Racism as perceived by ViperOverLord

[thegreekdog]

I like where this thread is going.

I'm just upset that no one has commented on my statistics. I want some guesses as to the races.

The stats are a significant part of why I'm interested.

If you want, pretend I said something hippieliberal, like requesting statistics about income for the races to help me out. Going on that you may not need to ask Natty, but I wouldn't pretend to speak for ol' Nat.

Excellent. This is why I love you guys. You're so accomodating.

I would note a couple of things, I guess:

- African Americans and Hispanic Americans are the arrestees in crimes in New York City more than the other two races. Does this mean that African Americans and Hispanic Americans in New York City are more likely to commit crimes than whites or Asians?

- African Americans and Hispanic Americans are the suspects in crimes in New York City more than the other two races. Does this mean that African Americans and Hispanic Americans in New York City are more likely to be suspects than whites or Asians? Further, it appears that suspect percentages for African Americans and Hispanic Americans are higher than the arrestee percentages. Does this mean that the NYPD suspects more African Americans and Hispanic Americans than they arrest? And is that racist (given that African Americans and Hispanic Americans are a higher percentage of arrestees than whites or Asians)?

- African Americans and Hispanic Americas are the victims in crimes in New York City more than the other two races. If the complaining victim is African American or Hispanic America, does this mean that the victim is racist because he or she is more likely to point the NYPD to an African American or Hispanic American suspect?

And those are just the stat observations; there are plenty more observations or conclusions to be made.

[Neoteny]

Kneejerk hippieliberal response would be "lrn2statistics google confounding variables."

Are they committing crimes because they are racially inclined or poor? Are crimes committed in areas that are predominantly poor? Would this affect suspect/victim ratios?

[pimpdave]

Are we allowed to post joke guesses without being banned?

[Neoteny]

Race 1: Le Mans 24 hr
Race 2: Daytona 500
Race 3: Kentucky Derby
Race 4: Boston Marathon

[Phatscotty]

Yes

That's not evidence. Also, before you post 2030x1059 images of bald eagles, those don't count as evidence either.

Yes....it is....

Bald Eagles?

thanks greek for giving natty a weasel way out when I nailed her

[natty dread]

Yes....it is....

I don't think you really comprehend the meaning of the word "evidence".

Somehow, that doesn't surprise me much.

[ViperOverLord]

in this thread, for example, VOL claims that racial discrimination by police can be good because black people commit a disproportionate amount of violent crimes, and racial profiling makes prevention of these crimes easier. natty claims that racial discrimiation by police only leads to unjust accusations and "police-state"-like activity like the kind in the NYT article.

Actually I claim that the police profile by socio-economic markers. In NYC/Chicago that means that the people they profile are going to be poor (mainly) black people. In rural Kentucky, they are going to be poor (mainly) white people. And yes, this does make sense since they do commit the majority of the crimes.

I personally think the legal inequality argument is rich vs. poor and not black vs. white. If Greek was to give a break-down of rich black people's legal woes vs. poor white people's legal woes, I would imagine that it would be poor white people with the disproportionate convictions and prison sentences and sentence lengths.

What Finland does or doesn't doesn't really have any bearing on this topic, but you're wrong about that as well. If I try to go to USA I won't get further than the customs because I have a criminal record. If you come to Finland, even if you're a convicted felon in USA, we won't turn you away. If you get a job and a permanent residence there's nothing stopping you from moving to Finland.

Yes and ironically the US is not letting in the white guy from Finland, but we're letting in the brown guy from Mexico by the millions. That doesn't really serve your racism argument at all. On a side note, thank you for the Finnish insight.

Also, when you say "the evidence is in the reality", what reality is that exactly? The reality as perceived by a white, heterosexual male, ie. you?

So my race and sexuality determine whether I can correctly perceive reality? That's a load of crap.

What about statistics that show that black people and other minorities are constantly harrassed by the police to a higher degree than white people? Or why are the majority of your prison population black, or why black people get harsher prison sentences than whites for the same crimes?

Stats can be manipulated. For instance, if whites are committing less crimes and the tendency is to go light on first time offenders then of course they're going to have lesser average sentences for the same crimes than blacks who are committing more crimes.

I don't think you know what "privileged" means. Yes, you are privileged. We all are privileged in some way. You are more privileged than black people, because you're white. You're more privileged than homosexuals, because you're heterosexual (I assume). You're more privileged than people who live in 3rd world countries. You're more privileged than women, because you are male. And so on....

I don't think you know what "privileged" means. Yes, you are privileged. We all are privileged in some way. You are more privileged than black people, because you're white. You're more privileged than homosexuals, because you're heterosexual (I assume). You're more privileged than people who live in 3rd world countries. You're more privileged than women, because you are male. And so on.

Similarly, even if you belong in one minority, you can still be more privileged in some aspects than other minority members. For example, a black heterosexual is more privileged than a black homosexual, who is more privileged than a black lesbian woman...

That's a nice little formula you have there. It allows you to condescend all your arguments based on race and sexuality. There are a significant proportion of blacks, women and gays who are more privileged than I am. Does that mean that my so-called plight automatically gives me more insight than them? Your formula is bogus.

You need to learn that your personal experience does not necessarily correlate with reality.

If we are honest with ourselves then our experiences have a very high correlation with reality. That is life.

You have never had to experience discrimination because of your race. Not in the same degree that black people have.

That's just not true. I've personally faced racial discrimination on jobs. I've faced racial discrimination in applying for jobs due to affirmative action. My white male status has made it much harder for me to get into academic institutions than a minority woman with the same credentials.

Oh, the poor rich white man! Why won't anyone hear the plight of the rich white man!

My point was not that I especially sympathize with rich white people. My point was that the IRS targets rich white people and that by your logic that would be racism.

[Phatscotty]

Yes....it is....

I don't think you really comprehend the meaning of the word "evidence".

Somehow, that doesn't surprise me much.

Hmm....there was something....that you deleted.....I'm sure it was there...something about Middle East stonings and an American president named Barak Hussein Obama.....wait....but why would you delete the evidence...what are you trying to hide.....why did you delete it?????

NATTY IS CHEATING AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are just like our president. Yall only care about how the end result can be made to look.

You don't know anything about America either, troll

[thegreekdog]

Kneejerk hippieliberal response would be "lrn2statistics google confounding variables."

Are they committing crimes because they are racially inclined or poor? Are crimes committed in areas that are predominantly poor? Would this affect suspect/victim ratios?

That was my "plenty more observations to be made" comment. There are socio-economic reasons for crime, in my opinion, not racial reasons. A poor person may be more likely to commit a crime; I do not believe skin color is indicative of likelihood to commit a crime.

I'll give you another real life example - If I walk down the street at night in Philadelphia and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will be frightened and likely try to move across the street if possible. If I walk down the street at night in my hometown in suburban New Jersey and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will not be frightened and do nothing. I've done both of these things in the last two months. Does that mean I'm racist towards African Americans living in Philadelphia, but not to African Americans living in suburban New Jersey?

[BigBallinStalin]

I like where this thread is going.

I'm just upset that no one has commented on my statistics. I want some guesses as to the races.

The stats are a significant part of why I'm interested.

If you want, pretend I said something hippieliberal, like requesting statistics about income for the races to help me out. Going on that you may not need to ask Natty, but I wouldn't pretend to speak for ol' Nat.

Excellent. This is why I love you guys. You're so accomodating.

I would note a couple of things, I guess:

- African Americans and Hispanic Americans are the arrestees in crimes in New York City more than the other two races. Does this mean that African Americans and Hispanic Americans in New York City are more likely to commit crimes than whites or Asians?

Isn't it better to ask if they're more likely to get arrested?

I'm sure many of us have committed crimes (primarily very minor ones); however, our physical appearance (race, clothing, etc.) and how we express ourselves really helped us not become "just another statistic."

- African Americans and Hispanic Americans are the suspects in crimes in New York City more than the other two races. Does this mean that African Americans and Hispanic Americans in New York City are more likely to be suspects than whites or Asians? Further, it appears that suspect percentages for African Americans and Hispanic Americans are higher than the arrestee percentages. Does this mean that the NYPD suspects more African Americans and Hispanic Americans than they arrest? And is that racist (given that African Americans and Hispanic Americans are a higher percentage of arrestees than whites or Asians)?

- African Americans and Hispanic Americas are the victims in crimes in New York City more than the other two races. If the complaining victim is African American or Hispanic America, does this mean that the victim is racist because he or she is more likely to point the NYPD to an African American or Hispanic American suspect?

And those are just the stat observations; there are plenty more observations or conclusions to be made.

I can't remember the criminologist who said this, but to explain the discrepancy between the races for crimes, he simply stated that African Americans committed more crimes.

It's difficult to discover if police officers in general are more likely to arrest you--primarily based on your skin color.


Off the top of my head:

Maybe the laws which hits groups of people the hardest is due to these groups' inability to effectively change the legislative process. Groups that are effective at rent-seeking (e.g. certain, large corporations) and which have the social capital to avoid crimes (e.g. legions of attorneys) have the ability to avoid this terrible situation because they directly influence the rules of the game and can effectively avoid the negative consequences.

[Neoteny]

Kneejerk hippieliberal response would be "lrn2statistics google confounding variables."

Are they committing crimes because they are racially inclined or poor? Are crimes committed in areas that are predominantly poor? Would this affect suspect/victim ratios?

That was my "plenty more observations to be made" comment. There are socio-economic reasons for crime, in my opinion, not racial reasons. A poor person may be more likely to commit a crime; I do not believe skin color is indicative of likelihood to commit a crime.

I'll give you another real life example - If I walk down the street at night in Philadelphia and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will be frightened and likely try to move across the street if possible. If I walk down the street at night in my hometown in suburban New Jersey and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will not be frightened and do nothing. I've done both of these things in the last two months. Does that mean I'm racist towards African Americans living in Philadelphia, but not to African Americans living in suburban New Jersey?

I figured as much. But posting just the race statistics and commenting only on race leads to a certain end.

[natty dread]

Hmm....there was something....that you deleted.....I'm sure it was there...something about Middle East stonings and an American president named Barak Hussein Obama.....wait....but why would you delete the evidence...

A black president in America is not evidence for racism not being a problem in America.

You have women in high positions as well, it still doesn't mean that sexism isn't a problem in America.

So, once again... please educate yourself on the meaning of the word "evidence".

Oh and ps: Posting in all caps with big black letters doesn't lend your argument any more credibility. Just like enormous pictures of bald eagles don't do that either.

[thegreekdog]

Kneejerk hippieliberal response would be "lrn2statistics google confounding variables."

Are they committing crimes because they are racially inclined or poor? Are crimes committed in areas that are predominantly poor? Would this affect suspect/victim ratios?

That was my "plenty more observations to be made" comment. There are socio-economic reasons for crime, in my opinion, not racial reasons. A poor person may be more likely to commit a crime; I do not believe skin color is indicative of likelihood to commit a crime.

I'll give you another real life example - If I walk down the street at night in Philadelphia and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will be frightened and likely try to move across the street if possible. If I walk down the street at night in my hometown in suburban New Jersey and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will not be frightened and do nothing. I've done both of these things in the last two months. Does that mean I'm racist towards African Americans living in Philadelphia, but not to African Americans living in suburban New Jersey?

I figured as much. But posting just the race statistics and commenting only on race leads to a certain end.

Yes, I know this and that is why I posted those statistics. I was trying to obtain a reaction (mostly from Natty and VOL). I guess that's baiting?

In any event, I know there are socioeconomic reasons behind high rates of crime. What I have a problem with is the editorial commentary that was quoted above; in other words, I do not and would not accuse the entirety of or the majority of the NYPD of institutional racism because they are more likely to stop and frisk (or suspect) a black man over a white man when the statistics show that African Americans and Hispanic Americans are more likely to be arrested for a crime than whites or Asians. To put it another way, if they had such statistics, I would bet that the suspects and arrestees for the majority of crimes are individuals who are impoverished or lower middle class in New York City; and those impoverished or lower middle class people are, percentage-wise, likely to consist more of American Americans and Hispanic Americans than whites and Asians (at least in New York City).

I think tomorrow I may go find the arrest stastics for a small town (if such statistics exist) to try to add some more fun to this really awesome thread.

[ViperOverLord]

That was my "plenty more observations to be made" comment. There are socio-economic reasons for crime, in my opinion, not racial reasons. A poor person may be more likely to commit a crime; I do not believe skin color is indicative of likelihood to commit a crime.

Agreed. It's called the learned behavior theory. When I used to teach autistic students, we based our teaching on it. That meant enforcing repetition for the sake of learning. Non-autistic humans of course are more cognitive and more free to break from routines. But the theory still very much applies to us.

I'll give you another real life example - If I walk down the street at night in Philadelphia and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will be frightened and likely try to move across the street if possible. If I walk down the street at night in my hometown in suburban New Jersey and see a group of three or more teenage African Americans walking toward me, I will not be frightened and do nothing. I've done both of these things in the last two months. Does that mean I'm racist towards African Americans living in Philadelphia, but not to African Americans living in suburban New Jersey?

People can agree or disagree with your outlook but your priority should be to take reasonable means to ensure your safety.

When I was working a sales job in North Minneapolis, I walked through a black park. There was a gang of about ten black kids that aggressively taunted me with racial taunts and threats of violence and I was pretty sure I was about to get jumped. But I kept walking and did not reply like I frankly wanted to and they did not attack. (Of course, in Natty's mind that must be hard to fahthom b/c he thinks its black people getting racially bullied and not white people lol).

In the future I did still go through that park, though their were also times that I avoided it. I think we can agree (though I'm sure some won't) that that would not make me racist.

To more directly regard your argument__ by your own logic, suburban New Jersey is not as rough as a place as Philly. It'd make sense that you'd be more keenly aware of potential criminal activity and therefore be more on the guard against becoming a victim.

[Neoteny]

I think tomorrow I may go find the arrest stastics for a small town (if such statistics exist) to try to add some more fun to this really awesome thread.

That could be nice.

[natty dread]

If Greek was to give a break-down of rich black people's legal woes vs. poor white people's legal woes, I would imagine that it would be poor white people with the disproportionate convictions and prison sentences and sentence lengths.

If the white people need to be poor and black people need to be rich for you to be able to create a situation where black people are treated better, then that only proves the existence of racism.

In other words, if you compare rich black people vs. rich white people, or poor white people vs. poor black people, then black people are clearly facing more discrimination.

Yes and ironically the US is not letting in the white guy from Finland, but we're letting in the brown guy from Mexico by the millions. That doesn't really serve your racism argument at all. On a side note, thank you for the Finnish insight.

Your argument doesn't make sense. You can't compare illegal immigrants to people who would visit your country legally. Illegal immigrants are coming to your country against the country's wishes, otherwise they wouldn't be called illegal immigrants. Therefore, you're not "letting" the "brown guy from Mexico" in.

So my race and sexuality determine whether I can correctly perceive reality? That's a load of crap.

No, your race and sexuality determine (partially) how you experience reality. Whether you can perceive it correctly depends on your mental faculties.

Stats can be manipulated.

Funny how your argument continues to be basically "the black people are lying".

For instance, if whites are committing less crimes and the tendency is to go light on first time offenders then of course they're going to have lesser average sentences for the same crimes than blacks who are committing more crimes.

So now your argument is that black people are obviously all criminals so it's ok to give them harsher sentences?

Wow.

That's a nice little formula you have there. It allows you to condescend all your arguments based on race and sexuality. There are a significant proportion of blacks, women and gays who are more privileged than I am. Does that mean that my so-called plight automatically gives me more insight than them? Your formula is bogus.

It's not "my formula", it's how privilege is defined. In general, white people are more privileged than black people. In general, men are more privileged than women. That's an unfortunate fact. And as long as you keep denying that fact you are enabling it to continue.

That there exists some black person who is richer than you still does not refute the fact that black people face racial discrimination, and you never have to experience the same, because you are white.

You need to learn that your personal experience does not necessarily correlate with reality.

If we are honest with ourselves then our experiences have a very high correlation with reality. That is life.

No, that is simply not true.

For example, let's say (hypothetically) that I've only met 2 Americans and they've both been horrible racists. Now, according to my personal experience, all Americans are horrible racists. But that doesn't mean that all Americans are actually horrible racists, because my personal experience is limited and cannot be used to draw conclusions about the situation in general.

I've personally faced racial discrimination on jobs. I've faced racial discrimination in applying for jobs due to affirmative action.

That's not actual discrimination. Affirmative action only levels the playing field. You are still more likely to be hired in most jobs than an equally competent black person. You enjoy higher salaries than equally competent women, and homosexuals or atheists don't even need to apply...

Also, maybe you've been turned down from a job that was given to a black man, but how do you know that black man wasn't a better choice for the job? Is it that impossible for you to imagine that a black person could be better than you at something? And even if you did lose a job to a less competent black person, that black person has likely lost a job to a less competent white person 10 times more.

My white male status has made it much harder for me to get into academic institutions than a minority woman with the same credentials.

Oh really.

Oh, the poor rich white man! Why won't anyone hear the plight of the rich white man!

My point was not that I especially sympathize with rich white people. My point was that the IRS targets rich white people and that by your logic that would be racism.

[/quote]

No it wouldn't. It's a load of bullshit to say "yeah, the blacks have poorer living conditions, are discriminated against, harrassed by police, get worse jobs, have worse education, but the rich white people are being taxed for their income so they are suffering too!"

[john9blue]

yes, it would. just because greater racism exists elsewhere doesn't mean that minor racism isn't still racism.

btw, do you agree that affirmative action can go too far and commit "reverse racism"?

[thegreekdog]

If the white people need to be poor and black people need to be rich for you to be able to create a situation where black people are treated better, then that only proves the existence of racism.

In other words, if you compare rich black people vs. rich white people, or poor white people vs. poor black people, then black people are clearly facing more discrimination.

Oh, I like this issue the most! I went to see Chris Rock a couple of times and he has a bit where he'd rather be a poor white person than a rich black person (i.e. himself). I've always thought about finding him afterwards and offering to trade with him.

If we take race out of the equation; if they had economic statistics regarding crime, I suspect that a higher percentage of poor people commit crimes. So then we would want to know whether a higher percentage of poor people are African American as compared to white people (and I don't know if that's true).

The bottom line (natty and VOL) is that crime is probably more related to economics than it is to race. But obviously I need to find statistics.

[john9blue]

what you're looking for btw is "statistical independence" between the factors of race and income.

oh and does there exist a black comedian that doesn't make race jokes? does such a being exist? they all seem to love race jokes because they are just too easy to make.

[Phatscotty]

Yes....it is....

I don't think you really comprehend the meaning of the word "evidence".

Somehow, that doesn't surprise me much.

yup....I dont know what evidence is but it's not my fault as in my 32 years on the planet I have never heard the word or come across it... Nice argument

Somehow, you still dodge the fact you deleted what I brought to the trial! Why did you do that? Oops I already asked you that twice guess you still haven't answered. Keep going natty cuz U R winning!

[Woodruff]

When I was working a sales job in North Minneapolis, I walked through a black park.

What is a "black park"? No lights there? The moon doesn't come out?

[Woodruff]

Somehow, you still dodge the fact you deleted what I brought to the trial! Why did you do that? Oops I already asked you that twice guess you still haven't answered. Keep going natty cuz U R winning!

Does the irony, lies and hypocricy ever become overwhelming for you?
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=161251&p=3556466&hilit=lookee#p3556466

[ViperOverLord]

If the white people need to be poor and black people need to be rich for you to be able to create a situation where black people are treated better, then that only proves the existence of racism.

I think I've made it abundantly clear that I'm not denying the existence of racism. That'd be preposterous and assume that humanity equates to ultimate virtue. I have argued against your argument that the US is an extremely racist country towards minorities.

In other words, if you compare rich black people vs. rich white people, or poor white people vs. poor black people, then black people are clearly facing more discrimination.

That'd be true if all other factors were equal. Are you assuming that black people aren't engaging in more drug use? Black people emphasize learning as much as other races? Black people don't suffer from a single parent epidemic?

Funny how your argument continues to be basically "the black people are lying".

During the course of arguments, I have stated that lying is more culturally accepted in black culture imo. I think what you're claiming I'm saying and is a farce.

So now your argument is that black people are obviously all criminals so it's ok to give them harsher sentences?

Again. Another farce.

In general, white people are more privileged than black people. In general, men are more privileged than women. That's an unfortunate fact. And as long as you keep denying that fact you are enabling it to continue.

Statistically you can argue that based on median incomes. In actuality there are a significant masses of women that are better off than men. There are significant masses of black people that are better off than white people.

That there exists some black person who is richer than you still does not refute the fact that black people face racial discrimination, and you never have to experience the same, because you are white.

I have not faced any discrimination that a black person has not faced and in fact due to reverse racism I could make the argument that I have faced more discrimination. Not only that, not all discrimination is racial. I have faced other various forms of discrimination that the typical black person does not face.

For example, let's say (hypothetically) that I've only met 2 Americans and they've both been horrible racists. Now, according to my personal experience, all Americans are horrible racists. But that doesn't mean that all Americans are actually horrible racists, because my personal experience is limited and cannot be used to draw conclusions about the situation in general.

There's something called sample size. I've been to 30 plus states and lived in the country my entire life and I'm telling you that racism in America is not the problem that you think it is or want it to be.

That's (affirmative action) not actual discrimination. Affirmative action only levels the playing field. You are still more likely to be hired in most jobs than an equally competent black person. You enjoy higher salaries than equally competent women, and homosexuals or atheists don't even need to apply...

Level the playing field - Nice talking point but no. What it does is create unnecessary racial tensions and a lower bar for other races. And no, I'm less likely to be hired than an equally competent black person. There has been case after case demonstrating this reality in America. If you deny that reality then you are either uninformed or lying.

As for higher salaries than women, there are still companies that do seem to unfairly advantage men. It's the exception and not the rule imo. And there is actually evidence to suggest that women are unfairly given more advantages to suit affirmative action as well. B/C many of them retire into child rearing and then to meet numbers, the lesser number of women have better odds of getting the job. I have personally seen that reality in my own career track.

Discriminating based on homosexuality? I think that's pretty far off base. In fact, if you look at the entertainment industry, homosexuals are disproportionately represented.

Atheists? Dude__ Religious beliefs don't even come up in job interviews. Again, I don't think you have nearly the clue of America that you think you do.

And even if you did lose a job to a less competent black person, that black person has likely lost a job to a less competent white person 10 times more.

I don't know if you're referring to an actual stat__ I suspect not. Your implication is that a black person is 10x more likely to lose his job due to racism and that is absurd.

My white male status has made it much harder for me to get into academic institutions than a minority woman with the same credentials.

Oh really.

Yes really. Now how would you remedy that reality?

No it wouldn't. It's a load of bullshit to say "yeah, the blacks have poorer living conditions, are discriminated against, harrassed by police, get worse jobs, have worse education, but the rich white people are being taxed for their income so they are suffering too!

Again police harassment is a socio-economic reality and there is no system in place to constantly harass blacks b/c of the color of their skin. And you may find this hard to believe, but suffering comes in many forms and rich people do suffer. A person has a right to keep a significant portion of their income and if they're having to pay extra legal fees to do so that does cause a person much distress when he/she is trying to be a law abiding citizen and save for retirement and put his/her kids through school, etc.

And my point is that the IRS has a mission to collect as much revenues in taxes and penalties as possible. It's mission is not to meet racial quotas. The police have a mission too and their mission is not to make sure that for every five black guys they arrest, they arrest five white guys.

When I was working a sales job in North Minneapolis, I walked through a black park.

What is a "black park"? No lights there? The moon doesn't come out?

The answer to that is in the text you've cut out. Nice joke though I suppose.

[patches70]

@Natty-
Finland, the land of Finns. The only two ethnic groups you have are the Sami and the Gypsies.

Of course, you Finns didn't recognize the Sami as a "people" until 1973. What were they before that? Carbon units?

And the Gypsies, they are always treated well where ever they find themselves . Now far be it for me to say you Finns treat the Sami and the Gypsies like crap even if I point to evidence. The Sami are the indigenous people of your country yet Finland refuses to recognize any aboriginal or land rights to said Sami people.

You see, no matter how statistics are spun to try and get me to see one way or another, I don't live in Finland. I couldn't make any real conclusions from statistics because there is too much that can't be quantified. Only the people living there are best judged to figure out what it all means.

Since you are Finn and "If I try to go to USA I won't get further than the customs because I have a criminal record" you haven't been to the US, how can you even think you could have any inkling to what it's like here? Because you read it in a book?
That reminds me, is you having a criminal record because of racism? It must be since that is what you imply happens in the US.
Oh but the Finns have no problem with racism because 95%+ of the country is Finn. The Sami just became an ethnic minority (even though they were there before the Finn).

You know what I take from looking at Finnish crime statistics? You are a bunch of xenophobes. Finland says a majority of it's crimes are committed by foreigners. You've got that air of superiority in your posts, like the Finn is a better person than anyone else*. That's just my take on it and is pure opinion.

People have criminal records because they broke the law. What are people supposed to do? "We can't arrest him because he's <insert minority here>." Ridiculous.
And what about black on black violence? Is that because of racism that blacks seem to kill each other in droves in the inner cities? You know, that violence might be why there are those skewed numbers in the statistics. When crimes have victim and perp the same race it makes just keeps loading one side of the equation.

You know, I've never understood how people of one nation can look at people of another nation and say- "You're doing it wrong!"
That's how fights and misunderstandings start and everyone would probably be better off if they just worried about their own country....


*I have nothing but respect for Finland. I guess. Finland sure doesn't bother me at all nor do I lie awake at night wonder what it's like there. I'm sure the vast majority of Finns are nice decent people.

[BigBallinStalin]

You know what I take from looking at Finnish crime statistics? You are a bunch of xenophobes. Finland says a majority of it's crimes are committed by foreigners. You've got that air of superiority in your posts, like the Finn is a better person than anyone else*. That's just my take on it and is pure opinion.

*I have nothing but respect for Finland. I guess. Finland sure doesn't bother me at all nor do I lie awake at night wonder what it's like there. I'm sure the vast majority of Finns are nice decent people.

If Finland's economic policies are similar to the other Scandinavian countries, then it should be no surprise that foreigners cause the majority of crimes. Many people who emigrate to Finland remain as second-class citizens, so they're denied access to many services which first-class citizens enjoy. Their welfare state can't support a large influx in the population of the first-class citizens, YET they need the cheap labor to keep the game going. So, what they end up with is a second-class citizenry which presents a lovely breeding grounds of xenophobia, or at least, a sense of superiority to these pesky foreigners, who aren't even good enough to be first-class citizens.

Of course, I'm assuming that what you say is true about the crimes.