Blair blames spate of murders on black culture.

[Victor McDade]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/apr/12/ukc...


From the guardian 4 years ago.

Whether true or not, wonder if Cameron could get away with saying something similar today?

David Starkey faced massive condemnation from all sections of society for saying something very similar on news night a few days ago.

Don't recall Blair getting such a hard time back then.

[davepoth]

Why would you bother saying it now?

It wasn't a "black" issue back then, and it isn't now. While there are ethnically aligned organised crime groups throughout London, I don't believe there's actually a colour bar. Crime has got over racism a lot faster than the Labour party.

[Apache]

Victor McDade said:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/apr/12/ukc...


From the guardian 4 years ago.

Whether true or not, wonder if Cameron could get away with saying something similar today?

David Starkey faced massive condemnation from all sections of society for saying something very similar on news night a few days ago.

Don't recall Blair getting such a hard time back then.

He didn't do much to stop it though did he. I doubt Cameron would do anything so risky myself

[robsa]

I have to say I am getting a little fed up with hand-wringing liberals crying 'racist!' every time someone uses the word 'black'. As far as I could see, Starkey didn't say anything racist at all, and was right in saying that many London teens (black and white, male and female) have become involved in gang culture and adopt a style of speech evolved from Jamaican patois.
Piers Morgan et al quickly denouncing him as a racist sickens me to be honest.

[Apache]

robsa said:

I have to say I am getting a little fed up with hand-wringing liberals crying 'racist!' every time someone uses the word 'black'. As far as I could see, Starkey didn't say anything racist at all, and was right in saying that many London teens (black and white, male and female) have become involved in gang culture and adopt a style of speech evolved from Jamaican patois.
Piers Morgan et al quickly denouncing him as a racist sickens me to be honest.

Piers Morgan would call his mum racist if he thought it would make him popular

[grumbledoak]

We've had 30+ years of being called a racist every time the word black is mentioned, even when someone is making a valid observation. Knife crime in Croydon? Guess what colour they will be. No insurance in Bradford? Guess. Stolen electrical cable? Guess.

That's not to say that other social groups are innocent.

But "Call me Dave" won't have the balls to say it.

[OdramaSwimLaden]

My favourite quote in the last few days came from a Sky Tv interview in Tottenham:

Sky guy: What's made this happen?
Black yoof: They stop and search us innit
Sky guy: How many times have you been stopped and searched?
Black yoof: 6, 7 , 10; I don't know. I've lost count. innit.....
Sky guy: What was the result of the searches? Did they find anything?
Black yoof: Yer, innit. They found a knife twice and some drugs too........why can't I carry a knife. Innit.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

[turbobloke]

OdramaSwimLaden said:

My favourite quote in the last few days came from a Sky Tv interview in Tottenham:

Sky guy: What's made this happen?
Black yoof: They stop and search us innit
Sky guy: How many times have you been stopped and searched?
Black yoof: 6, 7 , 10; I don't know. I've lost count. innit.....
Sky guy: What was the result of the searches? Did they find anything?
Black yoof: Yer, innit. They found a knife twice and some drugs too........why can't I carry a knife. Innit.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

Duh.

The one riots interview I remember for its brevity was this:

Journalist to hoodrat entering a shop to loot: why are you stealing?
Hoodrat entering shop to loot: fk off

[carmonk]

davepoth said:

Why would you bother saying it now?

It wasn't a "black" issue back then, and it isn't now. While there are ethnically aligned organised crime groups throughout London, I don't believe there's actually a colour bar. Crime has got over racism a lot faster than the Labour party.

So how do you explain the massively disproportionate serious crime figures for black violence in London? Over half of all street crime and knife crime and 67% of all gun crime is committed by black people, who comprise 12% of the population.

[davepoth]

carmonk said:

So how do you explain the massively disproportionate serious crime figures for black violence in London? Over half of all street crime and knife crime and 67% of all gun crime is committed by black people, who comprise 12% of the population.

But that still means that 33% of knifings and shootings are not done by black people. In the districts with a large black population, I think the numbers will look more proportionate.

It's difficult to figure out where to draw the line between "crime is done by black people, many of whom happen to be in the most lowest strata of society" and "crime is done by the lowest strata of society, many of whom happen to be black".

If you approach this as a race problem, it becomes a race problem.

[carmonk]

davepoth said:

carmonk said:

So how do you explain the massively disproportionate serious crime figures for black violence in London? Over half of all street crime and knife crime and 67% of all gun crime is committed by black people, who comprise 12% of the population.

But that still means that 33% of knifings and shootings are not done by black people. In the districts with a large black population, I think the numbers will look more proportionate.

I think you're reading the figures wrong. The gun crime figure, in that example, means that a black person is 14 times more likely to be involved in gun crime than a person of another ethnicity (anybody knowledgable in stats feel free to correct me (67/12 / 33/88?), but it's a sizeable figure). In areas with a larger black population that figure would almost certainly increase. The London-wide averaging reduces the figure, not increases it.

davepoth said:

It's difficult to figure out where to draw the line between "crime is done by black people, many of whom happen to be in the most lowest strata of society" and "crime is done by the lowest strata of society, many of whom happen to be black".

It is certainly difficult but there is no question that even taking these factors into account, black violent crime is still massively disporoportional to that of other ethnicities. And when you consider that the violence itself is proably the biggest inhibitor to social standing then it almost becomes a moot point.

[davepoth]

carmonk said:

I think you're reading the figures wrong. The gun crime figure, in that example, means that a black person is 14 times more likely to be involved in gun crime than a person of another ethnicity (anybody knowledgable in stats feel free to correct me (67/12 / 33/88?), but it's a sizeable figure). In areas with a larger black population that figure would almost certainly increase. The London-wide averaging reduces the figure, not increases it.

On a purely numerical basis yes. But split it out by district and it may paint a different picture. You can bet that most of the knifings and shootings took place in a couple of poor districts, where the black population is much higher than 12%. As a result you would find that in those districts the number of knifings and shootings by black people would be much closer to the proportion of black people in those districts.

carmonk said:

It is certainly difficult but there is no question that even taking these factors into account, black violent crime is still massively disporoportional to that of other ethnicities. And when you consider that the violence itself is proably the biggest inhibitor to social standing then it almost becomes a moot point.

Is that because they're black or because lots of black people happen to be poor though?

[carmonk]

davepoth said:

carmonk said:

I think you're reading the figures wrong. The gun crime figure, in that example, means that a black person is 14 times more likely to be involved in gun crime than a person of another ethnicity (anybody knowledgable in stats feel free to correct me (67/12 / 33/88?), but it's a sizeable figure). In areas with a larger black population that figure would almost certainly increase. The London-wide averaging reduces the figure, not increases it.

On a purely numerical basis yes. But split it out by district and it may paint a different picture. You can bet that most of the knifings and shootings took place in a couple of poor districts, where the black population is much higher than 12%. As a result you would find that in those districts the number of knifings and shootings by black people would be much closer to the proportion of black people in those districts.

Hmm... I'm not sure you're getting it. If you reduce the area of consideration to communities with higher levels of black citizenship the proportion will increase. So the figure of 14X may increase to 25X or 50X. Including areas with a lesser black representation reduces the discrepancy. If we were to include only the areas of 12%+ black representation then that proportion would increase.

EDIT: Actually, it's an interesting puzzle. It may not be like I just posted (I'll leave it in though, for completeness) being that we're talking proportions and not absolutes. The proportion would certainly not decrease like you suggest, but it might remain the same. I'd have to commit more brain power to that than I have available right now.

davepoth said:

carmonk said:

It is certainly difficult but there is no question that even taking these factors into account, black violent crime is still massively disporoportional to that of other ethnicities. And when you consider that the violence itself is proably the biggest inhibitor to social standing then it almost becomes a moot point.

Is that because they're black or because lots of black people happen to be poor though?

As I say, I doubt it's possible to make a distinction, it's a vicious circle but one that is particularly noticeable in the black community. Of course, we are talking about a small minority of black people yet the link is still present and blatant.

Edited by carmonk on Sunday 14th August 19:37