• Here is a link to the full explanation: https://rollitup.org/t/welcome-back-did-you-try-turning-it-off-and-on-again.1104810/

DONALD TRUMP 2016

ActionHanks

ActionHanks

Well-Known Member
Yeah but its the whip cracking red necks that keep the lower class in their place. Thereby freeing up time for the elites to study nuclear physics for 18 hours a day.
Plus, these madmen arent all bad, theyve brought us nitrogenous ferts, vaccines, and personal computing. Evrrythings a double edged sword, there's not bad without good, and vice versa
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
mathematician1.618 said:
Why not post the statistics of black on white crime as opposed to white on black crime.
Click to expand...
OK.

As sociologist Robert O’Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9).
 
M

mathematician1.618

Member
This does not repdudite the data, and if blacks are only 8 percent of the population and whites like what 75% and blacks commit 1.2 violent crimes compared to the white violent crimes of 3.2 million. Wow, so this mens blacks are extremely violent. Also this does not prove a gap does not exist, it is merely an attempt to say it's not as bad as it seems, a poor attempt.
UncleBuck said:
OK.

As sociologist Robert O’Brian has noted (using Census data), the odds of a given white person (or white criminal for that matter) encountering a black person are only about three percent. On the other hand, the odds of a given black person (or black criminal) encountering a white person are nineteen times greater, or fifty-seven percent (6), meaning the actual interracial victimization gap between black-on-white and white-on-black crime is smaller than one would expect. In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). If each black criminal had a 57 percent chance of encountering (and thus potentially victimizing) a white person, this means that over the course of 2002, blacks should have been expected to victimize roughly 690,000 whites. But in truth, blacks victimized whites only 614,176 times that year (8). Conversely, if each white criminal had only a three percent chance of encountering and thus victimizing a black person, this means that over the course of 2002, whites would have been expected to victimize roughly 93,000 blacks. But in truth, whites victimized blacks 135,931 times: almost 50 percent more often than would be expected by random chance (9).
Click to expand...
 
M

mathematician1.618

Member
So blacks are 13 percent of the population and whites are 62 percent and your dat says whites commit 3 million violent crimes while backs commit 1.2 million. So if blacks were 62 percent of the population they would rougtly commit 5 million violent crimes, alsmot double that of whites.
 
M

mathematician1.618

Member
To quote UncleBuck: In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). So if blacks are 13% of the population 13 x 5 = 65 percent, roughly what whites are so 1.2 times 5 is 6, so 6 million double that of whites, idiot.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
mathematician1.618 said:
So blacks are 13 percent of the population and whites are 62 percent and your dat says whites commit 3 million violent crimes while backs commit 1.2 million. So if blacks were 62 percent of the population they would rougtly commit 5 million violent crimes, alsmot double that of whites.
Click to expand...
and their poverty rate is only about 3 times the poverty rate for whites. imagine that.

stop making white people look so fucking stupid.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
mathematician1.618 said:
To quote UncleBuck: In 2002, blacks committed a little more than 1.2 million violent crimes, while whites committed a little more than three million violent crimes (7). So if blacks are 13% of the population 13 x 5 = 65 percent, roughly what whites are so 1.2 times 5 is 6, so 6 million double that of whites, idiot.
Click to expand...
were you aware that poverty, and not skin color, is the thing that is most closely associated with crime?

there is no property of melanin that makes one more or less inclined to commit crime.

you are too stupid to realize this, and you are making intelligent white folks like myself look stupider every time you open your mouth.

stop making white people look so fucking stupid.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
mathematician1.618 said:
By proving mathematically how violent blacks would be if they were in proportion to whites look stupid? They look like they are half as violent as blacks.
Click to expand...
were you aware that violence is most closely tied to one's socioeconomic status, and not one's skin color?

were you aware that the most violent, brutal, and barbaric deeds ever committed in america were carried out by white people?
 
heckler73

heckler73

Well-Known Member
I repdudited once. But I didn't like the way it fucked with my logic, so I realized it wasn't for me.
Just Say Know, kids.
If some creepy person comes up to you twitching and asking if you've repdudited, just kick them in the balls (even if they don't have any) and run to your nearest butcher shop for protection until paramedics arrive.
 
M

mathematician1.618

Member
Wikipedia socialism: There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[6]They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[7]
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
heckler73 said:
I repdudited once. But I didn't like the way it fucked with my logic, so I realized it wasn't for me.
Just Say Know, kids.
If some creepy person comes up to you twitching and asking if you've repdudited, just kick them in the balls (even if they don't have any) and run to your nearest butcher shop for protection until paramedics arrive.
Click to expand...
one time i repdudited so hard i benghazi'd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top