Free Markets, Free People

The numbers that “Black Lives Matter” and the sensationalist media prefer you ignore

You’ve likely seen them, but these numbers tell a completely different story than those the “Black Lives Matter” tell and the media hypes:

The Washington Post has been gathering data on fatal police shootings over the past year and a half to correct acknowledged deficiencies in federal tallies. The emerging data should open many eyes.

For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths. According to the Post database, in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Using the 2014 homicide numbers as an approximation of 2015’s, those 662 white and Hispanic victims of police shootings would make up 12% of all white and Hispanic homicide deaths. That is three times the proportion of black deaths that result from police shootings.

The lower proportion of black deaths due to police shootings can be attributed to the lamentable black-on-black homicide rate. There were 6,095 black homicide deaths in 2014—the most recent year for which such data are available—compared with 5,397 homicide deaths for whites and Hispanics combined. Almost all of those black homicide victims had black killers.

Police officers—of all races—are also disproportionately endangered by black assailants. Over the past decade, according to FBI data, 40% of cop killers have been black. Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police.

Some may find evidence of police bias in the fact that blacks make up 26% of the police-shooting victims, compared with their 13% representation in the national population. But as residents of poor black neighborhoods know too well, violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there.

Such a concentration of criminal violence in minority communities means that officers will be disproportionately confronting armed and often resisting suspects in those communities, raising officers’ own risk of using lethal force.

So this gathering of facts would, or should, support an entirely different narrative – if the media reported on it honestly and if they had analysts who dealt in facts instead of emotion and opinion driven by ideology and agenda.

I’ ve seen these facts numerous times in numerous places and they’re pretty hard to argue against.  If black men are disproportionately represented in crime statistics it is because they disproportionately commit crimes – especially homicide.  If black lives mattered to “Black Lives Matter” that is one of the major issues the movement would be confronting.  But, of course, it’s not.  Instead it is focused on another issue, one that they have wildly misrepresented.  That is that police are out to kill blacks and black men specifically.

Nonsense.  There is nothing among the facts above that supports that contention.  Conversely, there’s much to say that BLM’s claim is exactly what I called it – nonsense.

Once you add to that the lack of leadership from the White House and Barack Obama and you can see why this has become an explosive problem.  As Myron Magnet points out in City Journal:

True to form, Obama went into grievance-mongering mode on July 7. . . . . His familiar conclusion: “If you add it all up, the African American and Hispanic population, who make up only 30 percent of the general population, make up more than half of the incarcerated population. Now, these are facts. And when incidents like this occur, there’s a big chunk of our fellow citizenry that feels as if because of the color of their skin, they are not being treated the same. And that hurts.” . . .

If you want to ignite race riots, a sure-fire way to do it is to stir up black hatred and suspicion of cops, which will in turn make cops warier of blacks and more trigger-happy, and so on, until an explosion occurs. So thanks, President Obama. You have set back American race relations by 50 years.

And he has.  Grievance mode that blows past the facts provided by Heather MacDonald in favor of – nonsense.  Gangs and gang related activities of two minority populations lend themselves heavily to what grievance mongers like Obama would like to call “disproportionate.”  Also note that he’s gone after police who are responsible for 258 deaths of blacks while other blacks are responsible for the remaining 5,827 deaths.  That, to a reasonable person, would seem the most frightening statistic if you were concerned about “black lives”, wouldn’t it?

Finally, as for “disproportionate,” when you see statistics like blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there, what would you expect to see in arrest results?  Those who are making this “disproportionate” aren’t the police.  They’re the black criminals.  Another great issue for a real human rights organization to address.

But Black Lives Matter isn’t a human rights organization.  They totally ignore the real issues facing the black community.  No, they’re a racist organization that, in the mold of the blamer-in-chief, are trying to play victim and blame shift the problems of the black community on whites and police while claiming the motivation is racism.

It’s … that’s right … nonsense.


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

31 Responses to The numbers that “Black Lives Matter” and the sensationalist media prefer you ignore

  • Black Lives Matter is another one of many — almost too many to count — revolutionary Marxist groups run without regard to facts. Facts just get in the way. Its purpose is agitation and propaganda in support of a racial proletariat on the identity politics horizontal axis of class struggle.

    BLM was founded not simply in reaction to the Trayvon Martin case, but as a reaction to George Zimmerman being acquitted of Martin’s murder. The eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence that showed, at the end of a detailed trial, that Zimmerman had acted in self-defense was irrelevant to the people who created BLM.

    Also, if you know anything about Jeremiah Wright’s church and its doctrine, BLM is a good fit with that. So Barack is very comfortable with this kind of thinking.

    • propaganda in support of a racial proletariat on the identity politics

      Historically what would you usually call a political movement based on socialist ideals but with an overpowering focus on race and identity? A movement that also seeks to disarm law-abiding citizens, cripple the regular law enforcement agencies, weaken the armed forces, has a strong thread of romantic environmentalism and turns to crony corporatism rather than nationalization?

      Hmmm, let me think…

    • Cultural Marxism (take the economic class struggle and apply to any identity group). In addition to racial issues, its how modern Feminism rolls now. Even the Disabled are getting their movements turned to this approach. It implies the able are oppressing you and anything don’t to accommodate the disabled is owed.

      It is about creating agitation and seeking only appeasement as the solution. Appeasement mean growing government, taxes and power for the disadvantaged group intentionally at the expense of the alleged oppressor.

      BLM’s agitation is designed to make the cops the problem so they can’t be seen as the solution to Black Violence. Its to create a crisis which the only solution is appeasement under a Social Justice template.

      • Remember the Frankfurt School. They knew that balkinizing the US culture was the only chance that Communism had in America.

        So now we have every possible victim signaling being the order of the day for people.

        “Intersectional feminism” is a great example.

      • I don’t see identity politics as wholly or exclusively cultural Marxism.

        “Race, class, and gender” goes the mantra in university race, class, and gender studies.

        Gender is more in line with cultural Marxism than the other two because it breaks down a public orthodoxy based on real norms based in reality, but all three of them are on that horizontal axis of class struggle.

        The attack on the meaning of marriage is pure cultural Marxism, as are the multiform offenses against political correctness. Feminism in general is based in cultural Marxism as well.

        • The BLM movement says you have to say BLM over ALM because whites have institutional power and inherent institutional racism keeps blacks down and underlying this is that “it’s impossible for the oppressor to be the oppressed” so whites or ‘all people’ don’t need advocacy only Blacks need it and putting

          This isn’t quite proof of cultural marxism but it is proof they resort to marxist theory for their ideological inspirations. But first, from the communist manifesto by Marx & Engels

          “The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. “

          Now this is a handful of videos from disjointed universities with the same progressive approach that inspires BLM & Obama

          • The video wouldn’t play for me, but I see it was about chanting “we have nothing to lose but our chains.” Classic.

            Yes, the plan to attack the institutions of society directly goes back not just to Marx but the pre-Marx of the French Revolution. Bourgeois institutions had to be destroyed, including all bourgeois morality.

            In the 20th Century, when Marxists were asking why the fire of the Revolution had not spread after the Bolsheviks took control in Russia, theorists like Gramsci and those of the Frankfurt School re-started the attacks on institutions of society, with Gramsci saying that family, church, schools, etc. were stabilizing bourgeois power and maintaining the false consciousness of the proletariat. Hence the reinvigoration of a specific kind of cultural Marxism.

            By the time you get to Derrida and Foucault, reason itself, and clarity, are under attack for essentially the same reason, and you’re back again at the French Revolution that the Bolsheviks were always so anxious to emulate.

    • Much like “Climate Change”; you’re a Nazi (or a Racist in this case) if you believe your own lying eyes.
      Question of the decade; “How did we end up with such a dolt?”

  • And from another uncomfortable and forbidden for discussion angle – Nor does that cover the number of African Americans who are never born in the first place, courtesy of Planned Parenthood.
    Also not likely to be discussed by our friends in the media.

    • I blame Planned Parenthood for allowing these killers to slip through the “abortion nets” of this country.

  • Yes, it’s true. Barack Obama put the PO**S into POTUS, but we knew that already.


    Yeeeeeeup. That about nails it.

    And, to borrow a meme from Glenn Reynolds…”This is not the 21st Century I was promised”. I worked for and dreamed of a color-blind America since the 60s. I still want that, but it’s been pushed back decades by the first black POTUS. A leading contender for the worst POTUS in history.

    Back to Erp and his trolling now?

    • “I worked for and dreamed of a color-blind America since the 60s.”
      That was too good an idea to make it apparently.
      The concept was too simple and needed lots of tinkering until various “they”s could figure out how to squeeze a nice living out of making damn sure it didn’t happen.

      We’re going to win Rags, it’s just not going to be as soon as you hoped.

      • My father was a pretty good amateur Western historian. He used to point out that in the real frontier days of Texas, nobody gave a good damn what color you were. They cared about the kind of man who had their back in a tough scrape.

        The “color” issue only came about later, when things got way more comfortable. Maybe we’ll have to return to really dire times for the color-blind thing to happen. I hope not.

      • Failure is never an option when you can simply blame someone other than yourself.

    • I still want that, but it’s been pushed back decades by the first black POTUS. A leading contender for the worst POTUS in history.

      First, and last.

  • The best take I saw on the whole thing was that black lives really don’t matter…..because if they did, blacks themselves wouldn’t be aborting left and right, not to mention the weekly slaughter counts in urban areas.

    If black lives mattered, some of this bullshit would stop.

    • This might be what you’re thinking of, Shark

      Money quote in the opening paragraph:

      Black lives don’t matter. How do I know this? Because if black lives really mattered, blacks would stop killing each other. Blacks would stop committing genocide against themselves by aborting more children than they allow to be born. Blacks would stop consigning generations to poverty by having the majority of their children out-of-wedlock. And blacks would stop treating education as punishment and instead treat it as an opportunity.

  • The president met for nearly two hours with leaders of eight law enforcement groups Monday, informing them that he considered the killing of the five police officers in Dallas on Thursday “a hate crime” and that he would work actively to serve as an intermediary between minority activists and police.

    “I’m your best hope,” Obama remarked at one point, according to the Fraternal Order of Police’s James O. Pasco, one of the meeting’s attendees.

    • “a hate crime”

      But, how can we know if it was a hate crime when “it’s very hard to untangle the motives of this shooter. ” Shouldn’t we “…leave that to psychologists and people who study these kinds of incidents.”
      Have the psychologists spoken definitively yet? Or the ‘people who study these kinds of incidents?

      I presume the full weight of the Federal justice system will be brought to bear on the wretched corpse?
      Will Loretta Lynch be able to identify shooting police officers was in fact a crime?
      and should we carry on with Hillary’s advice to make sure white people are listening to the complaints of hate criminals?

      Well, I guess it IS an improvement over declaring it was another case of work-place violence though.

      • Well don’t you know the alleged hate criminal purchased an AK-47 in a Target parking lot in Texas? Now we don’t know if that gun played a role in the alleged murders (although an off-the-street AK47 seems an unlikely choice for a sniper). But he legally purchased a vicious assault rifle which could clearly turn any man into a raging uncontrollable murderer via its telepathic powers. Or something.

        • He was going to buy a book, but that was too hard owing to laws and regulations.
          The gun was easier, cost less, fewer background checks.

          Plus guns talk to you, and give you advice and tell you to do things. Books just lie there.

          • I guess it is entirely predictable that the focus shifts to the convenient discovery he purchased a weapon legally in Texas. If this was, oh just to take a wild example, some white kid who shot up a black church, I’m sure we’d see the banning of all sorts of associated symbols and condemnation of an entire rainbow of the political spectrum. Here, condemn the incitement of BLM or similar… don’t be silly you silly-billys! The rightwing gun made him do it. It was probably a tea-party card carrying gun as well.

          • “They got guns, we got guns, all God’s chillun got guns.”
            One of these days some bright light will realize many of us have guns specifically because they have guns.
            But Barack would see a disarmed public as the perfect world.

            As far as the nefarious bought in the Target parking lot (at the intersection of North Josey and Trinity Mills Lanes, beside the PGBush Turnpike! I knew I could get a Bush mention in there) notan “AK-47”.
            It still hasn’t been released it was the weapon used, but no doubt it was the driving force behind the attack.

            Let me say, I have a number of projectile weapons, purchased in Texas and so far not one of the little devils has inspired me to go on a rampage of any sort at all.
            Clearly I must be defective.

        • Clearly Barack underestimates the true power of books.

          The Bible, The Koran, Das Kapital,
          Rules for Radicals.