oh shit you're right. i wasn't paying attention.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/pdfs/5079.pdf

go to page 8.

and 11, knowing 20% of state prisoners are drug-related, blacks constituted 15% of drug users in 1998. but blacks represent 37% of those arrested, 53% convicted, and 56% of drug offenders in prison.

[Edited on October 1, 2005 at 6:51 PM. Reason : mehr.]

10/1/2005 6:40:15 PM

makes sense that it would occur with drug offenses

murders though, I kind of doubt it

10/1/2005 8:45:46 PM

Quote :

"well i'd love to see you give evidence that isn't severely flawed."

i don't have to. I'm not the one positing that the system IS flawed. come on, don't pass your lack of an argument on to me.

All those numbers you posted are great. but they don't prove a damn thing. All of those numbers simply show a correlation between race and severity of punishment. And we all know that correlation doesn't prove a damn thing. Remember: global temperatures have an inverse correlation to the number of pirates. Thus, if we had more pirates, we'd have lower global temperatures, right? TPC ALL THE WAY!!!

10/1/2005 10:30:41 PM

Quote :

" backpedalling again, I see... Tell me, why should we assume that he is not using "crime rate" to mean "crime rate?" I mean, he said "crime rate" specifically each time he mentioned it. You'd think that if he used both "crime" and "crime rate" that he would be using them interchangably. Instead, you posit that he's a racist and then say that because he's a racist he was using them interchangably, and that because he was using the interchangably, he was being a racist... Logic don't work that way, buddy. "

HAHA, I can't believe you said that (actually, yeah I can, because you're an idiot).

Quote :

"BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well -- CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate. BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky."

Crime and crime-rate are pretty much used interchangeably there.


[Edited on October 1, 2005 at 11:30 PM. Reason : /b]

10/1/2005 11:29:31 PM

Quote :

"All those numbers you posted are great. but they don't prove a damn thing. All of those numbers simply show a correlation between race and severity of punishment."

the correlation is that race plays a key factor in the outcome of a trial (or whether it actually goes to trial).

how can you be so fucking stubborn to REFUSE the idea that our legal system is flawed. you have to be a goddamn idiot. AD HOMINEM ALL DAY, BABYCAKES.

your name fits; you're a fucking mule.

10/2/2005 12:49:42 AM

Quote :

"Smoker: The problem here is that you didn't get his point. He was using the example to say that "the ends don't justify the means." And the stupid, liberal caucus in congress turned it around to mean exactly the opposite, by quoting him out of context. This is akin to reading "A Modest Proposal" by Johnathan Swift and taking from it that he seriously wanted us to eat children as a solution to poverty. "

The problem here is that his true point is equally racist, even though I agree he was misrepresented by many. If you go along with his argument you can't help but conclude he thinks your race determines your behavior. If the blacks were to dissapear tomorrow, whites (well, non-blacks to be exact) would end up in their shoes in terms of their social including financial status. I'm not arguing here that merely your being poor excuses your criminal behavior. But HE's arguing in essense that non-blacks would behave differently under the same set of circumstances. That's racism.

The reality is probably that his comments were too shortsighted. He probably didn't understand the full implications of what he was saying. Which is quite unfortunate given the topic and his former employment since it suggests incompetence at best.

10/2/2005 12:50:35 AM

Quote :

"the correlation is that race plays a key factor in the outcome of a trial (or whether it actually goes to trial)."

and I'll reiterate my point: CORRELLATION PROVES [I][B][U]NOTHING[/U][/B][/I]. If a million blacks committed crimes and only one white committed a crime, all in the same year, I'd be hard pressed to believe that there was a racial inequality in the system. None of your numbers matter if we don't know other things behind the numbers. Just like the number of pirates being correllated with global temperatures PROVES NOTHING if we don't know anything about whats behind the two numbers.

Quote :

"how can you be so fucking stubborn to REFUSE the idea that our legal system is flawed."

maybe because I see no reason to believe it is flawed? Maybe because I believe that, in general, judges actually rule ON THE FUCKING CASE ITSELF, instead of on race, maybe? please, present some REAL evidence, such as juries and judges saying they rule based on race against blacks, or numbers that show how many whites and blacks should have been convicted and should have been sent to jail. Those are the numbers that matter.

Quote :

"If you go along with his argument you can't help but conclude he thinks your race determines your behavior."

actually, yes you can. thats what everyone else has been saying.

Quote :

"But HE's arguing in essense that non-blacks would behave differently under the same set of circumstances."

HE who? Bennett? Cause Bennett didn't say that anything of the sort. He stated that crime-rate would go down if blacks were gone. He stated nothing about what others would do, except to say that crime would be down. It isn't a crazy assertion to believe that non-blacks would continue to do or not do what they always done or not done, with or without blacks (except for killing blacks )

Quote :

" The reality is probably that his comments were too shortsighted. He probably didn't understand the full implications of what he was saying."

Yeah, he should have known that the press would jump all over it to continue their OMFG REPUBLICANS HATE BLACK PEOPLE mantra.

And moron, lets see... he starts out saying crime rate. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt either way. What was Freakonomics' point? is it crime or is it crime rate? Because, in some respects, reducing crime IS the same as reducing crime rate... but i digress And yet, you still have yet to address the OTHER half that point: that if he were truly racist, he wouldn't have said that aborting all black babies was morally reprehensible...

10/2/2005 1:04:19 AM

Quote :

"And yet, you still have yet to address the OTHER half that point: that if he were truly racist, he wouldn't have said that aborting all black babies was morally reprehensible... "

At a KKK meeting he wouldn't, but on public radio, it would be the most prudent thing to do.

It would be like Hitler saying he thinks all Jews should be killed, then saying, "but that's a bad thing to do". After the fact, we all knew he meant it, he was just trying to cover his arse. On the ladder of racists though, this guy is low, because he at least realizes it's not acceptable in modern society and tries to hide it. It doesn't make him less of a racist, he's just more benign that many other types of racists.

10/2/2005 1:10:52 AM

DID YOU EVEN READ THE GODDAMN STUDY?

I'M PRETTY FUCKING SURE YOU DIDN'T.

PERHAPS IF YOU DID, YOU WOULD SEE THEIR METHODS, AND HOW THE DATA WAS CALCULATED.

CASES ARE CITED IN A STUDY LIKE THIS, WHY WON'T YOU JUST READ IT?

if you can't see that our system is flawed in any manner, then how do you explain this recent case?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/30/mafia.cop.ap/index.html

why don't you actually read this link:
http://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/exonerations-in-us.pdf

[Edited on October 2, 2005 at 1:16 AM. Reason : w]

10/2/2005 1:14:30 AM

Quote :

"At a KKK meeting he wouldn't, but on public radio, it would be the most prudent thing to do."

hmmm. nice ad hominem, but there's no proof that he's a member of the KKK.

Quote :

"It would be like Hitler saying he thinks all Jews should be killed, then saying, "but that's a bad thing to do"."

this is great, but we ALREADY KNEW HITLER WOULDN'T REALLY MEAN THAT. this guy we know very little about, except that he's a conservative. Oh, I forgot. all conservatives are racists. DUH! if thats the case, then why keep arguing a point that is already true? I mean, if all conservatives are racists, then this guy must be a racist.

Oh, and thx for YET ANOTHER hitler and republican reference. Please, we really need another one. we haven't had enough of them already.

Or, if your intent was to say "HITLER WAS BAD, THUS THIS GUY IS BAD!!!", well, that was also stupid, because its irrelevant. I could easily say "HITLER WAS BAD, THUS YOU ARE BAD!!!" and its equally not logical. Hey, keep up the stupidity, though. It makes me chuckle

Quote :

" if you can't see that our system is flawed in any manner, then how do you explain this recent case? http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/30/mafia.cop.ap/index.html"

ummm, maybe that people lie? what a shocker!

Quote :

"why don't you actually read this link: http://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/exonerations-in-us.pdf"

OK, I made a brief and cursory look at it, and I see little talk of race in it. All it says is "the system makes mistakes sometimes." Well, NO FUCKING SHIT! Now, lets look at the rate of mistakes: in the years 1986 to 2003, it gives us a total of 206 "exonerations..." So, in 15 years, we have a total of 200 mistakes out of HOW MANY TOTAL DECISIONS? What, hundreds of thousands? Sounds like an acceptable rate of error to me. Even better, they stated that exonerations were being looked at more readily now. AKA, we will are now being more careful when someone brings up a point. Hey, sounds like correcting a previous potential flaw, doesn't it?

10/2/2005 1:15:02 AM

that's not ad hominem.

he didn't say he was a member of the KKK. you're just stupid.

that's an ad hominem.

10/2/2005 1:19:59 AM

come on. the obvious implication of the statement was that he would attend a KKK meeting, or at least is the kind of person who would. If thats not ad hominem, I don't know what is. AND, its irrelevent as well.

10/2/2005 1:23:41 AM

Quote :

"OK, I made a brief and cursory look at it, and I see little talk of race in it. All it says is "the system makes mistakes sometimes." Well, NO FUCKING SHIT! Now, lets look at the rate of mistakes: in the years 1986 to 2003, it gives us a total of 206 "exonerations..." So, in 15 years, we have a total of 200 mistakes out of HOW MANY TOTAL DECISIONS? What, hundreds of thousands? Sounds like an acceptable rate of error to me. Even better, they stated that exonerations were being looked at more readily now. AKA, we will are now being more careful when someone brings up a point. Hey, sounds like correcting a previous potential flaw, doesn't it?"

Quote :

"if you can't see that our system is flawed in any manner... why don't you actually read this link:"

i wasn't posting that to show racial disparity, but rather that the system is, in fact, flawed. sorry if it confused you; that is why i typed "in any manner". this: http://www.sentencingproject.org/pdfs/5079.pdf is to show racial disparity in our legal system
how do you explain this?

Quote :

"blacks constituted 15% of drug users in 1998. but blacks represent 37% of those arrested, 53% convicted, and 56% of drug offenders in prison."

Quote :

"Hey, sounds like correcting a previous potential flaw, doesn't it?"

a flaw that still currently exists.

if you think that only 200 innocent people were incarcerated, you are terribly naive. what the actual number is, that is impossible for anyone to know. but if you think about it logically, there is no way you could agree that 200 is enough.

[Edited on October 2, 2005 at 1:47 AM. Reason : rearrange]

10/2/2005 1:46:45 AM

There is an enormous amount of research that shows bias against blacks in the judicial system. Public defenders admit in high numbers that certain cases are indefensible if the client is black so they feel obligated to recommend their clients to confess to a crime they didn't commit. The reason is that they think an acquitall is not really a viable option.

10/2/2005 1:50:04 AM

Quote :

"come on. the obvious implication of the statement was that he would attend a KKK meeting, or at least is the kind of person who would. If thats not ad hominem, I don't know what is. AND, its irrelevent as well. "

I don't think he's a member of the KKK. I was merely trying to say that in a situation where blatant racism was tolerated (like a KKK meeting or TWW or wherever white people go to say racist things), he wouldn't feel the need to point out it was a "morally reprehensible" thing to do.

Quote :

"this is great, but we ALREADY KNEW HITLER WOULDN'T REALLY MEAN THAT. this guy we know very little about, except that he's a conservative. Oh, I forgot. all conservatives are racists. DUH! if thats the case, then why keep arguing a point that is already true? I mean, if all conservatives are racists, then this guy must be a racist."

I never said all Republicans are racist, I said republicans, like this guy, saying racist things, like this guy, help perpetuate the idea that republicans are racist.

Quote :

"Oh, and thx for YET ANOTHER hitler and republican reference. Please, we really need another one. we haven't had enough of them already."

Hitler is pretty much the only person everyone would agree was a bad guy/racist/whatever. I could have picked someone else, but there's no guarantee you would have recognized them as a racist. Hitler is just the most convenient universal racist. I could have said steve9419 instead, but he doesn't deserve that much attention.

Quote :

"Or, if your intent was to say "HITLER WAS BAD, THUS THIS GUY IS BAD!!!", well, that was also stupid, because its irrelevant. I could easily say "HITLER WAS BAD, THUS YOU ARE BAD!!!" and its equally not logical. Hey, keep up the stupidity, though. It makes me chuckle "

Wow. Okay, replace "Hitler" with anyone you recognize as racist, and re-read what I wrote. Maybe you won't so grossly misinterpret it.

[Edited on October 2, 2005 at 2:18 AM. Reason : w]

10/2/2005 2:10:44 AM

Quote :

"http://www.sentencingproject.org/pdfs/5079.pdf is to show racial disparity in our legal system"

You realize this report accepts that blacks are disproportionately involved in certain types of crime, right?

10/2/2005 7:56:14 AM

yes, and the next paragraph it puts it into context.

10/2/2005 9:26:31 AM

Quote :

"At a KKK meeting he wouldn't, but on public radio, it would be the most prudent thing to do."

moron (how appropriate), Bill Bennett is a Catholic, and the klan hates Catholics, smart guy.

10/2/2005 1:23:27 PM

in a related story, the crime rate of marijuana users has skyrocketed ever since smoking marijuana became illegal

10/2/2005 1:27:33 PM

Quote :

"Behind the numbers Of the men and women behind bars last year, 910,200 were black; 777,500 were white and 395,400 were Hispanic, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. To the casual observer - and anyone who is looking for some data to back up racist views - this might suggest that Bennett used an apt example. Given these numbers, aborting all black babies, however "morally reprehensible" to suggest, could bring about the biggest reduction in the number of crimes that are committed in this country, right? I don't think so. The Bureau of Justice Statistics' figures represent only those who were jailed for a crime. But according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, more than twice as many whites as blacks (6.7 million to 2.6 million) were arrested in 2003 for committing a crime. Whites made up 70.6% of all people arrested that year - and 60.5% of those arrested for violent crime. Blacks totaled 27.0% of all arrests and accounted for 37.2% of the people arrested for committing a violent crime. Unequal justice And 2003 was no fluke. A check of the arrest statistics gathered by the FBI from 1999 through 2003 shows that substantially, more whites than blacks were arrested in each of those years. Why does the black inmate population in jails and prisons exceed that of whites when so many more whites are arrested? I don't think it's a leap of faith to conclude that the scales of justice are out of balance. Maybe Bennett and others who view blacks as a criminal class are blinded by their myopia. Maybe they just never bothered to compare the government's data on who gets arrested in the country with who ends up behind bars. Maybe if Bennett examined this disparity, he might clamor for some reforms in the way juries are selected, poor suspects are defended and how prosecutors use their discretionary power to dispose of cases. "We are not going to back down from our views, and I'm not going to apologize," a combative Bennett said last week on his radio show as pressure mounted for him to do just that. At the very least, Bennett ought to acknowledge that the FBI data suggest that he could have come up with a better "absurdum." DeWayne Wickham writes weekly for USA TODAY. "

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051004/cm_usatoday/billbennettsthesisracistmaybewrongabsolutely;_ylt=ArbyT5VjTSApzKYK8alkIEms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3YWFzYnA2BHNlYwM3NDI-

10/4/2005 11:24:37 PM

I highly recommend this crackers opinion:
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2005-09-11-1.html

10/5/2005 1:22:37 AM

You want us to listen to fucking Orson Scott Card?

OMF g33k!

I might as well start quoting Dan Simmons or something.

Geez.

10/5/2005 1:23:22 PM

he (at least used to) write a column for the rhino times in greensboro (an independent weekly not unlike a conservative/libertarian version of the independent weekly out of the triangle)

10/5/2005 1:29:31 PM

Anyway, we've all seen the graph that shows the first generation to be affected by legal abortion went on a violent crime spree.

So I'm not really buying the argument.

10/5/2005 1:35:01 PM

Quote :

"i wasn't posting that to show racial disparity, but rather that the system is, in fact, flawed. sorry if it confused you"

thats great. too bad that I don't consider the occaisional mistake as a "flaw." Again, they found 200 people in the most serious categories of crimes that were wrongly convicted in OVER 15 YEARS!!! Certainly a FLAW would be readily apparent and obvious. I mean, we would be talking on the order of 10-15% mistakes. less than 1%? hardly a flaw.

Quote :

"I don't think he's a member of the KKK. I was merely trying to say that in a situation where blatant racism was tolerated (like a KKK meeting or TWW or wherever white people go to say racist things), he wouldn't feel the need to point out it was a "morally reprehensible" thing to do."

and thats entirely irrelevant. The obvious implication, again, is that he IS a member of the KKK, or would attend such a meeting. If you are doing little more than pointing out the obvious, then why do it? Yeah, the KKK hates blacks and jews. STOP THE PRESSES! Still doesn't mean a thing to mention the KKK, unless you are trying to imply that this guy is a member.

Quote :

"I never said all Republicans are racist, I said republicans, like this guy, saying racist things, like this guy, help perpetuate the idea that republicans are racist."

Yeah, its just too bad that this guy didn't actually say anything racist. you know, the whole point of this thread, and all... And its just too bad that democrats like to call republicans racist, because it helps keep the blacks whom they exploit from thinking critically about an issue. Make a ploy to a strong emotion and there is no need for logical substance. Just ask Hitler, he knows this for a fact.

Quote :

"Hitler is pretty much the only person everyone would agree was a bad guy/racist/whatever."

Thats great, but there are other, more effective ways of getting such a point across than to rely on the ol OMFG HITLER! attack. Use your imagination. Thats what Hitler didn't do when he attacked Russia.

Quote :

"Wow. Okay, replace "Hitler" with anyone you recognize as racist, and re-read what I wrote. Maybe you won't so grossly misinterpret it."

Nah, I can actually read and comprehend logical arguments, unlike Hitler.

Quote :

"yes, and the next paragraph it puts it into context."

yes, and the context would be "if you commit proportionally more crimes, you will have a proportionally higher crime rate."

Quote :

"But according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, more than twice as many whites as blacks (6.7 million to 2.6 million) were arrested in 2003 for committing a crime."

couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact there are FIVE TIMES AS MANY WHITES IN THE US AS THERE ARE BLACKS, could it?

Quote :

"Why does the black inmate population in jails and prisons exceed that of whites when so many more whites are arrested"

hmmm, repeat offenders, maybe... what about blacks generally committing more violent crimes than whites proportionally... what about...

Quote :

"I don't think it's a leap of faith to conclude that the scales of justice are out of balance."

nope. its a leep of sheer stupidity.

Quote :

"There is an enormous amount of research that shows bias against blacks in the judicial system."

There's also an enormous of research that shows the opposite.

Quote :

"Public defenders admit in high numbers that certain cases are indefensible"

yeah, we call that GUILT. crazy thing, I know.

but, if you instead want to suggest that public defenders are not doing their job, then look no further than the public defenders. you know, a group of people who generally tend to be, oh, i dunno, liberals, and such. But hey, lets keep blaming it on republicans and their racist tendencies and all (I know, strawman. you never claimed that republicans are racist or whatnot) But seriously, what does this say? this doesn't say that the blacks aren't actually guilty or that there is any actual bias against blacks. It, instead, suggests that the public defenders, whose job it is to defend everyone, either don't (and thus aren't doing their jobs...), or they do, but they personally believe it is fruitless to defend blacks, and that that, as such, affects their work. Thus, the problem isn't necessarily in racist judges, or juries, or whatnot. While, yes, the public defenders are a part of the system, and thus would represent a "flaw" in the system, we must also consider that they, themselves, are not trying as hard, and that they, themselves are to blame, and that the true system itself is not being tested. Rather, it is being unwittingly affected by those who will later claim its biased. Kind of a chicken or egg thing...

10/5/2005 7:26:53 PM

Quote :

"thats great. too bad that I don't consider the occaisional mistake as a "flaw." Again, they found 200 people in the most serious categories of crimes that were wrongly convicted in OVER 15 YEARS!!! Certainly a FLAW would be readily apparent and obvious. I mean, we would be talking on the order of 10-15% mistakes. less than 1%? hardly a flaw."

Quote :

"The flaws are numerous and the commentators have documented them well. There have been numerous death row exonerations. In fact, in some states the pace of exonerations competes with the pace of executions. See e.g., Death Penalty Information Center Searchable Database, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions.php, last accessed September 6, 2005 (indicating that since 2000, Louisiana has executed two individuals while five individuals have been exonerated from death row). "

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1577&scid=64

what is that? 250%? in 1 state alone for just one type of crime? how is it that they got to death row if they are innocent?

10/5/2005 8:22:29 PM

considering that executions don't take place for a good 7-10 years, then trying to judge today's system by the "results" of ten or 15 years ago is a bit... ummm... difficult?

but yeah, "outsripping the pace of executions," still, is like arguing that you are running faster than a turtle. woopty fucking do! besides, what does "exonerated from death row" mean? does that mean "sentence commuted" or does that mean "shown totally innocent" or does it mean "set free due to a technicality..."

seriously, the numbers can say almost anything, especially if you have an agenda to find numbers that say a certain thing... Every statistic you have thrown out can be easily thrown out as being correllated to something entirely different and unrelated to "flaws," but also bias (since you are now trying to shift the argument away from "OMFG BIAS" to "OMFG FLAW!!!"). And any statistician will tell you that such correllation all but removes that figure from the realm of meaningful statistics.

10/5/2005 8:34:49 PM

LOOK OUT! THERE'S A WHOLE GANG OF 'EM!!!

10/5/2005 8:40:49 PM

what, red x's?

10/5/2005 9:09:32 PM

^ You suck at browsing teh intarweb.

10/5/2005 9:23:37 PM