Quantifying black crime: comparing arrests to offenses
Jan 9th, 2012 by Unamused
Last time, we presented our first set of results:
- The black offending rate by number of offenders for six violent crime categories, expressed as a multiple of the corresponding white and Hispanic (W&H) rate, 2004–2008.
- The minimum overall black offending rate (combining single- and multiple-offender victimizations) for the same six categories, expressed as a multiple of the corresponding W&H rate, 2004–2008.
The crime categories were: rape and sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, violent crime of any of these types, and completed violent crime of any of these types.
We thereby corrected an erroneous or at least highly misleading calculation by the Task Force on Race and the Criminal Justice System in its 2011 “Preliminary Report on Race and Washington’s Criminal Justice System.”
Today, we incorporate arrest rates into our analysis and obtain our second set of results:
- The black share of arrests and the minimum black share of offenders for four violent crime categories, 2004–2008. For example, we found that at least 60% of robbery offenders were black, but only 56% of robbery arrestees were black.
- The black arrest rate — to compare with the minimum black offending rate — for the same four categories, expressed as a multiple of the corresponding W&H rate, 2004–2008. For example, we found that the black arrest rate for robbery was 8.9 times higher than the W&H arrest rate for robbery, but the black offending rate for robbery was at least 13 times higher than the W&H robbery rate.
- How much higher the black arrest rate (as a multiple of the W&H arrest rate) must be to match the minimum black offending rate (as a multiple of the W&H offending rate) for the same four categories, 2004–2008. For example, we found that the black arrest rate for robbery must be at least 48% higher to match the black robbery rate, assuming the W&H rates are fixed.
Again, our data on criminal victimization are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 2004–2008 (the five most recent years for which the survey’s complete data are available). Our data on arrests are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, 2004–2008. The crime categories are: rape (representing the “rape/sexual assault” category in the NCVS and the “forcible rape” category in the UCR), robbery, aggravated assault, and violent crime of any of these types (“combined”).
The graphs appear below. Note that the W&H offending and arrest rates (represented by a dashed line in the second graph) are always 1.0. Also note that, according to the NCVS, the black share of the general population (represented by a dashed line in the first graph) was 12.2% for 2004–2008 combined.
Appendix: Assumptions
Recall our assumptions:
- The racial distribution of NCVS respondents classified as “more than one race” was similar to the racial distribution of all respondents.
- The racial distribution of offenders of unknown or unavailable race was similar to the racial distribution of all offenders.
- The racial distribution of offenders in mixed-race groups was similar to the racial distribution of like-race groups.
- The average number of offenders per multiple-offender victimization (MOV) was similar for offending groups of any racial makeup.
- The average number of offenders per MOV for which the number of offenders is unknown or unavailable was similar to the average number of offenders per MOV for which the number is known.
- No violent crime involved more than four offenders.
The last, necessary assumption is the reason we can only obtain minimum overall black offending rates. (Violent crimes involving more than four offenders would increase all overall black offending rates.)
That’s pretty good. Also, thanks for the FBI link. I never knew there was so much good info online; I’ll have to do some digging myself. Great stuff!
Thanks for putting this together for the benefit of all to see.
“Lower bound” is not an easy term to understand. If there is a non-verbose way of expressing what this means, it would be great.
Does “lower bound” mean because all of the crime categories are for 4 or less offenders, those with more offenders in one crime are not included?
Does “lower bound” mean robbery by a gang of 5 members is not counted in these statistics?
And these are the lower bound assumptions? We’re giving them a LOT of leeway here.
“Lower bound” just means minimum. I have updated the last three “Quantifying black crime” posts, including the graphs, to reflect this.
For the record: The lower bounds give the minimum black share of offenders and the minimum amount by which the black arrest rate must increase to match the black offending rate.
The lower bound on the number of offenders in a multiple-offender victimization (MOV) with four or more offenders is clearly four: that’s the minimum number of offenders. Using that lower bound/minimum means we ignore any additional offenders: the fifth, sixth, seventh, etc. (if there actually were that many, which we don’t know, which is why we need to ignore them).
That means we get a minimum value for the average number of offenders involved in a MOV. And that means a bunch of other values we get are also minima (plural of “minimum”). (Basically, this is because the black crime rate is highest — compared to the W&H crime rate — for multiple-offender crimes.)
On a related topic: I saw the online report about the (ooooh) “racist” flyers that someone distributed about a town in which a black-on-white killing occurred:
http://www.wlwt.com/r/28811819/detail.html
Some thoughts:
* When was the last time that a news program showed the same outrage over flyers posted by, say, the Black Panthers, or Black Student Unions, or MECHA, or whatever racially oriented groups that routinely propagandize on university campuses?
* For that matter, why if it is considered unremarkable by the news that out-and-out communists can teach on university campuses, is a (ooooh) “racist” flyer so out of bounds?
* The report refers to the community being “hurt.” How can a community be hurt at all? After all, there are individuals within that community who might support the flyer’s contents. And what of a community which might be hurt by, say, leftwing propaganda? Or by liberal biases in news reporting (ahem)?
* They did not quite show the flyer’s contents, but where was it wrong? Did it make statements which were in accurate?
* At last, and certainly least for the multicultists, this is a Free Speech issue. Why wouldn’t the news media support the 1st Amendment rights of the people behind the flyer?
Yes, and why was only one side presented by the so-called news media? In this country, as in any other, there is always two sides to any story except with the jew controlled media. I am referring to the video in which a black male shot and killed his white girlfriend. Probably the white girl wanted to break up with the black boy friend. That’s the price of miscegenation for most white females.
Perhaps the most hilarious Yahoo article. Probably intentional.
Off topic:
First lady rips ‘angry black woman’ image
First lady tired of stereotype.
… So she angrily “rips” on camera and proves that she is, indeed, not an angry black woman.
I chuckled.
http://news.yahoo.com/mrs-obama-her-angry-black-woman-image-150915657.html
Unamused – Since the FBI doesn’t split Hispanic from white crime this might be a ridiculous question, but is there a way to tell if hispanics have a higher rate of crime when living in proximity to whites or blacks?
I ask as my area has seen Hispanics move into neighborhoods that were destroyed over a 50 year period by the black undertow going from mostly white, to mixed, to mostly black, to all black to nearly abandoned to now mixed hispanic and some black. If the news reports a hispanic crime it is from those areas and not from areas where hispanics live amongst a mostly white group of citizens.
I almost feel like it’s going to take a hispanic president to show the truth behind black criminality to all of America.
Interesting question. The problem, as you say, is that Mestizos (the brown Hispanics) usually get classified as “white Hispanics,” simply because they aren’t black, Asian, American Indian or Eskimo.
[...] Price – “Ryan’s Daughter: Worth the Time”Unamused – “Quantifying Black Crime: Comparing Arrests to Offenses”Simon Rierdon – “Why the “War on Drugs” is Wrong at the Least… [...]
Interesting question. The problem, as you say, is that Mestizos (the brown Hispanics) usually get classified as “white Hispanics,”
On Texas Most Wanted they do not have enough room for the Hispanic part so Villegas-Rioja for example gets classified as white.