Shooting at Eaton Centre

[fuji]

Let's see:

White, 53% of the population, 67%, or 23% above the expected rate

Black, 8% of the population, 18%, or 125% above the expected rate

Given the low number of reports, 67 vs 53 is probably not significant, but 18 versus 8 sure is. In any case the report is saying that blacks, per capita, are more likely to be sex offenders than whites.

What were you wanting me to respond to?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Let's see:

White, 53% of the population, 67%, or 23% above the expected rate

Black, 8% of the population, 18%, or 125% above the expected rate

What were you wanting me to respond to?

What about the biker gangs??

 

[fuji]

What about the biker gangs??

Admit you're full of shit on the sex offenders first, blacks are more likely than whites to be sex offenders from that data.

Let's combine all the gang stuff together. So biker+street=588 gang reports, of which 254 (43%) are black and 94 (16%) are white. What point do you think you are making?

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Admit you're full of shit on the sex offenders first, blacks are more likely than whites to be sex offenders from that data

I'm not full of shit, I didnt have the numbers, it just seemed to me every time I see a pedo on TV he's white. But fair enough, Blacks do appear to commit a fair number sex crimes as well. But the stats dont say which types of sex-crimes, it does not distinguish between pedo's or other types of sexual assaults on adult women (not that I'm in any way downplaying those types of rapes)

Let's combine all the gang stuff together. So biker+street=588 gang reports, of which 254 (43%) are black and 94 (16%) are white. What point do you think you are making?

No combining anything, fuji. I wanna know when you plan on arguing we should have spotchecks for guys riding Harley's to cut down on Biker gangs

 

[fuji]

It's my opinion that noise bylaws should be enforced aggressively against biker gangs. They are no less pernicious and we should indeed crack down on them too.

There are simply fewer of them than black gangs, but individually they are just as harmful.

 

[frankcastle]

[/quote] I'd hazard t because blacks commit more per capita in general).

Now you can get upset about all these facts and start yelling "racist! racist!" but that's just stupid. "Race" is a cultural construct, not a genetic one, so whatever is going on here with blacks is something cultural. No doubt it has historic causes, and we can all get together and sing songs and feel bad for the poor oppressed black man of yesteryear. But in the modern world it's a problem, one we have to deal with, and denying that it's a problem isn't helpful. Honestly, if we can solve this problem the #1 beneficiary will be black people, who are in fact the #1 victims of all this horrendous violence.[/QUOTE]

If blacks per capita commit more crimes we would see increasing crime rate correcting with increasing black pops

 

[fuji]

We probably do, frank.

 

[frankcastle]

Looks like you're trying to get some data together, that link didn't work--it returns a yahoo search, not a PDF. It's 4am, I'm going to sleep, then I'll be working most of tomorrow. If you do have some data, when I get a chance I will run it through excel and see what it turns up. Might not be until late tomorrow afternoon, or the weekend, before I get a chance to do it.

http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/access_acces/archive.action?loc=/pub/11-008-x/2003004/article/6802-eng.pdf


Might be a good start rest of research is up to you.

 

[frankcastle]

We probably do, frank.

Comparing per capita provincial crime rates to per capita black pops there wasn't. I showed those numbers and links a while ago.

 

[fuji]

Comparing per capita provincial crime rates to per capita black pops there wasn't. I showed those numbers and links a while ago.

Your method was guaranteed to produce an incorrect result. You have showed no such thing.

What you actually showed is small towns have less crime...

 

[frankcastle]

Your method was guaranteed to produce an incorrect result. You have showed no such thing.

What you actually showed is small towns have less crime...

Well i really don't want to go in circles so how about doing the regression you allude to.

 

[frankcastle]

Why is no on else complaining about my numbers other than Fuj?

Also if black crime gets quote diluted doesn't that mean there is enough crime that we should expand from a black focus?

 

[Toke]

You're hilarous. Phil completely MADE UP some numbers, he has no idea about anything, he just made some shit up. You didn't get upset with him about that, because you liked what he was saying. I come back with some data that suggests he is completely full of shit--some evidence about the pedo rate among school teachers--and you start in on this? Where's your post to Phil telling him to fuck off for making up bullshit?

Sure, looking only at school teachers is sampling. It's the only CANADIAN data we have on this thread, and it indicates that he's full of shit. I also posted proper full valid American data showing he was full of shit. So there's two different data points showing he's full of shit--neither really perfect, one American, one just looking at teachers.

But the point that seems to be lost on your outrageously partisan mind is that this is going up against a guy who has NOTHING to justify his claims. NOTHING. But that didn't bother you at all, because you liked his bullshit.

Not sure your thinking this through, more like, you're a cheerleader singing rah-rah-rah for anybody you agree with, without having the least foggiest clue whether what's being said made sense.

I think you missed the sarcasm in his 'data'.

It's my opinion that noise bylaws should be enforced aggressively against biker gangs. They are no less pernicious and we should indeed crack down on them too.

There are simply fewer of them than black gangs, but individually they are just as harmful.

How do you know that they are fewer in number?

What a ludicrous thing to say. Not only is it data, it's relatively complete data, and it definitively shows that blacks commit almost all the major violent crimes in Toronto. Denying that loses all your credibility and says more about you than anything else. You can't actually win arguments by shoving your head in the sand and denying facts you don't like.

Post the link.

I'm not joking. "Baggy pants" is obviously not the complete story, it's short hand for dressing like a gangster. I think we would put a substantial dent in the crime rate, long run, if we managed to impose a dress code on people under the age of 18. No dressing up like a gangster, moreover, anyone caught dressed up that way would be sent, with their whole family, to some re-education program to drill into their heads that the gang lifestyle is a failure, and to make sure they know what opportunities they have here in Canada.

The whole black culture is a big pile of bullshit, a bunch of people lying to themselves about how they've been oppressed, fundamentally oppressing themselves and other blacks around them, and in the end their bullshit translates into violence. I do think we have to confront that bullshit head on, not tolerate it, and show it up for the garbage that it is.

This is not a feasible or well-thought solution.

How are they lying about being oppressed?

It absolutely is not socio-economic. Blacks commit crimes in Toronto well, well, well beyond what socio-economic factors would predict. They cause almost all the acts of street violence, yet they're only a small fraction of the poor. That rules out socio-economic factors as the cause of black violence.

Sure, it doesn't prove it's cultural, but in light of the glorification of violence in black culture, it seems pretty fucking likely.

So why a couple of pages back did you suggest we control a regression for income? Actually, you at first you didn't...

Admit you're full of shit on the sex offenders first, blacks are more likely than whites to be sex offenders from that data.

Let's combine all the gang stuff together. So biker+street=588 gang reports, of which 254 (43%) are black and 94 (16%) are white. What point do you think you are making?

Link or location of the data (please, not the blog).

Why is no on else complaining about my numbers other than Fuj?

Also if black crime gets quote diluted doesn't that mean there is enough crime that we should expand from a black focus?

Because fuji has not clicked or looked at any other information than his. I gave him many suggestions of actual work put into this topic and he has not responded to any of it.

 

[fuji]

Well i really don't want to go in circles so how about doing the regression you allude to.

Whether I do it or not the result you have is invalid and communicates nothing. When I do the regression, I will calculate the level of significance and if it's not at the 95 percent level we will still not know.

To make claims based on averages over many cities you need enough data with strong enough results.

We're both assuming the following model will predict crime: x1 x poverty-level + x2 x population-density + x3 x black-pop + x4 x native-pop + y = murder-rate. Fundamentally we disagree over the value for x3, you think it's near zero, I think its significantly positive.

A regression will find numeric values for x1 through x4 that best fit the data but the values will mean nothing unless there is enough data to produce statistical significance, the "within 5%, 19 times out of 20" type qualifier.

That will depend on the volatility in the factor y, meaning, the effect of all other factors they we haven't considered besides poverty, density, blacks, and natives. If some other factor dominates the murder rate, or if we simply don't have enough data, then we won't get a significant result and we won't be able to draw ANY conclusion.

Just setting expectations here, and pointing out the futility of you trying to use the invalid analysis you did previously in the thread to draw ANY conclusion from the data.

 

[frankcastle]

Whether I do it or not the result you have is invalid and communicates nothing. When I do the regression, I will calculate the level of significance and if it's not at the 95 percent level we will still not know.

To make claims based on averages over many cities you need enough data with strong enough results.

We're both assuming the following model will predict crime: x1 x poverty-level + x2 x population-density + x3 x black-pop + x4 x native-pop + y = murder-rate. Fundamentally we disagree over the value for x3, you think it's near zero, I think its significantly positive.

A regression will find numeric values for x1 through x4 that best fit the data but the values will mean nothing unless there is enough data to produce statistical significance, the "within 5%, 19 times out of 20" type qualifier.

That will depend on the volatility in the factor y, meaning, the effect of all other factors they we haven't considered besides poverty, density, blacks, and natives. If some other factor dominates the murder rate, or if we simply don't have enough data, then we won't get a significant result and we won't be able to draw ANY conclusion.

Just setting expectations here, and pointing out the futility of you trying to use the invalid analysis you did previously in the thread to draw ANY conclusion from the data.

If you don't get a good confidence level it means the connection is weak, doesn't exist or there are other stronger factors at play.

Interesting earlier you were so confident you wanted to bet.

 

[frankcastle]

I was speaking about Toronto, where there are few natives. The point, and all the other similar ones you quoted, is correct. You may not like the truth, but that's your problem.

Yes, if you broaden to look beyond Toronto, especially in the West, then natives take over as the #1 problem. In Toronto it's blacks because we have few natives. Either way, both blacks and natives have a horrendous cultural problem that causes them to inflict violence on the rest of us. Here in Toronto despite being a tiny fraction of the population blacks are responsible for almost all the street violence.

You quoted a Star article which did point out that blacks commit an enormously disproportionate share of the violence, but that the rest of the population still committed the remainder. Well, that's a bit dodgy, because if you read that article carefully, you will see that the remainder of the violence is of a lower order than what the black community is doing, with the exception of domestic violence.

You can point out that there is a problem with domestic violence in this country, and in every country, and that's true. I agree. Pointing that out does not reduce in any way the horrible problem that the black community has become for us all. It just means that we have more than one problem to solve in this society. (Domestic violence does not appear to follow racial lines, blacks commit their share of it, as do all races. I'd hazard a guess that blacks commit more per capita, just because blacks commit more crimes per capita in general).

Now you can get upset about all these facts and start yelling "racist! racist!" but that's just stupid. "Race" is a cultural construct, not a genetic one, so whatever is going on here with blacks is something cultural. No doubt it has historic causes, and we can all get together and sing songs and feel bad for the poor oppressed black man of yesteryear. But in the modern world it's a problem, one we have to deal with, and denying that it's a problem isn't helpful. Honestly, if we can solve this problem the #1 beneficiary will be black people, who are in fact the #1 victims of all this horrendous violence.

Wow finally you get it. No one was denying that blacks commit some crimes and as you put it it is horrendous.

Glad you finally acknowledge that there are other ills that need to be addressed as well.

 

[frankcastle]

Wow for Fuji to admit that the analysis might come back inconclusive is the closest to him admitting he might be wrong.

I have said i am done a number of times but this time short of discussing regression results i have nothing to say to him.

I still contend that he can't be the only guy who took a stats course reading this thread. And that others have not sided with his feelings of the validity of my calculations which whilecrude is better than anyone else has tried.

PEACE OUT *drops the Mic*

Yikes autocorrect does some weird shit

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

I will say this in fuji's defense. These gangbangers need to stop using public malls as their shooting gallery. If you're gonna blow somebody away at least do it in a place where there's no innocent kids around.

But that goes for all criminals, black, white, yellow, purple......whatevah

 

[blackrock13]

Wow finally you get it. No one was denying that blacks commit some crimes and as you put it it is horrendous.

Glad you finally acknowledge that there are other ills that need to be addressed as well.

It is a nice dance when it happens.

It's also interesting to see the lack of background, read guesses, he works with as Toronto has the largest population of Aboriginals in Canada with ~85,000, in between the Latin American and Filipino communities in TO. Over 60% of Ontario native population live in urban environments.

 

[frankcastle]

It is a nice dance when it happens.

It's also interesting to see the lack of background, read guesses, he works with as Toronto has the largest population of Aboriginals in Canada with ~85,000, in between the Latin American and Filipino communities in TO. Over 60% of Ontario native population live in urban environments.

For some people it is hard to admit they don't know everything. Some people go through life without people calling them on their shit so they get used to thinking they are right.

Might not be the case. But it seems that way.