ben Shapiro’s thumping of Morgan last week, in that Ben pretty much threw West’s argument right in Piers’ face, by reminding him that most gun violence is both carried out with handguns and occurs in low-income, minority areas.
It left Morgan verbally flummoxed, because liberals both don’t want to deal with the cycle of poverty causes of inner city violence — they just want to keep those people dependent on government — and Piers couldn’t come out and tell Shapiro what he and other liberals really think. Their end game is to ban all guns, including handguns, but they know their crusade would collapse completely if they told the public that was the real goal of their assault weapons PR campaign (West probably knows that, too, which is why his remarks are more self-promoting rhetorical than anything else — he’s not really going to confront Obama or any white liberal Democrats about their seeming contradiction).
I’ve been beating my drum on the deinstitutionalizing of the violenty mentally ill ever since the Gifford shooting. There was a time in our history when a responsible family member could get a dangerous nut locked up relatively easily, perhaps too easily. But as in most things when liberal academics get their grubby little fingers in it, we’ve swung by way too far in the opposite direction.
It seems to me that equally as important in these communities as the murder rate is the birth rate to unwed black females. In the true crime TV program “The First 48″, they invariably describe the often-black victim as “the father of (insert any number here)”. When the victim is 16 or 17 and described as the father of two or three, which is absolutely his only claim to fame, then I have to wonder who on earth are the mother and children left behind. I do not understand why this cohort is reproducing at this rate. Surely it must be a terribly difficult life to be unemployed, uneducated, on the street and targeted for murder or prison. Why do they insist on bringing more babies into the world damned to live the same existance?
Or has no one in their Affirmative Action Headstart programs ever explained the cause and effect of a penis inserted into a vagina?
To those objecting to the fact that whites pointing out the problem of blacks killing blacks as being a far greater issue than the Sandy Hooks that occur, I say, So just keep talking about it. Don’t shut up when they try to make you the issue. Keep talking. If we really care about making our society better we’ll keep pointing out the facts and stop hiding in the shadows because we’re afraid to speak up.
This article, and the responses, will, I fear, far exceed Joe Biden’s report in defining our real, lethal, unsolved problem. It is axiomatic that if you do not define the real problem, you will never solve it. If Biden recommends an ammo magazine of a specified capacity, or an ugly gun, he will have done nothing to solve our murder problem and exploded a Second Amendment conflict. This is utter stupidity.
Prof. West sees only one aspect of the problem. He is absolutely correct in that black males, 17- 25 are both the killers, and the victims. I suspect he is half correct, in that the slaughter of white people causes a tsunami in the liberal press, while the constant killing of blacks, follows the second commercial.
As root problems, motivators to kill, we must focus on the collapse of the family structure, primarily in the black community, but also in other communities, and insanity, substance abuse, dope and booze. Strong willed men do not slaughter people. Biden does not have the courage to point this finger.
And, in candor, there may be enough dumb people who would overturn the Second Amendment, revoke the right of Americans to own, possess, and use small arms. History is certain that this would lead to slavery, but the debate would have the advantage of honest dialogue, something which is totally lacking today.
Speaking honestly, how many people do you personally know who advocate repealing the second amendment? To your personal knowledge, how many elected officials in government in your lifetime have advocated the repeal of the second amendment? Obviously, the fear of repeal of the second amendment as constantly repeated on here, must be supported by some real substantial numbers or they’re going into the realm of delusion. What are the numbers of our population speaking to such repeal of the second amendment?
In 1942, President Roosevelt advocated taxing all income in excess $25,000 at a 100% rate, in effect, confiscation.
A mere thirty years earlier when the the 16th Amendment had been ratified, 7% was the top tax rate. In 1913 you would have found no one (other than a few communists, perhaps) advocating the confiscation of “excess income.” When foes of the income tax asked for assurances that the top rate never be allowed to exceed 10% they were ridiculed as being alarmists.
Given the long, sorry record of broken promises made by our government, beginning with the Indian tribes and proceeding right up to the present day, who in his right mind would trust their assurances? Yet you ask the question, “Speaking honestly, how many people do you personally know…” as if truth and political promises have anything in common.
The people I “personally know” are convinced that the government is comprised of fools and knaves. Federal officials, both elected and appointed, routinely ignore and bypassed the US Constitution when enacting, interpreting and enforcing legislation. Judges have overturned our initiatives and referendums by fiat. Congress has driven us to the brink of national insolvency. The White House runs guns to Mexican drug cartels and blames “bitter clingers” and lenient gun laws for the resultant deaths.
The “realm of delusion” is not occupied by those who fear that government has become a threat to our liberty and prosperity. The delusional man is the one who still believes the civil authorities will at some point be content to usurp no more authority and our present difficulties will be peaceably resolved.
If you are honestly looking for “real substantial numbers” as to how the adult population views the political situation, simply take note of how much weaponry and ammunition has been purchased since BHO’s inauguration.
A substantial number of Americans rightfully distrust Obama’s character and assurances. You will find “substantial numbers” of them commenting here at PJM.
So, it appears you can’t answer any of the questions relative to the specific topic in your lengthy response. If you can’t, with some degree of logical or factual research data, support your fears — delusion!
“how many elected officials in government in your lifetime have advocated the repeal of the second amendment…the fear of repeal…must be supported by some real…numbers or they’re going into the realm of delusion”
Thats a false agrument.
MOST Politicians want to “repeal” the Second Amendmend, they just use code words.
Words like “common sense” gun laws, that would prevent anyone from having a modern weapon sutable to contest theirs, in a power struggle against Tryanny.
Words like “hunting and target shooting”, as if the Second Amendment was designed to support pleasure-sports.
Words like “privilages” as if the RIGHT to be armed is A PRIVILAGE GRANTED by the state, when the actual language of the Second Amendment is incontrovertably clear.
Most Politicians WANT to repeal the Second Amendment, because it is the LAST and ONLY check on their quest for power.
They’re just Politically Savy enough (for now) to cloak that desire in sneaky disingenuous language (they ARE all lawyers arebnt they?)to chip away at it bit by bit untill it has no “teeth” they need to fear.
Example: Its a whole lot more politically expedient to LEAVE the FIRST amendment in place, while ENFORCING “hate speech” codes and “seperation of church and state” doctrine to intentionally stifle political disent on college campuses.
Same with the Second Amendment….they’d rather “repeal it” without actually, you know, REPEALING it, for political reasons.
Are you actually THIS niave, or just playing Devils Advocate?
Of course, if you were consistent, you’d be for abolishig the 2nd. We know them drugs turn everyone into violent felons that cant control themselves (of course only in ghettos) and so do guns. Of course, neither is true but you progressives aren’t very consistent.
Drugs, like excessive alcohol, are impairments to judgment.
Firearms are for the sober and serious.
They are Tools for those with the MORAL AND PHYSICAL capacity to use them appropriately.
Stoners, Drunks and Druggies cannot properly control firearms, because they are not in control of THEMSELVES.
Their judgement is impaired, and they are incapable of safely handing these Tools of Freemen.
You are aware that getting drunk or stoned isnt permanent right? You do know that stuff only affects you for a few hours right? Are you a prohibitionist too?
Of course you know that the VAST majority of people that choose to partake aren’t running around shooting guns while they are partaking right and are perfectly able to control themselves in that regard right?
If you arent going to admit this simple point then to be consistent you must also believe that because of the actions of some gun owners/thieves, no person has the RTKABA.
Your leftist veneer is VERY thin.
Every single Stoner I know, is high 24/7.
“Wake-and-bake” first thing in the morning, bone-up for lunch, another in the late afternoon, and some in the evening before bed.
They spend a sizable portion of their take home pay on it, certainly more than their grocery bill, and have to “move a little” of it themselves to “stay in business” meaning pay their rent, car insurance etc etc. and still have the daily weed allotment.
Every single one I know does that without exception. Their life revolves around staying buzzed and getting more Pot, just like an like an alcoholics life revolves around a bottle.
If you ARE a Firearms Instructor/Range Safety Officer AND you get high, you wouldnt work for me.
A student has an A.D., and my RSO is a “really responsible” pothead?
I’ll explain THAT to the lawyers?
Seriously?
“Every single Stoner I know, is high 24/7…Every single one I know does that without exception.”
Thats kinda funny, because none of the ones I know do that. And they’re still ‘harmless’ according to you.
‘If you ARE a Firearms Instructor/Range Safety Officer AND you get high, you wouldnt work for me.’
What on Earth makes you think I’d tell you a damned thing about my PRIVATE life. Maybe I already do work for you. You see, thats the beauty of a person that chooses to smoke and drink responsibly.
The bottom line is you’re a nanny state progressive and you want to control people. Congrats, you’re a memer of the whig party. You’re no better than liberals and in some respects you’re worse because you’re a liar that tells people you believe in small govt.
Delusion!
They advocate ignoring the Second Amendment to pass legislative restrictions on the right to bear arms, which is the same effect with a candy coating of dishonesty.
Absolutely true…
And their failure to properly address Violent Crime because of the Political Straight Jacket they forced us into 50 years ago, has created enormously bottled up angst within them when it comes to crime.
So much crime, and everyone walking on eggshells dutifully ignoring The Elephant In The Room….
Its not quite “ignored” because they don’t “care”, its ignored because their politics has created a self-contradictory paradox that cannot now be acknowledged.
Capital Punishment is therefore effectively non-existent for ALL murderers, as a fair and honest implementation of it would quite naturally fall “disproportionately” on Blacks….
“Real” Capital Murder Charges themselves rarely pursued at all for the very same reason…the result is a “catch and release” program of repeat firearms offenders, where everything plea-bargained down from “Attempted Murder” (which is what discharging an illegally owned firearm at a crowded street corner actually IS, isn’t it?) to mere “assault”, as if they punched someone in the nose….
So to their collective relief, these “mass shootings” remove the “racial aspect” (even when the shooter is a black racist like Colin Ferguson or the DC Sniper) and allow escape of that pent-up frustration and guilt brought on by being so “necessarily” soft on (predominantly Black Perpetrator) crime.
It lets loose their bottled –up rage in a “safe” and “politically correct” trajectory against mere OBJECTS, as they AT LAST can speak forcefully, passionately (instead of weakly and apologetically?) about “crime”.
Racism and Gun Control are in a way, opposite poles…..they are the counterweights that spin the gyroscope of their Leftist Guidance System…both must exist together in “equal amounts” for their “machine” to stabilize itself.
Remove either, and it instantly crashes.
Apathy and indifference toward what happens to drug dealers are probably more a factor than racism. I don’t recall much attention being given when the drug dealers who get killed happen to be white.
There’s another factor that you failed to mentioned. We all know dealing drugs is dangerous, including those in the ‘trade.’ The average person’s reasoning is perhaps less ‘good riddance’ than that ‘they knew what the risks were when they decided to deal in drugs. In contrast, kids going to kindergarten are choosing to engage in a risky activity.
Great article and a perspective that needs to be publicized much more by gun rights advocates. America is not a violent nation, it is a mostly peaceful nation with pockets of routine violence.
I used the FBI’s data tool to drill into Minnesota’s rates of murder and violence last week. In 2010 Minnesota had murder and violent crime rates of 1.8 and 236.0. Treating Minneapolis and St. Paul proper separately from the rest of Minnesota, you get rates of 7.9 and 924.6 for the cities(pop. 668,039) and rates of .9 and 136.7 for the suburbs and the rest of the state(pop. 4,635,886). For Minneapolis and St. Paul I can also confirm that murders and violent crime are mostly concentrated in a some neighborhoods, with the remaining parts of the cities only slightly above the rest of the state.
This article is incorrect when it says the real problem with murder is black on black crime.
Here’s a few stats taken from the web site of the US Dept. of Justuice.
Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.
Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.(Actually believe this number is substantially higher because it is grossly under reported by authorities for political reasons.)
’cause this is a free country and if they wanna kill each other t’ain’t nobody’s bizness if they do