Man stabbed for his Focus RS

[Tankrizzo]

poo at Paul's said:

What's the demon eye thing? A remote camera or alarm?

I think it's a red light thingy which goes in the headlight clusters....like a demon eye for the car sort of thing.

[Escort Si-130]

Load of rubbish, maybe because a lot of the videos circulate are when it is people of colour.

Ahbefive said:

lbc said:

Most criminals and nutters seem to carry knives regardless of their skin colour.

I don't think that is correct at all. Out of videos I see about this sort of thing I'd say 90% if not more are black or maybe it's just the type of crime that attracts a certain type.

Either way there must be a common denominator that lures a certain type to this stabby sort of crime and it needs addressing. Denying the facts is not a way to address it.

[Ahbefive]

Escort Si-130 said:

Load of rubbish, maybe because a lot of the videos circulate are when it is people of colour.

Odd thing to say. Bury your head in the sand if you want but they are facts. Look at the statistics.

[coldel]

Ahbefive said:

Escort Si-130 said:

Load of rubbish, maybe because a lot of the videos circulate are when it is people of colour.

Odd thing to say. Bury your head in the sand if you want but they are facts. Look at the statistics.

But you have to look at drivers of these sorts of crimes not just correlated statistics - lots of things correlate with each other but it doesn't mean they are causal. For example children that watch more TV are more likely to be violent, so TV causes violence right? Or is it that violent children are more likely to watch TV? OR is it a third factor that isn't in that equation that causes both? To simply look at violent crime and then look at race, see that on correlates with the other and conclude that race causes violent crime is statistically incorrect, you are observing a correlation.

Why are black people so under-represented in high brow crime like fraud? As someone else said, black people generally earn less money and are more likely to live in deprived areas. These areas are prone to the fundamentals of crime which is baked into humans as a whole. If you go to China and look at deprived areas there are murders happening there, there are no black people there, so why does it happen if the colour of someones skin is the reason for violent crime?

[anonymous-user]

coldel said:

But you have to look at drivers of these sorts of crimes not just correlated statistics - lots of things correlate with each other but it doesn't mean they are causal. For example children that watch more TV are more likely to be violent, so TV causes violence right? Or is it that violent children are more likely to watch TV? OR is it a third factor that isn't in that equation that causes both? To simply look at violent crime and then look at race, see that on correlates with the other and conclude that race causes violent crime is statistically incorrect, you are observing a correlation.

Why are black people so under-represented in high brow crime like fraud?

As someone else said, black people generally earn less money and are more likely to live in deprived areas. These areas are prone to the fundamentals of crime which is baked into humans as a whole. If you go to China and look at deprived areas there are murders happening there, there are no black people there, so why does it happen?

No place for common sense like that around these parts ........

[loafer123]

Mr Salama, who has served as an adviser to the Government on e-commerce, responded to a Twitter follower who offered him his “thoughts and prayers” by saying: “I feel lucky. Punctured lung, but nothing life-threatening and should be fine. Most distressing aspect was being identified as a Chelsea fan.”

[dundarach]

I worry every day that my 15 year old 140k Rover 75 will draw unwanted attention.

What if someone breaks the door down, searches for half a fking hour to find the key....

Fills it with diesel (as it has none), cleans all the fking diesel off their hands and then pulls away steadily....

What if someone sees me easing down the road at a steady 29mph and impressed by the marks on ever panel, decides to pull me from the soft armchair like leather seat...

Car jacking is generally not on my radar, nor is cloning the key, however I do wonder whether, very much like being a young lady on a night out, if you draw attention to yourself, attention will come.

It isn't right, however people need to be aware of the world around them

[jdw100]

oyster said:

It's like PH's version of Jack Reacher - you just seem to find trouble where no-one else does.

Or else they're just great tales.

Four events over 21 years, one of which didn’t even involve me!

You must lead a very sheltered life if:

a) you think this is worthy of a series of books and two Tom Cruise films (first one was very good).

b) you think these are unusual kind of occurrences.

I could add loads more - been threatened with a stabbing in a bus as well,which was nice.

[Spoonz_]

Reading articles like this make me almost thankful mine was stolen of my driveway whilst I was asleep. What is the world coming to when people are prepared to kill for a ford focus.

[Digga]

loafer123 said:

Mr Salama, who has served as an adviser to the Government on e-commerce, responded to a Twitter follower who offered him his “thoughts and prayers” by saying: “I feel lucky. Punctured lung, but nothing life-threatening and should be fine. Most distressing aspect was being identified as a Chelsea fan.”

What a lad.

[Escort Si-130]

You may not think it is worth nothing, but to some idiot they may steal your 75 then break it for spares.

dundarach said:

I worry every day that my 15 year old 140k Rover 75 will draw unwanted attention.

What if someone breaks the door down, searches for half a fking hour to find the key....

Fills it with diesel (as it has none), cleans all the fking diesel off their hands and then pulls away steadily....

What if someone sees me easing down the road at a steady 29mph and impressed by the marks on ever panel, decides to pull me from the soft armchair like leather seat...

Car jacking is generally not on my radar, nor is cloning the key, however I do wonder whether, very much like being a young lady on a night out, if you draw attention to yourself, attention will come.

It isn't right, however people need to be aware of the world around them

[Ahbefive]

coldel said:

But you have to look at drivers of these sorts of crimes not just correlated statistics - lots of things correlate with each other but it doesn't mean they are causal. For example children that watch more TV are more likely to be violent, so TV causes violence right? Or is it that violent children are more likely to watch TV? OR is it a third factor that isn't in that equation that causes both? To simply look at violent crime and then look at race, see that on correlates with the other and conclude that race causes violent crime is statistically incorrect, you are observing a correlation.

Why are black people so under-represented in high brow crime like fraud? As someone else said, black people generally earn less money and are more likely to live in deprived areas. These areas are prone to the fundamentals of crime which is baked into humans as a whole. If you go to China and look at deprived areas there are murders happening there, there are no black people there, so why does it happen if the colour of someones skin is the reason for violent crime?

Perhaps you are struggling with comprehending my previous posts. Have a read again:

oyster said:

There probably is a causal denominator - and it isn't skin colour.

Ahbefive said:

Then that issue needs to be identified and dealt with.

From a .gov source: "In 2017, just under 4% of White people were unemployed, compared with 8% of people from all other ethnic groups combined. The Pakistani/Bangladeshi ethnic group had the highest rate of unemployment in 2017 (10%), and the Other White group had the lowest rate (4%)."


That doesn't account for the massively skewed violent crime ratios. So what is it?

[coldel]

Ahbefive said:

coldel said:

But you have to look at drivers of these sorts of crimes not just correlated statistics - lots of things correlate with each other but it doesn't mean they are causal. For example children that watch more TV are more likely to be violent, so TV causes violence right? Or is it that violent children are more likely to watch TV? OR is it a third factor that isn't in that equation that causes both? To simply look at violent crime and then look at race, see that on correlates with the other and conclude that race causes violent crime is statistically incorrect, you are observing a correlation.

Why are black people so under-represented in high brow crime like fraud? As someone else said, black people generally earn less money and are more likely to live in deprived areas. These areas are prone to the fundamentals of crime which is baked into humans as a whole. If you go to China and look at deprived areas there are murders happening there, there are no black people there, so why does it happen if the colour of someones skin is the reason for violent crime?

Perhaps you are struggling with comprehending my previous posts. Have a read again:

oyster said:

There probably is a causal denominator - and it isn't skin colour.

Ahbefive said:

Then that issue needs to be identified and dealt with.

From a .gov source: "In 2017, just under 4% of White people were unemployed, compared with 8% of people from all other ethnic groups combined. The Pakistani/Bangladeshi ethnic group had the highest rate of unemployment in 2017 (10%), and the Other White group had the lowest rate (4%)."


That doesn't account for the massively skewed violent crime ratios. So what is it?

Went back and had a read, still comprehending it the same way that by associating your statistics in a way that people are 'stabby' because they are black. I presented the common error that correlation does not mean causality and pretty much every statistician learns this in day one of their studies.

"It does seem to disproportionately be black people that get stabby" - you appear to be assuming here its because people are black they are more likely to stab. You went on to say that of the videos you watch 90% are black and that stabbing attracts a certain 'type'. My point around causality is that because two stats i.e. Stabbings and Black skin colour are highly correlated which you called out you assume one drives the other which if you ask any good statistician they will tell you is fundamentally an incorrect finding.

If you want to use Statistics to make a correct conclusion as to what 'drives' stabbings, ideally you would collect as many relevant variables as possible and conduct driver analysis to get to the root cause of what causes 'stabbiness'. If you took in variables like number of present parents, social-demographics, income, quality of schooling, presence of role models etc. you would see very quickly what drives the likelihood of someone becoming violent and stabbing someone.

So, if for example I could click my fingers and all the black people in London turned white BUT they still lived with the same abusive parents, poorly paid households, poorly educated, a view that they have no future, gangs still present etc. would all stabbings suddenly stop? You are right that skin colour and stabbings are highly correlated and black people are over-represented in the stats BUT to assume because they are black they are more likely to stab someone is wrong, that is a typical false positive or type I error.

Edited by coldel on Wednesday 23 January 18:12

[Ahbefive]

That statistics are drastically disproportionate. Even if you took only the "most deprived" 50% or even 20% of white people.

Having black skin obviously is not the overriding factor but there is obviously something that black people are more prone to being associated with (perhaps drill music or gangster wannabe lifestyle) that is causing them to disproportionately be more stabby.

It's not from being skint or having bad parents and even if it was then there is still something there that should be addressed and not swept under the carpet.

Denying that there are issues that are more common and associated with the black populace is part of the problem.

[coldel]

Ahbefive said:

That statistics are drastically disproportionate. Even if you took only the "most deprived" 50% or even 20% of white people.

Having black skin obviously is not the overriding factor but there is obviously something that black people are more prone to being associated with (perhaps drill music or gangster wannabe lifestyle) that is causing them to disproportionately be more stabby.

It's not from being skint or having bad parents and even if it was then there is still something there that should be addressed and not swept under the carpet.

Denying that there are issues that are more common and associated with the black populace is part of the problem.

So how do you explain the following:

-Wealthy black people in the UK do not commit violent crime, why?
-Largely non-black populations in other countries also have similar or worse violent crime, given there are no black people present how do you explain it?
-There were plenty of stabbings and violent crimes throughout UKs history long before black skinned people arrived, why?

The thing that needs accepting in this country is that colour is a correlation statistic it is NOT a causality statistic (I woudl recommend reading up on causality vs correlations it will explain it all) . What needs accepting is the statistic that black people are also overly represented as the victims of violent crime as well - from a very simple inference you would say the common factor is gangs and location rather than skin colour as blacks are also over represented in gangs and in low income areas.

There are very few people qualified to actually understand and interpret statistics which is why it takes years to get qualifications in it. Simply pointing at 90% of black people account for stabbings and concluding that because people are black they are more likely to stab you is as I said above is fundamentally incorrect and a very common error.

[Gargamel]

https://fullfact.org/crime/are-majority-youth-knif...

Knock yourselves out. Facts are pretty unarguable.

You can spout ste about casuality all you like, there are many sections of society who don’t have a great deal. Some of them break the law, and some don’t.

It is an aggressiveness in the culture and a lack of positive male role models in my opinion.

The facts on single parent rates in some ethnic communities are also not to be argued with.

[coldel]

Gargamel said:

https://fullfact.org/crime/are-majority-youth-knif...

Knock yourselves out. Facts are pretty unarguable.

You can spout ste about casuality all you like, there are many sections of society who don’t have a great deal. Some of them break the law, and some don’t.

It is an aggressiveness in the culture and a lack of positive male role models in my opinion.

The facts on single parent rates in some ethnic communities are also not to be argued with.

No one is denying black people commit violent crime I have already said that a number of times. I can spout about causality because it is important, if not the most important statistic to understand in terms as to how to tackle it - until you know what causes a problem you cannot attempt to solve it. You have guessed that its culture and male role models, but how do you know? Unless you conduct multi-variate driver analysis with a lot of variables that are in the mix its a guessing game.

What is fundamentally incorrect statistically is that saying because someone is black they are going to stab someone. Its a highly correlated statistic but its not the reason someone stabs someone else.

[Ahbefive]

coldel said:

What is fundamentally incorrect statistically is that saying because someone is black they are going to stab someone. Its a highly correlated statistic but its not the reason someone stabs someone else.

Nobody said that it's all black people. Thats like saying all terrorists are Muslim or all Irish are drunks etc etc.

What is fundamentally correct though is that statistically you are more likely to get stabbed by a black man, regardless of that being a reason. Hence rightly or wrongly why some are more likely to get a wide berth in the street and maybe even the employment market and consequently how stereotypes are formed. The cycle of negativity continues.

[MC Bodge]

dundarach said:

I worry every day that my 15 year old 140k Rover 75 will draw unwanted attention.

What if someone breaks the door down, searches for half a fking hour to find the key....

Fills it with diesel (as it has none), cleans all the fking diesel off their hands and then pulls away steadily....

What if someone sees me easing down the road at a steady 29mph and impressed by the marks on ever panel, decides to pull me from the soft armchair like leather seat...

Car jacking is generally not on my radar, nor is cloning the key, however I do wonder whether, very much like being a young lady on a night out, if you draw attention to yourself, attention will come.

It isn't right, however people need to be aware of the world around them

I have a similar view. I drive about in an almost decade old Mondeo estate in a dull colour and on black steel wheels. It's basically invisible and disposable, but is comfy, spacious, brisk enough for the road and still enjoyable to drive. It's the oldest car I've owned, but quite liberating and just keeps on going.

No car thief with any pride would take it, I'm sure

[Blue Oval84]

Ahbefive said:

What is fundamentally correct though is that statistically you are more likely to get stabbed by a black man,

Is it?

Is it not the case that a black person is statistically more likely to be stabbed by a black person? For a white person does that remain true? I'd be doubtful, when you consider the amount of white people stabbed by their white partner, or a white member of a rival gang, or a white scumbag from their own (white) neighbourhood.