The Color of Crime?

[FTA Lawyer]

Shouldn't we be expending efforts / resources on figuring out how to prevent people from being anally raped rather than noting their complexion in a standard deviation plot?

If certain segments of the community are involved in a greatly disproportionate amount of crime, then it behooves us to examine the cultural factors at work which might be causing this level of criminality. Without noting and admitting to a problem how can the problem be addressed?

As a criminal lawyer, I can tell you that criminals truly are individuals and will in most cases immediately dismantle myths and stereotypes, even if they exhibit particular patterns of behaviour.  That is to say, robbers act like robbers, rapists act like rapists...regardless (in large part) of their race.

FTA

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And yet, statistical abnormalities to the degree we see in regard to black crime are unexplainable except by some cultural/ethnic factor unique to that particular group. Thus if we're to address them we have to examine that group to see how such cultural factors might be eliminated or redressed. There are innumerable programs which seek to address specific cultural problems within minority communities. Why not one addressing crime? Because no one in authority wants to come out and admit that the Black community, or at least, some portion of it, has a problem with criminality.

I saw a Globe article once where a reporter sat all day in what was then a new thing, a special drug court in Toronto. The reporter observed that only about 2% of the defendants appearing before the judge that day were white. That says there is a problem within what is still, when we're speaking of visible minorities, the immigrant community. And I don't think anything has changed since then. Or am i wrong that virtually all those being murdered in Toronto are non-white, along with virtually all the murderers?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Argus,

By all means, explore the issues...but don't get focused on the wrong ones. If we all agree that being black doesn't "cause" one to commit crime, then we shouldn't be looking for solutions to "black crime"...we need to look for solutions to crime that happens to be committed by more blacks than others.

It's a fine distinction, but an important one in my view.

And, I'm not so sure that the contention that no one in authority is prepared to stare these issues down is correct...at least in Canada. For example, way back in 1996 the Criminal Code was amended after those in authority noticed that more Aboriginals than other races were being put in jail for similar crimes.

The conclusions were not drawn that Aboriginals are just a criminal race...rather they didn't seem to be getting treated fairly in sentencing proceedings.

So, s.718.2(e) of the Criminal Code now reads:

"all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders."

Now someone may want to track down the HANSARD from the debates on these amendments, but I would suggest that Canada has been more than willing to address these issues and act to correct them.

FTA

[tml12]

Shouldn't we be expending efforts / resources on figuring out how to prevent people from being anally raped rather than noting their complexion in a standard deviation plot?

If certain segments of the community are involved in a greatly disproportionate amount of crime, then it behooves us to examine the cultural factors at work which might be causing this level of criminality. Without noting and admitting to a problem how can the problem be addressed?

As a criminal lawyer, I can tell you that criminals truly are individuals and will in most cases immediately dismantle myths and stereotypes, even if they exhibit particular patterns of behaviour.  That is to say, robbers act like robbers, rapists act like rapists...regardless (in large part) of their race.

FTA

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And yet, statistical abnormalities to the degree we see in regard to black crime are unexplainable except by some cultural/ethnic factor unique to that particular group. Thus if we're to address them we have to examine that group to see how such cultural factors might be eliminated or redressed. There are innumerable programs which seek to address specific cultural problems within minority communities. Why not one addressing crime? Because no one in authority wants to come out and admit that the Black community, or at least, some portion of it, has a problem with criminality.

I saw a Globe article once where a reporter sat all day in what was then a new thing, a special drug court in Toronto. The reporter observed that only about 2% of the defendants appearing before the judge that day were white. That says there is a problem within what is still, when we're speaking of visible minorities, the immigrant community. And I don't think anything has changed since then. Or am i wrong that virtually all those being murdered in Toronto are non-white, along with virtually all the murderers?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Argus,

By all means, explore the issues...but don't get focused on the wrong ones. If we all agree that being black doesn't "cause" one to commit crime, then we shouldn't be looking for solutions to "black crime"...we need to look for solutions to crime that happens to be committed by more blacks than others.

It's a fine distinction, but an important one in my view.

And, I'm not so sure that the contention that no one in authority is prepared to stare these issues down is correct...at least in Canada. For example, way back in 1996 the Criminal Code was amended after those in authority noticed that more Aboriginals than other races were being put in jail for similar crimes.

The conclusions were not drawn that Aboriginals are just a criminal race...rather they didn't seem to be getting treated fairly in sentencing proceedings.

So, s.718.2(e) of the Criminal Code now reads:

"all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders."

Now someone may want to track down the HANSARD from the debates on these amendments, but I would suggest that Canada has been more than willing to address these issues and act to correct them.

FTA

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe that if people are committing crimes, they are doing so becaue they are alienated from society. Teenagers, minorities, aboriginals, etc. are typecast as the majority of criminals because they are perceived as being the most "ostracized" from society.

Many of these people are ostracized from society because mainstream society does not welcome that, or doesn't try hard enough to accomodate them. This is unfortunate, but true. When one feels that their society confines them, they naturally will do their best to fight their confinement.

We need to fight injustices and discrimination in order to fight crime, not characterize it as a hopeless issue of race.

[Riverwind]

Many of these people are ostracized from society because mainstream society does not welcome that, or doesn't try hard enough to accomodate them.  This is unfortunate, but true.  When one feels that their society confines them, they naturally will do their best to fight their confinement.

Most people that are 'ostracized' from today society do so voluntarily because they believe society should conform to their needs instead of the other way around.

[tml12]

Many of these people are ostracized from society because mainstream society does not welcome that, or doesn't try hard enough to accomodate them.  This is unfortunate, but true.  When one feels that their society confines them, they naturally will do their best to fight their confinement.

Most people that are 'ostracized' from today society do so voluntarily because they believe society should conform to their needs instead of the other way around.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That may be true Sparkawk but it doesn't hold up in all instance.

[scribblet]

I suppose it begs the question, how much is nature and how much is nurture. I've always felt that nature always accounts for the larger percentage, but in this case I don't think race has anything to do with, its more nurture than nature. As a fundamental principle, IQ, is based on a person’s genetic make up, but IMHO the propensity for crime and bad behaviour is largely in part due to family upbringing. or maybe lack of a family upgringing and moral environment.

Kids often join gangs because they need to belong, maybe if they had a more loving family environment they wouldn't have that need.