Amnesty at the DMV

Earlier this month (pre-layoff) I replaced the 65,000-mile tires on the Yaris, enabling me to pass inspection and get a shiny new sticker on my windshield. That sticker reads “4/12,” and not “6/12” because my inspection was actually due by the end of April, not the beginning of June.

In other words, I drove around for five weeks with an expired inspection sticker — with an illegal car. And DRIVING AN ILLEGAL CAR IS AGAINST THE LAW. That’s why at any point in May or early June I could have been pulled over and ticketed. I would have been charged a fine and I would have had to pay that fine, because my inspection was out of date, my paperwork was out of order.

But despite doing something illegal, something against the law, I was never in danger of arrest, because while driving a car with expired inspection stickers is “illegal,” it is not criminal. It’s a civil violation.

It’s fashionable these days to pretend that this distinction doesn’t exist — at least when the subject is immigration — but it’s a significant and essential distinction. A civil violation doesn’t make someone a “criminal,” it earns them a ticket and they have to pay a fine. That’s why lovely Rita the meter maid carries a pad of tickets instead of handcuffs. She’s not out to arrest anybody, just to leave a ticket under their windshield wiper.

I’m now back in the good graces of the Pennsylvania Department of Motor Vehicles. My paperwork is in order, my inspection is good through next April and I am, once again, a law-abiding citizen. When processing my belated inspection, the DMV surely noticed that it was several weeks overdue, but they follow a better-late-than-never policy and do not issue a fine at that point. This is a sensible policy in that it encourages those with overdue inspections to come forward and correct the situation by getting their vehicles inspected. If they knew that doing so would result in a fine, that fine would be an incentive to not come forward and correct the situation. And creating incentives that encourage people to violate the law would be a foolish policy.

That, at least, is the DMV’s thinking, and I’m glad that’s the case.

The alternative view would be to characterize this policy as “amnesty.” Or, rather, to characterize this policy as OMG AMNESTY!!1!11 and then to insist that, whatever that may or may not actually mean, it must be the worst possible thing in the world.

I have tried, unsuccessfully, to discuss this with those most vehemently opposed to “amnesty” and to ask why they consider that word an epithet. It’s proven difficult to get them to articulate exactly why they think amnesty is such a bad thing, or even what it is they understand “amnesty” to mean other than “a Very Scary and Bad Thing that I fear and condemn because it’s Very Scary and Bad.”

I can’t help but wonder if those folks have ever allowed their inspection or registration to lapse and, if so, how they responded when their DMV allowed them to correct that lapse without penalty.

Stay in touch with the Slacktivist on Facebook:

Team Because vs. Team Despite
Postcards from the culture wars (11.22)
The Salt Lake Remonstrance: Mormons are out-Baptist-ing Baptists (in a good way)
'To keep oneself unstained by the world'
  • Anonymous

    Okay, now I’m calling Beatrix a troll.

  • Amaryllis

    Happy Fourth of July, Americans

    And that comment on this thread reminded me of the Immigrant Picnic
    “He’s on a ball,” my mother says.
                                                          

    “That’s roll!” I say, throwing up my hands,

    “as in hot dog, hamburger, dinner roll….”

    “And what about roll out the barrels?” my mother asks,

    and my father claps his hands, “Why sure,” he says,

    “let’s have some fun,” and launches   

    into a polka, twirling my mother   

    around and around like the happiest top,   

    and my uncle is shaking his head, saying
    “You could grow nuts listening to us,”  
    and I’m thinking of pistachios in the Sinai

    burgeoning without end,   

    pecans in the South, the jumbled

    flavor of them suddenly in my mouth…
    Happy Fourth to all Americans, by birth or by choice, regardless of their status with the DMV or any other three-letter agencies.

  • Amaryllis

    Also, from way back on the first page:

    I have tried, unsuccessfully, to discuss this with those most vehemently
    opposed to “amnesty” and to ask why they consider that word an epithet.

    “Amnesty” has been a dirty word in some circles since 1977. As in, we don’t need no “cultural reconciliation,” let those draft-dodgers stay in Canada where they belong.

    No, we won’t stop fighting about Vietnam until the last of us is dead.

  • Guest-again

    ‘If the subject interests you, look up other crimes, incarceration rates’
    You know, for a Canadian-Limey, you would think that you would have other, non-American statistics readily to hand.

    Like this fact – there are more people in U.S. jails and prisons than in any other country, including countries with 3 or 4 times the population, like China (not noted for its lax approach to criminality) or India.

    You might focus a bit on these interesting statistics from Canada while you are at it –
    ‘What’s the deal in Canada, both on the ground and “in the mind”?
    While race ain’t quite the category in Canada that it is in the US,
    consider the following statistics on incarceration rates amongst
    persons of aboriginal descent from 2004-05 (see Prison Justice for the gorier details):
    22% of admissions (vs 3% of the adult population in the 2001 Census)

    70% or more of the prison population in each of Saskatchewan, the Yukon, and Manitoba

    54% of the female prison population in Alberta (~4% of the provincial population)’http://whatsortsofpeople.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/prisons-incarceration-philosophy-and-canada/Seems like a Canadian-Limey with any sort of dedication to facts would be decrying how the original, legal, population of their land deserved to replaced by illegal immigrants who know how to enforce the law – as demonstrated by the prison system run by the descendants of those illegal immigrants.Assuming, of course, that said person is actually a Canadia-Limey, the tip-off being in your health care comment – the Canadian and British systems are actually quite different, and only someone without any experience of either, while having to deal with the American system, would make such a stunningly ignorant prediction.

  • Beatrix

    Yeah, your right, Indians/Natives commit a huge percentage of the crimes in Canasda, particularly in the prairie provinces which you mentioned. For generations they’ve been kept on reservations, under exploitative tribal systems, without property rights… a socialist paradise.  Hasn’t worked out that well.

    As for “Health Care”, Canada vs. Britain – well, they’re both socialist.  Canada does have provincial variation, and in the U.K. you can usually opt to pay for private, i.e. see a doctor before you die, but they’re both socialist systems, baby, and they’re both nightmares. 

    (Forget it.  Until I’m banned, or just get bored, I’ll comment as I see fit.  Lord knows you’re a dull bunch though.)

  • Lori

    As for crime stats, this stuff is very basic, do your own googling.  The sad fact is that Black people
    appear to be around 8 times more likely than Whites to commit
    homicide.  If the subject interests you, look up other crimes,
    incarceration rates, victim reports as to the race of the perpetrator –
    there’s a whole internet out there, knock yourselves out. 

    Beatrix the supposed British/Canadian living in Canada objects to being called a troll, so that leaves us with the eternal debate, stupid or evil. This statement is pretty strong evidence for stupid, or at least very poorly educated.

    Beatrix, learn how to read and understand statistics. There are a number of good books about the topic and there’s also information on the internet. Knock yourself out.

    No really, if being unconscious is the only way that you can stop making ignorant statements on the internet then knock yourself out.

  • Beatrix

    Lori, genius, as opposed to saying “you suck, and you’re stupid, and you’re evil, and you might be lying, and you suck!”- aside from that, do you have anything, sweety?

    Because if you don’t, aren’t you basically just an idiot? 

    Einstein, I call myself “Black Mamba” on this evil right wing Canadian (maybe I really am Canadian?) website.  Here’s a link to a thread on which I commented last night, mentioning y’all.

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/017203.html#comments

    Pop by and chat with us. 

  • Lori

    Beatrix, I didn’t merely say that you seem stupid or badly educated. I pointed out why. Your statements clearly indicate that you do not understand statistics at all. I also provided a link to a discussion on the topic by someone who does understand statistics so you could see how it works. 

    The fact that your response was to act like a condescending twit and to link to something you wrote simply confirms that you’re not worth talking to. I certainly see no reason to add to traffic at a site that’s apparently full of people like you so I’m not even going to bother following your vanity link. 

    Also, you’re a troll. On of the surest signs of a troll is repeatedly announcing that you’re leaving followed by more posts. And no, cracking jokes about the fact that you keep flouncing off and then coming back doesn’t change the fact that you’re a troll. 

    And with that I’m going to take my own advice and stop feeding the energy creature. Someone really needs to write a kill file that works on Disqus. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=581585394 Nicholas Kapur

    I actually just started learning Javascript at work, among other things. When I have some free time, I might look into whether Disqus has enough stuff exposed to Greasemonkey up a killfile.

  • Guest-again

    ‘As for “Health Care”, Canada vs. Britain – well, they’re both socialist.’
    Nope – try harder, being a Canadian-Limey. I’ll even wager you think that France and Germany have ‘socialist’ health care systems. (Hint – they have more or less universal health care systems.)

    ‘Indians/Natives’ – funny, try modelling your ‘Canadian-Limey’ speech better – those are terms Americans would tend to use (can’t speak for the British, though – maybe you can wriggle a bit more?). Canadians generally use different terms – but like the distinction above, I’m pretty sure you don’t actually understand that.

    ‘For generations they’ve been kept on reservations’ – nope. You’ll need to learn some more Canadian history, it seems. Try ‘Indian Reserve’ – maybe in your boredom, you can actually spend some time learning more about your Canadian-Limey heritage (here is a free hint – royal proclamation, 1763).

    And sorry, no one is interested enough in your verbiage to ban you. Making fun of your act is the sort of guilty pleasure some of us just can’t resist indulging in.

  • Beatrix

    Why would I try to fool you?

  • Beatrix

    Lori, you went to The Atlantic online, typed in “diversity”, and came up with an article from two days ago.  Which suggested that “diversity” somehow lowered crime rates but didn’t say how or why.  That’s just stupid.  Try the U.S. Bureau of Justice.  They have real stats, no reason to lie to you, and will give you any info you want.  http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/

  • Lori

    Beatrix, you have no idea how I found the article I linked to so don’t talk as if you know me. I did not find it be searching on “diversity”. The fact that you jumped to the conclusion that I did says more about you than it does about me. 

    Repeatedly referencing DOJ statistics as if they give all the information one needs about crime or that the meaning of the stats is self-evident also says a great deal about you. It proves my point about your lack of understanding of statistics. If your usual discussions are with people who consider that link to be proof of anything about the issue of crime and race then you need to get out more because they apparently don’t understand stats either. 

    Not only do you not understand statistics, you apparently also don’t understand sociological research. Unless you’re willing to learn you need to stop throwing statistics around because you’re basically pulling your arguments out your ear. That doesn’t reflect well on you. Saying that I’m stupid doesn’t change that. 

    Also, your arguments are racist. I don’t really care about your childish reaction to being called on that. I bothered to point out your use of a racist dog whistle for one reason. Unlike you I know that there are many people who read this board who aren’t in the US and that many of them would have no idea of the implications of your ridiculous insinuations about La Raza.

    That’s basically the same reason why I bothered to respond to your latest trolling. It’s easy to misunderstand statistics or use them to flat out lie. You use statistics badly. Anyone who gives credence to your statements is making him or herself less knowledgeable by doing so and I think they need to be aware of that. 

    You clearly object to being called ignorant, but the alternative is that you know exactly what you’re doing and are lying on purpose. I’ve been giving you the benefit of the doubt. 

  • Anonymous

    Don’t forget that sometime the statistics are just plain skewed. Trigger: rape. Google Ms. Magazine’s attempt to get the FBI to redefine ‘rape’ to include oral and anal and so forth and so on.

  • Lori

    Oh yes, there are definitely many problems with the DOJ stats themselves. The issue with the definition of rape is a problem with the laws themselves as well as with the data, but there are all kinds of other issues. 

    There are jurisdictions that don’t report their crime stats to the FBI at all. Some report some crimes and not others. Even those jurisdictions that fully report don’t always use uniform definitions of crimes. The DOJ data has value, but is hardly the whole picture of crime in the US. DOJ knows this and is honest about it and anyone who did any honest research on the issue would know that. In fact it’s right on the front page of Beatrix’s link. One of the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ major projects is improving criminal justice data because there are serious problems with it. That’s always going to be the case with decentralized, unfunded data retention. 

    None of that even touches the fact that knowing the numbers, even if those numbers are 100% accurate, doesn’t tell the story. Answering the question “How many?” doesn’t answer the question of “Why?” or tell us what to do about it. Beatrix is apparently unable to grasp that since she complained that the article in The Atlantic didn’t explain how or why diversity lowers crime. For those playing along at home here’s a big clue: the lack of explanation for the how or why was the point of the article and the reason that I linked to it. That’s why I made this comment about the link: 

     

    People who explain crimes stats for a living are having trouble explaining current US crime trends. The one thing that is clear is that the racist crap spewed by the likes of Beatrix is just that, racist crap. 

     
    Beatrix’s reading comprehension apparently also needs some work. 

  • Beatrix

    “Answering the question “How many?” doesn’t answer the question of “Why?” or tell us what to do about it.”  And my hairdresser doesn’t look after my cat when he’s sick, for that matter.  And I’m the one that can’t “understand statistics”, as you keep asserting without the slightest evidence. 

    “Also, your arguments are racist.”  That means you don’t like the data.  It means you have an ideological objection to the data.  It means the data doesn’t fit your world view.  It doesn’t invalidate the data.

    “Repeatedly referencing DOJ statistics…”  One single time does not constitute “repeatedly”.

    I do apologize for calling you an idiot, though.  The interwebs are nasty enough as is.

    Guest-again – Indians are what everybody, including, in my experience, Indians, calls Indians.  “Native” when you’re trying to sound sensitive.  Do you seriously think Gordie Hoser or anyone else goes around saying “I was talkin’ to this First Nations guy today, eh”?  And on planet Earth, “Aboriginal” mean Australian.  I also can’t figure out why you think I would be lying to you.  I mean, what’s in it for me, pretending to be Canadian?

  • Anonymous

    Do black people actually commit more crimes than white people, or does the assumption that such is true mean that black people get caught more often, is the question you should be asking.

    In the case of drugs crimes, the latter is true. I’ll find the cite when I’m off work.

  • Lori

    Your posts provide all the evidence needed to determine that you don’t understand statistics. Your comments show no grasp whatsoever of the topic. 

    This:

    And my hairdresser doesn’t look after my cat when he’s sick, for that matter. 

    and this:

    That means you don’t like the data.  It means you have an ideological objection to the data.  It means the data doesn’t fit your world view.  It doesn’t invalidate the data. 

    are both completely ridiculous statements. The fact that you apparently thought they were clever or meaningful is proof positive that you don’t understand statistics. I don’t have an ideological objection to the data about this or any other topic. The only reason to have an ideological objection to data is a total lack of understand of what data is and how to use it. I have many problems, but that isn’t one of them. Understanding that data is flawed (because whether you want to admit it or not all data is flawed) =/= an ideological objection to the data.Knowing how to use and how not to use it =/= an ideological objection to the data.
    The fact that you don’t realize this indicates a problem with your education, not mine. 

  • Beatrix

    I’m sure you’re very educated, Lori.  The hairdresser/vet thing merely was merely meant to mean that data is just that; data.  If I ask for, say, the number of baseball bats owned by the school across the road, and the answer is: 112, that’s that.  “How”, i.e. how did the school pay for those bats?  Where were they purchased?  How were they transported to the school?; and “what to do about it”, i.e. should the school keep those bats?  Or sell ’em?  Give them away?  Burn them for firewood?  Try to start a baseball team? – those are different questions.  They may be very important questions.  But if the original question was “how many baseball bats does the school across the road own?”, then 112 is the answer.  “112 is a racist answer!” is… not pertinent.

    Statistics are notoriously tricky and subject to manipulation.  “Lies damned lies and statistics” as Disraeli may or not have said.  But if you’re going to write off statistical information you need something more compelling than “I find the results racist!” The DOJ (if you hate them, go elsewhere; there are many, many sources of statistics on even these understandably sensative issues) has no reason to pretend that non-Whites, non-Asians and non-East Indians (and indeed non-many African immigrant communities) commit more crimes than they do that I can imagine.  My intuition – and yes, it’s just my intuition, my guess –  is that if they were going to massage the stats they’d probably go in the other direction.

    Could I add that some of you guys seem really paranoid?  I’m not lying about my residence or my nationality, nor can I understand why I’m supposed to want to.  I’m not “dog whistling”; I mean, in as far as I even understand what that means, to whom, on this very left-wing site, would I be sending my “whistles”?  To what purpose?  What would I even be trying to imply, nudge-nudge wink-wink, that I wasn’t just, you know, saying?  If I say that a Latino/Hispanic supremicist organization (and that does account for at least some of what they do, and you know it) called “the Race” seems racist to me, there’s no secret code involved. 

  • Lori

     But if you’re going to write off statistical information you need something more compelling than “I find the results racist!”  

     

    The fact that you think this is what I said reinforces my belief that you have reading comprehension issues. The only “results” that are racist are the conclusions you’ve drawn and are trying to use as arguments. The issue is not the date, it’s you and the way you misuse data. 

     I’m not “dog whistling”  

    Fine. You’re not dog whistling. You’re regurgitating racist arguments and attempting to support those arguments by misusing data. 

    If I say that a Latino/Hispanic supremicist organization (and that does account for at least some of what they do, and you know it) called “the Race” seems racist to me, there’s no secret code involved.  

     
    I take it back. 

    White people making a big point about the fact that  La Raza means The Race is a racist dog whistle. I have no idea why you’re whistling here.  The fact that it doesn’t make any sense doesn’t change the fact that it’s a racist dog whistle.  My best guess is that it’s a either reflex or you’re attention whoring, aka being a troll. I really don’t care why you’re doing it. 

  • Tonio

    White people making a big point about the fact that La Raza means The Race is a racist dog whistle.

    And here’s one reason why…it wrongly treats racism as though it’s about individual prejudice or bigotry, or even about groups of like-minded bigots. Racism is a systemic problem where societies and cultures treat people differently based on skin color and ethnicity. In our society’s case, whites enjoy automatic privileges and often don’t realize it. Obviously any kind of supremacism is morally wrong. The problem here is in treating non-white supremacism as though it were just a big a problem as white supremacism, or an even greater problem, when the former doesn’t have an entire system reinforcing it.

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    Indians are what everybody, including, in my experience, Indians, calls Indians.

    Down here Indian is what we call people from India.

    And on planet Earth, “Aboriginal” mean Australian.

    To be more specific, I think you’re refering to the 2.5% of Australian citizens (and roughly 3.5% of Australian-born Australian citizens) who identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people.

    Quick cultural/grammar lesson while I’m here: “Aboriginal” is an adjective and can be used in terms like “of Aboriginal descent” or “Aboriginal peoples” but it’s not appropriate to refer to a person as “an Aboriginal”. The term you’re looking for there is Aborigine (capitalised) or, cos they’re distinct groups, Torres Strait Islander. There’s an interesting correlation in Australia between people who go off on racist rants against Indigenous Australians and people who can’t get the name of the group they’re targeting right.

    /edumacation

  • https://profiles.google.com/ravanan101 Ravanan

    As an addendum, it also does not necessarily mean “Australian” of any sort. It refers to any indigenous population of an area that has largely been supplanted by another ethnic group. The Native Americans are the aboriginal people of America, the Ainu are among the aboriginal people of Japan, and the aboriginal people of Australia are usually simply called Aborigines.
    [/pedant]

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    Agreed, Ravanan, I was specifically using the capitalised noun. We’re not terribly original at naming places, people and things here so it can be a bit confusing :)

  • Beatrix

    And “down here”, what do you call “Indians/Natives/Aboriginals/First Nations”, and what do you insist that we Canadians call them, since you’d know better than I would?  Nor was I talking about what some prof of yours in a “…Studies” class told you was “appropriate”.  I’m talking about the way people – you know, humans – talk.  Most people, including Indians, say “Indian”.  “Native” is a reasonable alternative.  Nobody outside of a government report has ever referred to anyone as “First Nations”.

    I’ve lived in Australia (I know, you don’t believe me.  I couldn’t honestly give a sh*t).  I spent two weeks in a “settlement” in the Northern Territories not very long ago.  Adjective but not noun?  “Hey, that guy’s a… (?) [Seriously, edumacator, what? ‘Abo’ is frowned upon these days I believe.]”  Your Political Correctness radar is off.  “Aborigine” was and is considered offensive – to the Academics, at least – as a noun or an adjective. 

    BTW, do you wake up in the night in a cold sweat over your own practically obscene nit-picking pettiness?

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    Chill out Beatrix! I haven’t been involved in this fight; I have no reason to believe that you’re not from Canada and don’t intend to spend any mental energy disbelieving whatever you say about yourself.

    My comment on “Indians” was merely pointing out that when you claimed “everybody” speaks a certain way, you were incorrect. In Australia you are vastly, vastly, vastly more likely to come across someone from India than an Indigenous person from the Americas, so it would be really bloody confusing to refer to the latter as Indian. Given that there are 1.1 billion people in India and millions more elsewhere one or two generations descended from someone from India, we’re probably not alone in assuming that Indian = from India.

    My point is that people in North America, or the Western Hemisphere, does not equal “everybody”.

    what do you call “Indians/Natives/Aboriginals/First Nations

    Not a lot. I don’t often have reason to refer to the group; when I do it’s almost always in the context of multi-country research about several groups of people, so I usually go with something like “Indigenous peoples”. Otherwise, Native Americans maybe?

    what do you insist that we Canadians call them

    I don’t care? Whatever they want to be called?

    since you’d know better than I would

    Seriously, chill out. Commenters here an not a single amorphous beast. I’ve said nothing to you to warrant that.

    I’m talking about the way people – you know, humans – talk.

    Again, in my world we don’t talk like that cos it would be damn confusing. Thanks for reminding me that North American is the equivalent of humans. The rest of us are a subtype, I guess.

    I’ve lived in Australia (I know, you don’t believe me.  I couldn’t honestly give a sh*t).

    Well done. You *don’t* know, though, and it appears you could give a shit. 

    Seriously, edumacator, what?

    It was actually “edumacation”. A little Simpsons reference there to indicate that the latter half of my post was sharing something with the crowd in general that I find interesting and informative, and not a politically correct rant at the evil Beatrix who is definitely not from Canada.

    Your Political Correctness radar is off.  “Aborigine” was and is considered offensive – to the Academics, at least – as a noun or an adjective.

    My point in the latter part was that “Aboriginal” as a noun is definitely not OK. “Aborigine” is better if you insist on being succinct, but as the language I chose to use myself showed, preferable is “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples” or “Indigenous Australians”.

    BTW, do you wake up in the night in a cold sweat over your own practically obscene nit-picking pettiness?

    No, my body temperature at night, and my temperament in general, is excellent. I enjoy light-hearted pedantry in the spirit of nerdiness, but I think it’s unfair to call it obscene.

    You seem to be flailing around randomly now, so I’m sorry that I made you feel attacked. My second point was sharing interesting info from another country; if you don’t care then leave it alone; it wasn’t part of an orchestrated plan to have a go at you. My first point was serious and was directed at you: don’t assue that the way you speak, think, do things in North America is the only “human” way to speak, think, or act. I really, really hate that.

    kthxbai

  • Anonymous

    http://oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/2k4nsduh/2k4results/2k4results.htm#2.7 –as of 2004, white and black people use illicit drugs at the same rate, give or take a couple tenths of a percent. Yet black people are the overwhelming majority of people in jail for drug crimes. What does that tell you, Beatrix?

  • Tonio

    Or how about the disparity in capital sentencing? Whites and blacks in the US are the victims of murders in almost equal numbers, but more than three-quarters of the executions were of people convicted of murdering whites. So the overall issue isn’t necessarily what people believe but how they treat others.

  • Beatrix

    At a guess – and yes, it’s a guess – that Blacks are more likely to use really horrible drugs (i.e. crack rather than pot), more likely to be dealing, and more likely to be using drugs during the commission of another crime (smoking a joint is a “drug crime”.  Breaking into a house with heroin on you is a “drug crime”.  Killing a rival drug dealer is a “drug crime”).

  • Lori

     At a guess – and yes, it’s a guess – that Blacks are more likely to use really horrible drugs (i.e. crack rather than pot), more likely to be dealing, and more likely to be using drugs during the commission of another crime (smoking a joint is a “drug crime”.  Breaking into a house with heroin on you is a “drug crime”.  Killing a rival drug dealer is a “drug crime”).  

    Oh yeah, of course you’re not a racist. Not at all. 

    Also, citation needed and needed very badly. Said citation needs to be from a reputable source and the result of a properly conducted study and properly used data.

  • Beatrix

    “Dog whistling” being a recent expression, and slang, I went to the Urban Dictionary.  Saith the Urban dictionary, “dog whistling” is:  “A surreptitious inclusion of code words or phrases that will be heard by some of those listening, while not disturbing the other listeners, who may not appreciate the hidden message(s).”

    If you agree with that definition, what are the “hidden messages”?  If you don’t then the what do you mean?

    Let’s take it as a given that the Police (for whom I have no particular love) and the prosecutors and everybody are so racist that they’re willing to frame Black defendants.  Can this possibly account for the fact that in the U.S. Black people have over many, many years been shown to be seven to eight times more likely to commit himicide than Whites?  Really?  Honestly, I think a better bet for you would be to acknowledge that there’s a huge problem and blame Society/the Hegemony/White people/The Rich/aHumanity’s failure to love, dammit/Israel/insufficient socialism/Sarah Palin  – or something.  Because it’s not going away.

    Look, I hate this stuff.  I’m shouting against the wind, here, of course, but I’m not a racist.  I have never judged a person in any way on his/her race.  But what was the point of this post in the first place?  Is the idea that the U.S. (and Canada, I think that’s implied) should have literally no border controls?  That no Western country should?  (Can African countries?  Arab countries?)  That anyone who calls for any border enforcement is A Racist and therefore Wrong and Evil?  That the Indians/Natives/Aboriginals/First Nations are the “legal” owners of America, but the proper response to this is not for the guy who asserted that to turn his car keys and the deed to his house over to the nearest Indian band before sodding off back to Europe but rather to let hundreds of thousands of the poorest and least educated Mexicans into the country?  Have you asked the Navajo how they feel about that?

    This is not grown-up stuff.

  • Anonymous

    Can this possibly account for the fact that in the U.S. Black people have over many, many years been shown to be seven to eight times more likely to commit himicide than Whites?

    Citation needed.

  • Beatrix

    I would but Lori gets upset when I link to the Department of Justice website.

  • Anonymous

    Citation. Fucking. Needed.

  • Anonymous

    Citation. Fucking. Needed.

  • Lori

    You’re never going to get an actual citation from Beatrix. As far as I can tell she doesn’t actually know what the request means. 

    Or you know, she’s just a big old troll. 

  • Beatrix

    Citation! Fucking! Coming! 
     
    But oddly, I don’t have a bottomless bag of stats right here on my desk for me to sift through.  In fact I’m responding to enough of y’all to be slightly unclear as to whether the Citation. Fucking. Needed. is re. – well, which stats do do want, Lady Murasaki?  Seriously, specify what info you want.  I will do some googling, possibly get in touch with some of my wicked brethren who make a hobby or even profession of this sort of thing, and try to get back to you within 24 hours.  I am not lying to you.  I’ve wasted enough time on this silliness, why not a few more hours?  But specify your request.

  • hapax

    Hey, Beatrix, there’s a commenter by the handler of Rumpusfugly over on the “Inhuman” thread whom you have srsly got to hook up with.

    You have so much in common!

    Except that zie has managed to stay flounced for a whole half hour or so.  You might see if you could beat zir record.

  • Anonymous

    What we want are citations that support your claims that

    Blacks commit way more crimes than White people do…

    and

    Can this possibly account for the fact that in the U.S. Black people have over many, many years been shown to be seven to eight times more likely to commit himicide than Whites?

    Lori, EllieMurasaki and Ravanan have explained why the DOJ statistics do not support your statements.  Do you have statistically sound studies published in peer reviewed journals to back up your remarks?

    I suspect not considering that, when first asked to cite your sources, you wrote

    As for crime stats, this stuff is very basic, do your own googling.  The sad fact is that Black people appear to be around 8 times more likely than Whites to commit homicide.  If the subject interests you, look up other crimes, incarceration rates, victim reports as to the race of the perpetrator – there’s a whole internet out there, knock yourselves out. 

     
    Such evasion indicates, in my experience, that one does not have a credible source and is trying to avoid exposure.

    Edit: Formatting

  • Beatrix

    Nope, gonna let Lady Murasaki speak for herself; I am genuinely not clear on what she’s requesting.  And if “statistiaclly sound studies” can’t include the DOJ, then what would be sound?  I’ve offered you pretty hard data; counter with your own, tell me why it’s better, or stop your “evasion”.  Peer review is nice but it’s generally applied to papers in the fields of science or social science; i.e., people forwarding a theory.  I don’t believe compilations of arrest and conviction statistics want or need to be peer reviewed.  You might even notice that I put forward no hypotheses as to the meaning of the DOJ stats.

  • Anonymous

    What hidden_urchin said.

  • Anonymous

    Nope, gonna let Lady Murasaki speak for herself; I am genuinely not clear on what she’s requesting.

     
    We were asking for the same information.  I’d be inclined to think that you didn’t see my posts but you responded to them, although not with the information I requested.
     

    And if “statistiaclly sound studies” can’t include the DOJ, then what would be sound?

     
    A statistically sound study will control for factors such as geography, population density, economic status, education, cultural influence…you get the idea.  As the posters I mentioned pointed out to you, the DOJ numbers do not do this.  Data in a good study would also be collected according to standardized definitions and methods as far as possible.  As the other posters mentioned (Lori and Ravanan come to mind), the DOJ data was not only self reported but also came from jurisdictions with different definitions for the same crime.
     

    I’ve offered you pretty hard data; counter with your own, tell me why it’s better, or stop your “evasion”.

     
    Several people have told you exactly why this “hard data” does not support your claims.  I see no purpose in repeating it.  On what do you require information?  I have already provided a link to study published by the American Psychological Association to support my argument that racism not only exists in America but also has a negative impact on the judicial system.  Here is the link again:
     
    http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/94/2/292/
     
    If the topic of violence in the US interests you then I would recommend “Culture of Honor” by Nisbett and Cohen.  The authors are actually looking at the difference in white male violence between northern and southern states.  They use multiple techniques to control for the variables I listed above and address the limitations of each study clearly.
     

    Peer review is nice but it’s generally applied to papers in the fields of science or social science; i.e., people forwarding a theory.

     
    We are discussing a social science topic and you are making some pretty big claims.  Were you getting your information from a peer reviewed source then we would be able to reasonably evaluate its credibility.  This statement, however, makes me think that you are looking at some numbers, maybe the DOJ data that we have already demonstrated is unreliable, and drawing your own conclusions without regard for where that data comes from, how it was collected and the ways in which it could be misleading.  Such conclusions should not be stated as fact e.g. “Black people appear to be around 8 times more likely than Whites to commit homicide.”
     

    You might even notice that I put forward no hypotheses as to the meaning of the DOJ stats.

     
    It does not matter.  If you make a factual claim then you need to be able to back it up.  You made two factual claims and have not provided peer reviewed research to support them.  As I said above, I can only conclude that you do not have a credible source and are attempting to state your own beliefs as fact.

  • Beatrix

    Nope, gonna let Lady Murasaki speak for herself; I am genuinely not clear on what she’s requesting.  And if “statistiaclly sound studies” can’t include the DOJ, then what would be sound?  I’ve offered you pretty hard data; counter with your own, tell me why it’s better, or stop your “evasion”.  Peer review is nice but it’s generally applied to papers in the fields of science or social science; i.e., people forwarding a theory.  I don’t believe compilations of arrest and conviction statistics want or need to be peer reviewed.  You might even notice that I put forward no hypotheses as to the meaning of the DOJ stats.

  • Lori

    And there you go again, proving my point about your inability to use statistics properly. You’re also apparently unable to follow an argument. 

    You are either very, very poorly educated or you’re a very determined troll. 

  • Lori

     of course, but I’m not a racist  

    There is no, “of course” about it. When you’re speaking the language of racists and making the arguments of racists you don’t get to act like there’s no reason to think you’re a racist. 

    This is not grown-up stuff.  

    True. Your mischaracterization of the discussion is not at all grown up. 

  • Beatrix

    Good one! Ouch, baby, very ouch! (As I typed, I thought:  Surely noone could be lame enough…)

    You know how you guys like to say we right-wing swine are “racist”?  Well when we get together in our neo-con covens we say “a racist is a conservative winning an argument with a liberal”.

    “Mischaracterization”.  Nope, I read every bloody comment on this thread.

  • Lori

     Nope, I read every bloody comment on this thread.  

    “Mischaracterize” does not mean “did not read”. 

  • Kish

    You know how you guys like to say we right-wing swine are “racist”? 
    Well when we get together in our neo-con covens we say “a racist is a
    conservative winning an argument with a liberal”.

    You know, considering that, for that claim to make any bleeding sense at all, it needs to include an implicit claim that there is no such thing as actual racism, that’s actually quite an admission if you’re not a Poe.

  • Beatrix

    Nope.  There is such a thing as a bear.  But if I say “I hate you, you are a bear!”, and you are not a bear, then I am making a ridiculous and unsubstantited claim.  There are such things as horrible, evil racists who hate people because of the colour of their skin and their background, but yelling “racist!” at everyone who is not on board with you is stupid and ultimately makes the type of people who say such things a laughingstock.

    (p.s., what’s a “Poe”?  I mean, not Ed, I guess?)

  • http://guy-who-reads.blogspot.com/ Mike Timonin

    Well when we get together in our neo-con covens we say “a racist is a conservative winning an argument with a liberal”.

    That’s funny, because from where I’m sitting, it doesn’t look like you are winning…

  • Lori

    That’s funny, because from where I’m sitting, it doesn’t look like you are winning… 

    In this argument, no. Beatrix sets the bar for conservative victory very low and then consistently fails to clear it.

    Unfortunately, in the larger world things are going quite differently.

  • http://guy-who-reads.blogspot.com/ Mike Timonin

    Beatrix sets the bar for conservative victory very low and then consistently fails to clear it.

    Unfortunately, in the larger world things are going quite differently.

    Alas, that is sadly true.

  • Anonymous

    But what was the point of this post in the first place?

    I thought Fred’s message was pretty straightforward, but just to recap, the points he was making were, in no particular order, and including but not limited to, the following:

    1.  Just because something is ILLEGAL! doesn’t necessarily mean it’s heinous.
    2.  Just because something is ILLEGAL! doesn’t necessarily mean that jail or deportation is an appropriate punishment, either from a practical or a moral standpoint.
    3.  To summarize the first two points, not all crimes are equal and this is not Mega-City One.
    4.  Monoblade is a dope.
    5.  So is anyone who hides behind the “But it’s ILLEGAL!” argument as an excuse to see somebody get punished.
    6.  Possibly — just possibly — if those who were already living and working here in America were not hunted down and thrown out, but instead were offered a fresh good-faith opportunity to get their papers in order and become legal citizens, it might not spell doom for civilization as we know it.

  • Beatrix

    And on that narrow point, claifying the distinction between “illegal” and “criminal”, I thought it was a worthwhile post.  This is the sort of stuff people from anywhere on the political spectrum should understand and often don’t.  (I did know about that distinction.  It was pointed out on the evil Canadian blog Small Dead Animals ages ago by a co-blogger there who tends towards Libertarianism and values precision, in relation to precisely this topic.)

     “Possibly — just possibly — if those who were already living and working here in America were not hunted down and thrown out, but instead were offered a fresh good-faith opportunity to get their papers in order and become legal citizens, it might not spell doom for civilization as we know it.”

    Absolutely worth debating, from a variety of angles.  But the tone of this post and thread has been “every time a Republican fails to love, Baby Jesus sheds a tear”.  I repeat, this is not the way grown-up people discuss serious issues. 

  • https://profiles.google.com/ravanan101 Ravanan

    Let’s see here…

    Re: DOJ statistics. A large part of their inaccuracies come not from conscious manipulations, but from reporting rates. Which pushes the question back a bit further: why do the individual precincts and states report certain ways?

    The answer there is complicated, but a large part of it boils down to both conscious and unconscious racism. Think about Joe “Mexicans are criminals” Arpaio. While he is just one very public example (who’s given public favor because his main discrimination is against an Acceptable Target), there are many such people around the country. Do you really think that people that are that blatantly racist are going to report accurately?

    Furthermore, those statistics are based on arrests and/or conviction rates. Sad fact: our justice system screws up pretty frequently (my uncle in the FBI, a staunch conservative, tough on crime guy, estimates that 1 out of every 6 convicts didn’t do the crime they were convicted of, and this is before acknowledging the existence of unjust laws). A black man is significantly more likely than a white man to get the worse of applicable charges for a given act and circumstances (attempted homicide vs. battery. Murder in the 2nd degree vs. involuntary manslaughter), and more likely to be convicted once charged. Add in that, for crimes of violence or theft with an unknown perp, a black man is more likely to be arrested as a first suspect.

    While we’re at it, throw in the poverty correlation (that people living in poverty are significantly more likely to commit crimes), note that due to institutional racism, black people are overwhelming over-represented among the impoverished, and you get to seeing that perhaps race isn’t quite the factor in criminal behavior that it’s usually made out to be.

    Re: Drugs, A large study known as The National Survey on Drug Use and Health, was recently conducted. To quote their section on racial prevalence of substance abuse, verbatim:

    In 2009, among persons aged 12 or older, the rate of substance
    dependence or abuse was the lowest among Asians (3.5 percent). The rates
    for the other racial/ethnic groups were 15.5 percent for American
    Indians or Alaska Natives, 13.2 percent for persons reporting two or
    more races, 10.1 percent for Hispanics, 9.0 percent for whites, and
    8.8 percent for blacks. These rates in 2009 were similar to the rates in
    2002 through 2008.
    http://oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/2k9NSDUH/2k9Results.htm#7.1.4

    Given Margin of Error, it’s a total wash. Lifetime drug use in almost every category was only about 10% higher in black individuals than white. So while black people are slightly more likely than white people to use drugs at some point during their life, they are not much different and perhaps even slightly less likely to have addiction problems. Even the highest disparity category I could find, PCP use, black people had roughly 40% higher lifetime usage rates, and white people were still more likely to be regular users.

    Black people make up nearly twice the absolute number of white people convicted of drug crimes (around 60% of all drug convictions are of black men and women). Even if we expected that use of every drug was 40% more likely among black individuals than white, if prosecution was even, we should expect that white people should make up more than 2/3 of those convictions thanks to population weighting. We have those numbers reversed.

    Re: Natives/Indians, I lived 2 blocks away from a major reservation, have applied for jobs at said reservation, and gone to school with the kids of the reservation. They say and use “Native American” for almost everything, and their tribal affiliation for everything else. “Indian” is kind of like “black” for them; it can be a perfectly fine, descriptive word that they don’t generally use but are perfectly fine with people using or it can be a slur, depending on context. Maybe other tribes do things differently though.

    @1cfd07d71c70392c27d26165e23b0cf2:disqus
    Take a look at my examples, like trans vs. intersex (minority vs. minority). For the most part, that I have seen anyways, it basically consists of intersex people saying that trans people have no medical legitimacy, and (as a result) should not receive protections like intersex people do (such as they are). Christians vs teh gays? Majority v. minority, but still intertwined with that idea that this other group is less deserving. Tribalism in essence says, “My privileges should be solidified and expanded and those who are against me (e.g. not part of my tribe) should have theirs stripped.” Basically, tribalism IS fundamentally -ist (rac-ist, sex-ist, etc.) with unconscious and conscious forms like any other.

  • Tonio

    Basically, tribalism IS fundamentally -ist (rac-ist, sex-ist, etc.) with unconscious and conscious forms like any other.

    No argument there. My point is that some forms of tribalism have more severe consequences than others, because they involve greater disparities in power and privilege. And then there’s sexism, where the minority is the one with greater power and privilege. Is it worth trying to coin a special word for the forms of tribalism that involve those power disparities?

  • Tonio

    Basically, tribalism IS fundamentally -ist (rac-ist, sex-ist, etc.) with unconscious and conscious forms like any other.

    No argument there. My point is that some forms of tribalism have more severe consequences than others, because they involve greater disparities in power and privilege. And then there’s sexism, where the minority is the one with greater power and privilege. Is it worth trying to coin a special word for the forms of tribalism that involve those power disparities?

  • https://profiles.google.com/ravanan101 Ravanan

    Ah, I get what you’re saying now. I wasn’t quite clear based on your original post.
    Hmmm…might I suggest Oligarchism or Kyrichism? Politics of resentment is too unwieldy imo.

  • Lori

    Bingo! I have Bingo. “Tone Argument” plus the middle space gives me a complete column. 

    Did I win?

  • Beatrix

    Maybe.  What the hell are you talking about?

  • Beatrix

    Oh! Okay.  Don’t get this “middle spaces” thing, but “tone” – how about I replace “the tone of this post and thread” with “every stinking thing you people have said from beginning to end”.  I’m okay with that.

  • Guest-again

    ‘I mean, what’s in it for me, pretending to be Canadian?’
    You ducked the ‘Indian Reserve’ part – maybe because you just aren’t as familiar with Canadian terms as the omnipresent U.S. ones – at least, omnipresent when surrounded by American media.

    As for the Nova Scotians I’ve known – what terms they use for various First Nations tend to depend on their age, or knowledge. A fair number of people prefer the term ‘Inuit,’ for example, over ‘Indian’ when talking about the Inuvialuit.

    As for your spelling – let us just say I don’t quite recognise it being taught in a Canadian or UK school system (and you know what, my children actually are taught by teachers from the UK – though the Scots use of ‘out with’ is still very, very strange to me.)

    ‘”every time a Republican fails to love, Baby Jesus sheds a tear”‘
    Do you honestly think anyone in the UK, or just about anyone in Canada writes things like that, much less cares about ‘Republicans?’ Leaving Baby Jesus out of it, of course. Entertain us – what does the Mamba think about the NoTW scandal, or what do you think about French booing?

    And now I seen you have lived on three continents, and don’t even know much about another Commonwealth nation – keep flailing, some of us enjoy it.

  • Beatrix

    Heh!  I’m in Nova Scotia – meaning it’s past my bedtime.  “Inuit” is the p.c. term (I can remember when they announced in my classroom that we were going to use it in my gradeschool classroom) for what used to be called “Eskino”.  A completely distinct and generally far more northern people than those whom I (and most everyone else) call “Indian”.  I suspect your confusing the “Innu”, who are Indian and have been somewhat in the news over the past few years, and who live to best of my knowledge in the funny hybrid eastern provincial entity we call “Newfoundland and Larbrador”, with the Inuit.  The “Inuvialuit”, based on a very rapid google search I’ve just done, seem to live all the way on the other side of the country (the way people in Maine don’t live in California, for example).

    ‘”every time a Republican fails to love, Baby Jesus sheds a tear”‘ – well, my sense of humour is what it is.  Most politically engaged Canadians, and to a lesser exten Brits, do in fact care very much about “Republicans” and Barry Obama and Healthcare and U.S. immigration and everything American, frankly.  We know that if you sink we can’t stay afloat; anyway, American politics are more interesting than ours by and large. 

    (Since you know I go by “Mamba”, check out Small Dead Animals.  Believe me, Kate McMillan doesn’t need or even want the hits.  But everything I’ve just said about the rightist Canadian blogosphere you can confirm there for yourself. But off the top of my head I don’t know what the NoTW scandal is, I’m sorry.)

  • Beatrix

    “Eskimo” and “you’re”.  As I said, bedtime.

  • Beatrix

    The “Inuvialuit” are Inuit, but they seem to be a specific, very Western group.  There are Inuit in Greenland, you know.

  • Guest-again

    ‘well, my sense of humour is what it is.  Most politically engaged
    Canadians, and to a lesser exten Brits, do in fact care very much about
    “Republicans” and Barry Obama and Healthcare and U.S. immigration and
    everything American, frankly.’
    Nope – the fact that I mentioned UK teachers should have been enough of a hint right there. Most of the world does not place America in the center of everything – that is a strikingly American trait, actually.

    Even an Australian tried to point out some of your biases in that regard. And if there is one thing that Canadians, even back in the 1980s, don’t care to discuss much is the disaster that is American health care – they live in a civilized country, and just shake their heads at the idiocy found south of the border in that regard. As for the British and the NHS – well, yes, in Europe the British system is considered poor in comparison to others, but even the doctor I know that works for the NHS (another hint) feels that the American system is morally appalling, regardless of specific or general NHS flaws.

    The rest of the world just doesn’t care that much about the U.S. Keep flailing.

     

  • Guest-again

    ‘well, my sense of humour is what it is.  Most politically engaged
    Canadians, and to a lesser exten Brits, do in fact care very much about
    “Republicans” and Barry Obama and Healthcare and U.S. immigration and
    everything American, frankly.’
    Nope – the fact that I mentioned UK teachers should have been enough of a hint right there. Most of the world does not place America in the center of everything – that is a strikingly American trait, actually.

    Even an Australian tried to point out some of your biases in that regard. And if there is one thing that Canadians, even back in the 1980s, don’t care to discuss much is the disaster that is American health care – they live in a civilized country, and just shake their heads at the idiocy found south of the border in that regard. As for the British and the NHS – well, yes, in Europe the British system is considered poor in comparison to others, but even the doctor I know that works for the NHS (another hint) feels that the American system is morally appalling, regardless of specific or general NHS flaws.

    The rest of the world just doesn’t care that much about the U.S. Keep flailing.

     

  • Beatrix

    You’re just a self-hating Yank, which pisses me off because I love America.

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    Even an Australian

    Oy!

  • Guest-again

    ‘And just to help the non-Canadian-Limey readers of these comments, ‘NoTW scandal’ refers to phone tapping/manipulation done by the UK tabloid News Of The World (another fine Murdoch property, which should warm the cockles of Beatrix’s heart – especially there being a story of immigration and death wrapped up in that very term).

    The NoTW scandal (which has been going on for years, actually, though until only very recently it was essentially political in nature), reached a new level in the last couple of days, involving the NoTW erasing voice mail from a dead girl’s mobe, then interviewing the girl’s parents who felt their daughter was still alive, the paper’s editors all the while knowing that the voice mail changes were caused by the paper, in its effort to sell more copies by milking the story they were creating based on the hopes and fears of a mother and father – a stunningly cruel and evil act, even for a Murdoch media property.

    The French booing, of course, is what greeted the royal newlyweds’ Canadian tour when it made its appearance in Quebec. The sort of news that tends to get reported just a touch more in Canada than in the U.S., not too surprisingly.

    Not that Beatrix cares about what media sources that aren’t American report – oh no, in the UK the raging discussion is about Obama (and not, for example, the ongoing gutting of the budget which affects anyone with children, for example), and in Canada, about U.S. health care.

    Why do I have the tiniest, eensiest-bitsiest suspicion that your news sources are overwhelmingly provided by Murdoch and co., and a certain cable channel from that media cauldron (a channel that isn’t free in Canada, unlike in the U.S.)?

    Enjoy your rest Beatrix, you’ll need to be all refreshed to keep this going – as a final hint, it is morning where I am, by the way. Cheers.

    And by the way – I’ll just bet some of your best friends are Canadian. (Well, not really – it seems a silly bet.) And that your dating experience is with some American you met on summer vacation – which is why no one in Nova Scotia could have ever seen you kissing.

    Many of the Americans here will get the joke, I’m sure – much like you will, if anyone is willing to make that wager.

    ‘Self-hating American’ – well, no actually – but you would be surprised at just how people grow tired of various American traits.

    ‘Even an Australian’
    Fair point – it was more along the lines that even someone living in another hemisphere, enjoying winter, can figure out the act.

  • Guest-again

    And Beatrix, not that you need to reply, seeing as how that would be atypical – how did you celebrate the 3 day weekend?

  • https://profiles.google.com/ravanan101 Ravanan

    Wow. I hadn’t heard about that NoTW scandal (American here). Well, as Murdoch’s biographer said, if he thought he would make an extra 10 bucks a year doing a liberal station instead of a conservative one, Fox News would be shut down 10 minutes ago. In terms of evil, I’d say a birdie (slightly “better” than par) but it’s rarely so exploitative of private individuals.

    I must say thy, I could not care less about the booing of the royal couple. Royal watchers are more than welcome to do their thing, but I’m not interested.

    It took me a sec to get the joke, but I must say, I’m generally not fond of that joke unless it’s subverted or involves puppets and/or Broadway.

    Ooo self-hating American. I’m guessing that would be me since I don’t think that the USA is automatically the bestest country on Earth in anything by virtue of being the USA and God loving us and liberty and justice and apple pie and baseball. Okay scratch that, I do loves me some apple pie.

    I guess you’re a self-hating Canadian then, since you fetishize another country to the point of deprecating your own?

    The problem I have with your use of statistics is that they show a very narrow cross-section. You want hard statistics with citations?

    http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=14&cat=1
    Black people are 2-3 times as likely as white people to be below the poverty line (13% vs. 35%)

    http://economics.fundamentalfinance.com/povertycrime.php
    A 1% increase in poverty levels leads to an increase of 2.5% of violent crimes.

    Do some math. ~269% increase in poverty rate from black people to white people. This is almost exactly one hundred 1% increases from the baseline standard of 100% (Log 2.69 base 1.01 = ~100. now take the 2.5% increase and exponentiate to that same value. 1.025^100 = ~11.81

    From increased poverty rates alone, we should expect black people to be 12 times more likely to commit violent crime. And you say that they’re only 8 times more likely than white people? This would suggest to me that black people are LESS violent than white people.

    Virtually any data needs interpretation, or you’re not getting the full story behind that data. After all, 100% of people consuming dihydrogen monoxide die.

    Edited for Disqus formatting

  • Anonymous

    After all, 100% of people consuming dihydrogen monoxide die.

    We must do something about this dihydrogen monoxide menace!

  • Anonymous
  • Guest-again

    ‘It took me a sec to get the joke, but I must say, I’m generally not
    fond of that joke unless it’s subverted or involves puppets and/or
    Broadway.’
    I puzzled about this a bit (and am still puzzled about puppets and Broadway), but rereading that section, I can see that where I only intended one joke, some people could see two separate jokes in two separate sentences, or an unintended joke entirely.

    To make it clear, Black Mamba (Beatrix by another name) has cited posting at a Canadian site as proof of something – that was the reference about (self hating Canadian – nice catch) ‘best friends’ – sarcastic, definitely, but not my joke. I can see, however, that the reference could be misread as being in another direction which some people certainly consider a worn joke in the U.S. (and Beatrix is at least seemingly self-aware enough not to pull that chestnut out of the bonfire – though to Beatrix’s discredit, it seems the point of many of the posted comments is to make sure that nobody even thinks about having friends that don’t meet certain rigid criteria). Only one joke was intended, even recognizing that it might be fairly regionally bounded one (something that occurred to me, but I left it in anyways – maybe only a certain group of Americans would be familiar with that joke.)

  • https://profiles.google.com/ravanan101 Ravanan

    Also, nevermind that the DoJ’s statistics are unreliable, they just plain don’t say what you say they say. What you have claimed, contrary to your protests, IS a hypothesis of the meaning of the the DoJ stats.

    [In] the U.S. Black people have over many, many years been shown to be seven to eight times more likely to commit himicide [sic] than Whites

    The DoJ statistics don’t say that black people are seven to eight times more likely to commit murder. They say that black are seven to eight times more likely to be arrested for, charged with, and/or convicted of murder. See the difference?

    You are claiming that black people are more homicidal than white people. Note your use of “commit” homicide. That’s a hypothesis of the meaning of the DoJ stats.

    The hypothesis we’ve been advancing, which OTHER data seems to bear out, is that black people qua black people probably have around the same homicide rates, but through a confluence of factors (including the fact that black people probably do commit more murders than white people, due in large part to aforementioned poverty rates; also systemic discrimination in arresting and charging procedures–black people are more likely to be charged with murder for the same actions) that black people are 7-8 times more likely to be convicted of homicide.

  • PurpleGirl

    In November 2010 I went to a NYS DMV office to renew my non-driver ID. I was a year late. When I pointed out the date to the clerk and then said I’d lost the renewal notice in a stack of papers, she nicely answered, “Oh, that’s okay. It happens. Besides you’re a non-driver. Now how long do you want to renew it for?”  Every so often, you find people who are so understanding of things and pleasant to deal with. 

  • Beatrix

    Reply function not working anymore. 

    Guest-again, I find you very hard to understand; your references to “jokes” and “chestnuts” and so on – I might as well have been reading Cyrillic.  I’m sorry if there’s some News of the World scandal where some murdered girl’s phone was tapped; from what little I could make out it sounds awful.  All sensible people know that reporters are the scum of the Earth.

    As for who I am, well, what can I say?  One of my parents was British and the other Canadian.  I have two passports.  I was born in Britain, grew up mostly but not altogether in Canada when I was little and I went to high-school, as the Brits of course do not call it, in the U.K.  I have a mildly mid-Atlantic accent.  I celebrated Canada Day (it’s not Dominion Day anymore) on Friday July 1st here in Halifax.  There were fireworks at Citadel Hill. 

    Ravanan, I do think the United States is a greater country than Canada.  I don’t think it’s perfect, but, like that poor slob in the Godfather into, I believe in America.  I care about Canada, but I don’t see that it stands for an ideal; I am informed that it was a more worthwhile place before Trudeau took over in the ’70s, but that was before my time.  If you don’t care for America then that’s sad; ultimately, this is why we would probably never agree on anything remotely ideological.  I wonder what country or civilization you would prefer, though, human history being what it is.

    “The hypothesis we’ve been advancing, which OTHER data seems to bear out, is that black people qua black people probably have around the same homicide rates, but through a confluence of factors (including the fact that black people probably do commit more murders than white people, due in large part to aforementioned poverty rates; also systemic discrimination in arresting and charging procedures–black people are more likely to be charged with murder for the same actions) that black people are 7-8 times more likely to be convicted of homicide.”

    You have no “OTHER” data.  This is nonesense: “black people probably do commit more murders”, but that’s because of “systemic discrimination” and poverty, which is of course imposed on them entirely from without, probably by George Bush sneaking into their rooms at night and stealing their money, and then the police frame them, so somehow that means that “black people qua black people probably have around the same homicide rates as whites”.  You’re just making stuff up.  What you mean is that Black people do commit more crimes but it’s all the fault of the Evil System.  Well, I said you many comments back that that was the best rout for y’all (generalizing).

    Lori – never did find out what I was “dog whistling” about.

    EllieMurasaki – no.  There are limits to my masochism.  I’m not going back through well over 100 comments to try to guess which of hidden_urchin’s posts you’re referring to.  A handful of commentss above this one he said:  “A statistically sound study will control for factors such as geography, population density, economic status, education, cultural influence…you get the idea.  As the posters I mentioned pointed out to you, the DOJ numbers do not do this.  Data in a good study would also be collected according to standardized definitions and methods as far as possible.  As the other posters mentioned (Lori and Ravanan come to mind), the DOJ data was not only self reported but also came from jurisdictions with different definitions for the same crime.” (Presumably those “different definitions for the same crime” in those different “jurisdictions” would nevertheless apply across to people of any race, but I digress.)

    I am not writing you a scholarly report (says Lori as I imagine: “ha!  That’s because she’s real stoopid and has no education unlike me haha!”).  If there is a specific piece of statistical information you want I will (since I volunteered, which I wouldn’t now because it all just seems so silly) try to find it for you.  I will not compose you an Encyclopaedia entry.  I’ll check back in a couple of hours; otherwise, google away yourselves and bon voyage.

  • https://profiles.google.com/ravanan101 Ravanan

    “If you don’t care for America then that’s sad; ultimately, this is why
    we would probably never agree on anything remotely ideological.  I
    wonder what country or civilization you would prefer, though, human
    history being what it is.”

    Given that I apparently hate my country enough to volunteer to join the United States Armed Forces, you might wanna pick another strawman to attack there.
    Seriously though, do you buy the straw in bulk? Because damn, you have a veritable army there.

  • Lori

    Beatrix, you are truly a wonder. You’ve managed to miss the point on each and every point. You either haven’t understood anything anyone has said to you or you’re the chattiest, most determined troll we’ve had here in quite a while. 

    No one is asking you to write a scholarly report. We’re merely saying that you should read a few before flashing your ignorance at the world. 

      bon voyage.  

     

    Oh Beatrix, you’re such a tease. 

  • Lori

    Beatrix, you are truly a wonder. You’ve managed to miss the point on each and every point. You either haven’t understood anything anyone has said to you or you’re the chattiest, most determined troll we’ve had here in quite a while. 

    No one is asking you to write a scholarly report. We’re merely saying that you should read a few before flashing your ignorance at the world. 

      bon voyage.  

     

    Oh Beatrix, you’re such a tease. 

  • Beatrix

    Are you a brainwashed little university lefty, Lori, or a sad aging hippy?  Either way you (you personally) come off like a twelve year old bully trying to suck up to the cheerleaders; passive aggressive, vicious and ugly when you feel like other people have got your back.  In person you will be the wost sort of coward, physically and morally.

    No, I won’t click on to this foul little site again.  I’ll never get to read your witty response.

    To think Patheos hosts The Anchoress.

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    Are you a brainwashed little university lefty, Lori, or a sad aging hippy?  Either way you (you personally) come off like a twelve year old bully trying to suck up to the cheerleaders; passive aggressive, vicious and ugly when you feel like other people have got your back.  In person you will be the wost sort of coward, physically and morally.

    I love conversations with grown-ups. Your local team is worse than my local team and your haircut is also uncool!

  • Guest-again

    ‘I might as well have been reading Cyrillic’
    You mean you haven’t lived in Russia too?

    ‘I have a mildly mid-Atlantic accent.’
    Actually, so do I. It’s a historical co-incidence though – a good part of Virginia and a good part of Nova Scotia share a similar accent, surprisingly enough.

    ‘civilization’
    You must have been the despair of your spelling teachers. Or maybe you use the ‘U.S.’ setting on your spell checker, since the U.S. is number 1? Though maybe, considering the typos (which we all make – no need to get into a huff), in this case it isn’t the spell checker, it is the education?

    Colour me surprised.

  • Lori

    Oh dear. Beatrix thinks I’m mean and pathetic. However will I go on now that she has figured out my secret?

    Oy. The fact that Beatrix thinks that being interested in actual facts and properly conducted research makes me a  “brainwashed little university lefty”is yet another thing that says far more about her than it does abut me. In fact, her use of the term “brainwashed little university lefty” reveals a great deal, none of it good. 

    The fact that my unwillingness to simply swallow her unsupported (and unsupportable) racist claptrap brands me in her mind as “a sad aging hippy” also says a great deal about Beatrix and again, none of it is good. 

    Beatrix’s latest comment* is revealing in another way. Isn’t The Anchoress the blog that’s so nasty it’s presence on Patheos factored heavily in the decision of a number of people from the old site not to post here? Quelle suprise!

    For anyone not participating in the conversation who may wonder about my responses to Beartix, the reason that I simply gave up and mocked her is that it was clear almost from the beginning that she wasn’t going to actually engage in a substantive discussion. She made broad statements with very racists overtones and was either unwilling or unable to understand why anyone would consider that a problem. She over-focused on minor issues while totally missing the actual point of the various statements and questions that people made in response to those racist comments. There is no way to have a serious exchange of views with a person who won’t deal with the actual issue at hand. 

    The main thing that Beatrix refused (or was unable to) deal with is that it was her responsibility to support her statements. When one has made an unsupported statement and is asked to provide support, no variation of “Look it up yourself. I’m not going to do your work for you.” constitutes an acceptable response. When one makes a supposed statement of fact or offers an opinion that is racist (or sexist, or some other kind of -ist) in its implications the onus is on that person, not the audience, to do the work of supporting it. 

    *I won’t refer to it as her last comment because I don’t want to jinx it. 

  • Villasenor

    If you want amnesty, then please move to Mexico.

    Thank you,

    Law Abiding, Legally Immigrated, Citizen