SBC's Richard Land: A black man is "statistically more likely to do you harm than a white man."

[cynatnite]

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The head of the Southern Baptist Convention's public policy arm condemns the response of many black leaders to the Trayvon Martin case as "shameful." Some black pastors within the nation's largest Protestant denomination say Richard Land's comments are setting back an effort to broaden the faith's appeal beyond its traditional white, Southern base.

Land says he stands by his assertion that President Barack Obama "poured gasoline on the racialist fires" when he addressed Martin's slaying and that Obama, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton have used the case "to try to gin up the black vote for an African American president who is in deep, deep, deep trouble for re-election."

Land, who is white, said in an interview he has no regrets about his remarks. He said he understands why the case has touched a nerve among black leaders, but he also defended the idea that people are justified in seeing young black men as threatening: A black man is "statistically more likely to do you harm than a white man."

http://www.timesnews.net/article/9045307

Racist scum!

[MADem]

1. He is the visual representation of the Seven Deadly Sins! nt

[Baitball Blogger]

2. That is bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

I have never been harmed by a Black American. But a community of anglo-americans taught me the absolute worst that society has to offer. They took my peace of mind, and stole what was never theirs to steal.

Check out my blog. I'm still waiting for justice. Or, at least, I'm hoping people will finally realize how exclusive white communities really operate. There's a very high corruption factor here because they think it's their right to always remain dominant.

[dkf]

28. Why isn't making accusations against the "Anglo American" community the same thing as the pastor?

Once you use the word "community" it's prejudicial.

That's the problem...people blame the other group for an undesirable circumstance.

If black people get to demand being considered as an individual why can't everyone else?

[Baitball Blogger]

34. Because I'm talking about just the kind of communities where the pastor would come from.

Where do you think everybody ran to with this thing we call white flight? They didn't just run away from minorities who were diversifying the urban landscape. They ran to communities which could boast 90% Caucasian inhabitants. And in these Petri dishes of their own making, we can see exactly how they operate when they have no one to challenge them. They're not as pure as they would like you to think and they have left a trail of victims who have tales to tell.

[dkf]

35. Well I am not black nor white so I constantly see the accusations being thrown past me.

Too much us vs them and not enough commonality. Even when trying to bind the races, then it becomes class. Everything is team based.

[Baitball Blogger]

36. Yes, it's team based.

Living here I've learned one truth. The tendency is to use the police statistics to support their prejudices. i.e. More blacks and hispanics in jail, therefore, blacks and hispanics have criminal genes. The only way to turn that around is to expose the kinds of crimes that they do daily, and get away with. That will level the playing field.

[dkf]

37. Why do we have those statistics at all? Do they really help?

Why is there even a need to "even the field" by adding other types of crimes?

[Baitball Blogger]

38. Are you kidding me?

It's because of those statistics that Scalia could dick around with the constitution. Statistics are everything. Police statistics showed high crime in black communities, (never mind how they came across those numbers in the beginning), so Scalia was able to slip in rulings that legalized stop and frisks in high crime zones, which coincided with black neighborhoods. Of course, more stop and frisks feeds the statistics even more.

If you were to be as overzealous in prosecuting breaches of fiduciary responsibility, white islands would turn into prison zones with a number of its residents wearing ankle bracelets. Believe me, you spend more out of your pocket due to the loss of common grounds where children can play for free, and infra-structure collapses caused by deals made between city officials and the builders of these communities. If you try to stop them, they will do the equivalent of a mugging--defaming you in front of your neighbors.

Anyone, by any color, can commit a mugging. But the kind of confidence scams you find in white islands are promoted by inner circles of primarily white residents.

[mythology]

52. There are a number of reasons one would want such statistics

It can make for more effective policing even absent racial profiling.

For example it can tell you that you might need more officers of a particular background in a given area. Generally speaking it helps to have Hispanic officers in largely Hispanic areas and so forth to help build trust and communication. This can help not only resolve crimes that were reported, but also it can help make victims feel more comfortable coming forward. This is especially important for crimes such as sexual assault or crimes against immigrants.

It can also be used for targeted crime prevention efforts via educational programs or community resources. People with college educations or a job that pays the bills are less likely to commit crime. Or if you find that a segment of the populace is particularly prone to being the victim of a crime, such as elderly people being the victim of scam artists, you can create educational materials to help prevent that sort of crime.

It can also be useful for instructing the community how effective the police are at working within their community. If for example they see that say 80% of arrests or traffic stops are of blacks, but the overall community is only 20% black, then there's something wrong.

[cherokeeprogressive]

59. What IS the relevent statistic then?

[Baitball Blogger]

67. That's the funny thing.

They're all based on police statistics which means you need to make a search by city, precinct to get to the root numbers. Different cities will show different results, obviously.

However, it really gets interesting when social scientist or activists dig in to find out how those numbers are derived. Here's an example. It's dated 2005 to show you how this issue has been dragging on infinitum:

ARE Blacks A Criminal Race? Surprising Statistics

Unfortunately, this false debate has obscured the deeper issue - whether or not Blacks contribute disproportionately to the crime rate. Media coverage, conviction rates and "common knowledge" (stereotypes) all suggest that Blacks commit crimes at a rate disproportionate to our numbers in society. Conservatives embrace this assumption, and call for tougher laws. Liberals embrace the same assumption, though squeamishly, and instead call for more social programs.

The better question for public debate is this: do the actual government statistics bear out the claim that Blacks contribute disproportionately to the crime rate? Or is this largely a stereotype, which is driven by the disproportionate rate of ARRESTS and CONVICTIONS of Black people? And does the over-focus on Black crime conceal an alarmingly high crime rate within the white population?

I will be writing more about this later, but I could not resist sharing with you some statistics pulled together by one of the best minds on the subject. Jason Zeidenberg works at the Justice Policy Institute. Here is his memo on the topic, addressing both illegal drug use and some violent crime. (I'm sure lots of people can produce contrary numbers. Nevertheless, I think this memo provides invaluable insight and a great point of departure for discussions.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones/are-blacks-a-criminal-rac_b_8398.html

[bigapple]

3. curious

Can we refute his claim? Where can we find the statistics?

[Baitball Blogger]

25. You would be hard pressed to use police statistics to prove your point

because the laws are established to focus on black crime.

That would all change overnight if we logged the number of victims of white collar crime, since a dozen people could be responsible for the loss of welfare of thousands.

if the issue is physical harm, then the statistics for serial killers should put white, again, at the top of the list.

The problem is that so much of the crime committed by anglos, is not investigated. They are a preferred class.

[surrealAmerican]

26. It does sound unlikely, doesn't it.

I know of no such statistics, and I doubt that he does either.


... and Welcome to DU.

[hack89]

41. Here are the FBI crime stats. They breakdown some crimes like murder by race.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr

Here is the racial and age breakdown of murders in 2010

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl03.xls

[bigapple]

60. thanks for the link!

i looked at the 2010 data. Based on the data, is it fair to say that men are stastically more likely to commit murder than women?

[elleng]

4. and of course the fact of the matter is its because of his,

and his cohorts, abominable behavior over the years that this issue should even arise today.

[pacalo]

21. That was my line of thinking, too, but you said it perfectly.

[dkf]

31. Why blame all white people either?

Why is it not okay to lump black people together but okay to lump white people as one big mass of no good people?

It's all bad. Categorizing people is bad.

Why do we even ask for people's demographics?

[Rex]

46. Where did the poster do that? They specifically named

a group of people that are to blame. Maybe you replied to the wrong post?

[elleng]

50. Thanks, Rex.

[elleng]

49. Don't think I did that:

'his, and his cohorts abominable behavior' is what I said. I think you are assuming too much.

[provis99]

5. his claim is an example of a logical ecological fallacy.

You can't leap from the general trend to the specific. Hence, his claim is shit. He's just a racist.

It is akin to saying that Southern white men are twice as violent as Northern white men (statistically, they are), therefore Billy Bob from Mississippi is more likely to kill you as Biff from Vermont is.

[bigapple]

7. i disagree on your reasoning

Is he leaping from the general trend to the specific? His claim is that a black man is statistically more likely to do one harm than a white man. He is not pointing to a specific black person and a specific white person.

[provis99]

8. yes his is saying that.

a person attacks you, not an abstract average of people. He is saying you should be careful of that particular black man you just saw on the street.

[obamanut2012]

30. He is being a broad-brush bigot against young black men

Right? Right.

[Thinkingabout]

6. This is the reason I do not attend or belong to SBC churches

Ministers should use the small window they have each week to talk about Jesus and his love for eveyone but you get the past down instructions to present the pointed hat tricks to their members. WWJD apparently does not enter their thoughts. I was raised in a good SBC church going home but I don't like what they teach any more. God help them.

[geckosfeet]

9. Are you kidding me?

I have been harmed by more white people in my life than black people. In fact, I can't think of ANY black people who have harmed me. I suspect that is most peoples experience.

How can anyone utter such nonsense and expect to be taken seriously?

[SATIRical]

39. That's silly

That's like me saying over 505 of the population cannot be female because I am a male. The nationwide statistics are not about you.

Granted, I don't know if these particular statistics are accurate or not since I haven't seen an authoritative source one way or the other.

But your post on statistics is utter nonsense.

[geckosfeet]

40. Not posting statistics. Posting about my experience.

Based on my experience, the quote and message in op is nonsense. And my guess is that there are a lot of other people where I live with the same experience.

on edit: I suspect that you meant to respond to another post.

[SATIRical]

48. Nope, I meant yours

Your experience has very little significance to the statistics. Like I said, statistically, more than half of Americans are women.

So, does that mean the statistics are wrong (because I am not a woman)?

[geckosfeet]

61. Did you read the article? What statistics are you talking about?

These statistics?

Southern Baptist Convention's leader criticizes Trayvon Martin support

A black man is "statistically more likely to do you harm than a white man."

Please. That is hyperbole.

And my experience is perfectly relevant. It does not change because some racist fear monger is trying to scare white people. I will trust and believe my experience before I will believe his overstated unsubstantiated bullshit.

[SATIRical]

62. Statistically, if you

encounter a man, with no other knowledge of the situation, is that man more likely to harm you if he is black versus white?

I don't know. I haven't seen the numbers. I have no idea if it is true. However, it very well could be. And it very well could be false. If it is true, then it is not hyperbole. If it is not, it still isn't hyperbole.

If we also incorporated the color of the victim, then there is more information on the situation. In some cases it is likely true. In other combinations, it is not.

[bigapple]

64. ok

someone posted a link to the data earlier in the thread. You can take a look.

By the way, there are two separate interpretations of what Land said.

Suppose there are lions and dragons. A lion has a 20% chance of eating a person they meet while a dragon has a 100% chance of eating a person they meet. Unfortunately dragons do not exist while lions do.

1. You are more likely to be eaten by a lion than by a dragon. That's because while dragons are 100% deadly, they do not exist.
2. A dragon that you meet is more likely to eat you than a lion that you meet.

So does Land mean #1 or #2?

#1 looks at total number of people eaten (e.g. 100 people every year are eaten by lions while 0 people every year are eaten by dragons). Thus you are more likely to be eaten by a lion than by a dragon.

#2 looks at it from a per capita basis (i.e. stripping out the fact that dragons are much rarer than lions). So, if you do meet a dragon, he has a 100% chance of eating you.



So back to the data, you can break it down by gender, race, even age group (e.g. a young girl is less likely to murder you than a 20 - 60 year old man).

[SATIRical]

68. You are 100% correct on all counts

My guess is that Land would use interpretation #2, in which case the statement may be true (I haven't gone and checked the data).

Those wanting to prove him wrong (if the data supports his position) would likely use #1, which I would be absolutely shocked if it were true.

And yes, the data can be parsed out.

On edit: I just looked at the FBI data. It simply doesn't parse out the data to really be able to tell anything. Yes, according to the data, a black person is more likely to murder you than white (under #1 or #2), but not more than any other person. And once you throw gender in there, it tells less (all murders by women COULD be by white women).

So I still do not have the data to see if the statement is true under any interpretation.

[Initech]

10. They should just put the robes on and get it over with already.

[Whisp]

11. yah, like the harm the PNACers and the white Bushes and their master thieves.

a black man is likely to do much more harm than that.

racist piece of ignorant shitfucker.

[nanabugg]

12. I guess, bombs, fraud, invasions, and police brutality don't count? nt

[Baitball Blogger]

27. Yep. It's time to add all that in.

[Permanut]

13. Dear Richard,

Jesus loves you. Everyone else thnks you're an asshole.

[DCKit]

14. Hard to believe with so many of them behind bars.

Is he talking about prison inmates? Been watching too much "OZ" for the prison rape scenes? "The Wire" and Omar?

That I could understand - magical thinking, wrapped up in a fantasy - he wants to get nailed by a thug.

Geez dude, just buy yourself a thug rent-boy, and get over it.

[killbotfactory]

15. See? It's statistics, not racism!

[aquart]

16. Yet most high echelon bank executives are white.

Go figure.

[SammyWinstonJack]

33. Wonder how much this person fleeces from his flock. Bet he is living large.

A man with a briefcase can steal more money than any man with a gun.

[2ndAmForComputers]

17. I said it before and I'll say it again:

Ladies and gentlemen, I present you Religion in America. [font color="#FFFFFF"]My bet for the number of invocations of the NTS fallacy in reply to this is... four.[/font]

[Zalatix]

44. As a religious person I would refute that.

That is insanity in America.

[lunasun]

18. Listening to Southern Baptists more likely to do me harm than any teen!

[geek tragedy]

19. SBC has been KKK without the masks since

its inception.

[Lint Head]

20. Richard Land is a pontificating bigot! I live in Nashville. I've known about this cowardly jerk

for years. He has had the ear of many politicians and thinks he knows what is best for everybody and has the "answer" to everything.

[dionysus]

22. whats SBC.. the klan's version of the SPLC?

[Skittles]

23. he is SO FULL OF SHIT

my life has been irreparably harmed - BY MIDDLE-AGED WHITE MEN WEARING SUITS

[Scuba]

24. Paul Ryan is a black man?

[Zax2me]

42. It's Richard, and I think he's white.

[malaise]

29. Define harm you stupid racist

fugger!

[GeorgeGist]

32. WOW.

White On White.

[Rex]

43. Cannot say I am surprised by Lands total arrogence or fuckwadidness.

He is very likely to get 'hurt' be me if he ever made a statement like that in my presence. Nothing severe, just a good verbal enviseration in front of his flunkies.

[Zalatix]

45. Hurting a pastor's feelings will be declared illegal when the GOP gets power again.

Welcome to the no-fly list. And look out above, too.

[got root]

47. wait. what... banksters don't count?

[treestar]

51. I would think the stats regarding the victims would play in here

As in where the death penalty may be applied to blacks more often, but even more interesting, is applied less, when the victim is black.

The real statistic is for the victim - and like most things, a black person is most likely to be attacked by another black person and white/white. Racists always have the goal of proving the black person more "genetically" violent than the white person. The real racism shows up in that the penalty is harsher where the black person attacks the white person. Because the racist values the white person more. So the attacks on blacks by blacks that they are using to bolster their claim don't really count to them.

[MountainLaurel]

53. So much for the SBC's attempts

To bring in more black members.

[MrScorpio]

54. What a sad, afraid little man. nt

[butterfly77]

55. He seems to think..

he is the authority on black pastors and how they should and should not react to certain situations. I guess if your white your always right,in his eyes. Racist scum!

[indepat]

56. To hell with MFing Land, his entire SBC for whom he speaks, and to all those of his/their lot and

ilk.

[susanr516]

57. Reason #12,863

on my "Why I left the Southern Baptist denomination" list.

[krispos42]

58. True, but irrelevent.

[div class=excerpt style=background:#AFEEEE]Trends by race
Blacks were disproportionately represented among homicide
victims and offenders

• In 2008, the homicide victimization rate for blacks (19.6
  homicides per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for
  whites (3.3 homicides per 100,000).
  
• The victimization rate for blacks peaked in the early 1990s,
  reaching a high of 39.4 homicides per 100,000 in 1991 (figure 17).
  
• After 1991, the victimization rate for blacks fell until 1999, when
  it stabilized near 20 homicides per 100,000.
  
• In 2008, the off ending rate for blacks (24.7 off enders per
  100,000) was 7 times higher than the rate for whites (3.4
  offenders per 100,000) (figure 18).
  
• The offending rate for blacks showed a similar pattern to the
  victimization rate, peaking in the early 1990s at a high of 51.1
  off enders per 100,000 in 1991.
  
• After 1991, the offending rate for blacks declined until it reached
  24 per 100,000 in 2004. Th e rate has since fluctuated, increasing
  to 28.4 off enders per 100,000 in 2006 before falling again to 24.7
  off enders per 100,000 in 2008.

"Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008"
Annual Rates for 2009 and 2010
Alexia Cooper and Erica L. Smith, BJS Statisticians

Page 11

November 2011, NCJ 236018

Hoodies are worn by tons of people. I wear them, my kid wears them... hell, my parents wear them.


And this statistical comment is nonsense... it's like saying you're going to win the state lottery because the odds are 8x better than the Powerball.

[agentS]

63. Give this guy one or two more years

He'll be the next megachurch preacher brought down by a sex scandal.

[Bake]

65. Hey, Rich: A Baptist preacher is statistically more likely to try to relieve you of your wallet!

Land is an idiot.

And I'm a Baptist (sort of).



Bake

[jpak]

66. The SBC is missing a douchbag

yup