Prison and Jail Population, by Most Serious Offense


From the Bureau of Justice Statistics Prisoners in 2019 data (tables 14 & 15) [UPDATE: link added], aggregating state and federal prisoners:

Violent 50.83%
Property 14.99%
Drug possession   3.35%
Drug other 14.63%
Weapons   6.29%
DUI   1.54%
Other   8.36%

NEXT: Lawsuit Highlights the Case for Legalizing Organ Sales

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Seems to put to rest the pop culture idea that most of the prison population is there because of a joint of Mary Jane. Although it would be interesting what exactly is the breakdown for Drug Possession and Drug Other. If I’m not mistaken prison for simple possession is rare if not nonexistent in places like California.

    1. A more accurate statement would be that they are in prison for a crime related to drugs. I suspect many of the murders, assaults, and property crimes were perpetrated by people involved with drugs. Adding the other vices of gambling and prostitution are probably significant but small contributors to the other violent crimes.

      People involved in unlawful activities have a higher tendency to resolve problems outside the law.

      Also, this is a snapshot of people in prison. Another way to track this is the percent of people that have even been in prison. Compared to violent crimes, drug possession isn’t something that people spend a lot of time in prison for. The sentences are shorter and parole is harder for violent offenders. Even without any time in prison, convicted felons have an uphill battle for the rest of their lives.

    2. You might need to differentiate jail from prison.

      A prison or penitentiary is operated by the federal government and holds prisoners for longer periods.

      A jail is operated by a local government and holds prisoners for shorter terms.

      1. State governments also operate prisons. The real distinction is usually what you said about length of incarceration.

      2. As noted in the story, these numbers aggregate Federal and State prisons.

      3. Some states pay jails to hold state prisoners and in some places a lot of people in jail are there awaiting trial. But generally those in jails are there for a shorter length of time, so the proportion of people arrested for possession would be higher.

        I read the article to include only actual prisons and not include jails.

      4. A prison or penitentiary is operated by the federal government and holds prisoners for longer periods.

        That’s going to come as a real surprise to those housed in the state facilities that vastly outnumber the federal ones. There are currently 109 federal “prisons”. If you count the state prisons starting alphabetically by state name you exceed the federal count before you even get out of the “C”s.

      5. New Jersey has prisons and jails. Persons sentenced to one year or less serve their time in county jails. Longer sentences are served in the state prison system.

    3. I suspect a fair bit of the “Drug other” consists of simple possession of drugs in large enough quantity to qualify under law as presumptive drug dealing. I don’t know enough to hazard a guess about how many of those people actually intended to sell what they had.

  2. Some of the crimes classified as “violent” don’t actually involve violence.

    1. Care to elaborate on that?

      1. Pick pocketing and purse snatching are considered robbery, which is classified as a violent crime. Driving off with someone’s car while they are standing several yards down the street would be classified as a carjacking, also a violent crime. Some assaults may not involve actual violence or even intended violence, just menacing or threatening conduct. There are also accidental forms of homicide and assault that obviously cause injury but aren’t perhaps what you picture when you think of “violence” (for example, if you’re speeding and accidentally hit someone, or if someone ODs on the drugs you shared with them). Also in some jurisdictions, drug distribution/PWID is defined by statute as a “crime of violence.” There are probably other examples.

        1. Driving off with someone’s car while they are standing several yards down the street would be classified as a carjacking

          By whom?

          1. Pretty much any police department or TV news department. In my city New Orleans there has been a rash of brazen carjackings where people gets in a car at a gas pump in full view of the security cameras and simply drive off. Often the driver is inside doing whatever and left the fob in the car or was still close enough for the car to start without it.

          2. By legislatures or courts interpreting the sometimes broad language of carjacking statutes.

  3. This is based upon offense of conviction, although it would be impossible to quantify I would be interested in most serious charge that could have been proven but was dropped as part of plea negotiations.

    1. There is a bright line of felony conviction; liable to 365 days plus one of government supervision.

      As a pro-gun activist I paid close attention to a judge’s jury pool instructions that included that definition. The lesson was driven home when more than half of the pool, by my head count, lined up for the judge’s determination of their status.


      1. And so some traffic misdemeanors under Massachusetts law are classified as felonies under federal law because they are punishable by more than one year in county jail. And the state process to restore gun rights does not have any effect because it is not considered a complete restoration of civil rights under federal law.

        1. There was a lawsuit in Maine a while back over that — what ever became of it?

      2. As I recall, a Federal prisoner is (or was – it’s been a few years (decades) since I last looked into this) not eligible for “good time” (time off for good behavior) unless his sentence exceeds one year. So some judges who want to be gentle will (or used to) sentence a defendant to one year and one day rather than, say, eleven months, because with the 15% off for good behavior, the defendant actually spends less time in prison (10.2 months) with the “longer” sentence than with the “shorter” (11 months, no time off) sentence. Wheee!

  4. Reminder to the lawyer dumbass. Thr sole mature purpose of the criminal law is in capacitation. Criminals do not specialize. The index crime stands in for 200 crimes year. The serial killer dhoplifts. You get one on shoplifting, he should be executed.

    You idiots prosecutr 2 million people. There are 15 million common lawcrimes and 100 million internet crimes. Crime has updated
    You lawyers suck.

    As usual, technology is the sole remedy. There were 83000 fentanyl deaths in 2020. This is 4th grade so it is OK. 30 years cut short X 200 X 83000. How msny crimes did the Chinese prevent last year with their $1 dollar fentanyl?

    1. Could you please list those 100 million internet crimes. I want to take care not to get prosecuted.

      In my state, thanks to the “One to One vs. One to Many” treatise by Prof. Volokh and unwillingness to accept punishment for writing something grim but sincere about a scoundrel and uploading the message, it is no longer easy for the constitutionally illiterate, and so many officious little tyrants, to abuse the cyberstalking statute.

      1. I can’t cut and paste on my phone. Go to for a nice list. It does not list the crimes of the platforms, like inflating viwerships to advertiser with fakes accounts.

        1. The solution to internet crime is an app not Medieval idiotic lawyer procedure for worthless rent seeking. Takes a screen shot of the crime, issues a $1000 fine. Takes it out of your account if not paid, for an additional $10000 fee, ie hacks the criminal’s account, plus charges him.

          1. How is the anti robocall law you enacted, lawyer dumbass? It diybled robocalls. I told you, dont pass that law. It is worthless lawyer rent seeking. Enact a 10 cent tax on each call. Dumbass lawyer never listens. We pay the price for its dumbassery.

            1. “In FY 2020, the Commission received 2.8 million complaints about robocalls, down from 3.79 million in FY 2019.”


              1. Fake, meaningless statistic. Believe your own ears.

            2. “The serial killer dhoplifts.,” “It diybled robocalls.”
              Not only are you a raving lunatic, you can’t even spell.

              1. The hallmark of the mad rant is a lack of carefulness, as Behar says perps don’t specialize, they generalize.

              2. Don, aren’t you a lawyer. You belong to the most toxic occupation in the country, 10 times more toxic than organized crime. Your occupation must be cancelled to save our nation.

                1. Charity demands that I pity you.

                  1. I am still your best friend. Everyone hates you, including lawyers, I want to save you.

    2. Nutty Mcnut.

  5. I’m too lazy to really dig into this but I’m curious about people’s insights on the main causes of the high US prison population. As far as I’ve seen, it seems to be mostly an issue of high punitive sentencing lengths rather than arrest patterns or drugs themselves like laypeople tend to believe. I’d also personally throw in the fact that the US has a relatively unusual combination of a highly developed and effective law enforcement and penal system with a heterogeneous population relative European and third world countries.

    1. Well just look at the stats there.

      50% are in prison for violent offenses, I would hope those would be long stretches. Only 14% are in there ‘for’ drugs, but I’m not going to give someone a pass if drug or alcohol use contributed to a violent crime.

      1. I don’t think violence driven by drugs should be given a pass or not result in imprisonment. But I would argue that some of the violence wouldn’t have occurred in the first place without the drug prohibition.

        Your lumber supplier delivers a pallet of 2x4s, you neglect to pay. The supplier hires a lawyer; if you’re inclined to escalate, you hire a lawyer too. Your coke supplier delivers a kilo, you neglect to pay. The supplier brings a gun; if you’re inclined to escalate, you bring a gun too.

    2. The high crime rate is the cause of mandstory guidelines and of high carceration. This is caused by the lawyer caused high bastardy rate, the feminist lawyer attacks on the patriarchal family, and the lawyer attack on religion. One factor never mentioned is overlawyering. China is stupidly imitating us. As they make more lawyers, crime is soaring. Japan has 20000 lawyers, and no crime. South America has more lawyers and higher crime than we do.

      Public self help is the sole factor that unifies all jurisdictions with low crime. Vicious criminals are more afraid of the neighbors than of the police. Naturally the lawyer traitor is conducting a jihad against public self help.

      1. As the lawyer traitor beteays our country to hand it over to China, it should consider taking the bar exam in the 20000 character Mandarin Chinese.

        1. ” the cause of mandstory guidelines and of high carceration. This is caused by the lawyer caused high bastardy rate,” therefore “As the lawyer traitor beteays our country to hand it over to China, it should consider taking the bar exam in the 20000 character Mandarin Chinese.”

          Compelling evidence of mental incapacity to distinguish between fantasy and reality. Very sad

      2. “This is caused by the lawyer caused high bastardy rate, the feminist lawyer attacks on the patriarchal family, and the lawyer attack on religion.”

        A Korn Mac Nuddy strikes again. Iceland has one of, if the not the, lowest crime rate in Europe, 71% of children born out of wedlock and a high lawyer per capita number.

        1. Iceland has…

          Oh, LOL with the “we can all be just like the cherry-picked tiny island community.” About as intelligent as looking to New Zealand for COVID policy.

          1. So then it’s not ‘lawyer caused bastardy rate,’ ‘feminist lawyer attacks on the patriarchal family’ and ‘lawyer attack on religion,’ it’s those things along with population and non-islandness? You’re saying things other than the variables Behar listed matter? It’s funny you don’t know that’s what I’m saying smart guy.

            1. You’re saying things other than the variables Behar listed matter?

              I’m not saying anything other than you’re a cherry-picking opportunist. Was that clear enough this time?

              1. No, she’s not.
                She is pointing out, correctly, with the that there is at least one place with the conditions Behar cites as the cause of our crime rates that does not have our crime rates.

                So there must be something else going on. Clear enough?

                1. Clear enough?

                  No, not really. Because despite your effort to reflexively circle the wagon around your comrade, I know enough about you to credit you with actually being smart enough to understand that a single data point chock-full of other confounding factors isn’t enough on its own to demonstrate lack of causation in a broader data set.

                  If I’m wrong about you, feel free to set me straight.

          2. How about Spain? More out of wedlock births, high lawyers per capita, low crime rates.

            Going to enjoy watching you running up Mountain Behar to expire…Pump them legs Brian!

            1. Fake statistic. Spain is a crime ridden hellscape with a cover up of crime by the Commie administration. You are safer in Detroit or Baltimore, than in many areas of Spain. There are no go zones for the police in areas ruled by illegals. Drug gangs have ended law enforcement. Knife attacks are rampant. Thefts and attacks on tourists are out of control.

              1. Statistics that don’t match your preconceptions are “fake statistics?”

                You’re an utter loon.

              2. But are you talking about the Barcelonians or the Madridniks?

            2. Keep ’em coming, Queenie! Those cherries aren’t going to pick themselves.

          3. ” About as intelligent as looking to New Zealand for COVID policy.”
            If your Orange Clown had done that the deaths in the US might not now be pushing 600,000. In fact he might still be the POTUS.

            1. You have to subtract the deaths of moribund people in nursing homes. When you do, 100000 excess deaths remain. Of those, 2/3 were by cancer and heart disease in people who could not travel to get medical care, from the Democrat Lockdown. It killed thousands. Then the death rate from flu has nearly disappeared prompting the suspicion the diagnoses on the death certificate are fraudulent to score $35000 from Medicare for COVID.

              Don, aren’t you a lawyer? You don’t know shit.

              1. David,
                Charity demands that I pity the weak of mind and poor of spirit.

                1. Charity demands that I pity the weak of mind and poor of spirit.

                  Self-pity is an ugly thing.

            2. If your Orange Clown had done that the deaths in the US might not now be pushing 600,000.

              Wow, my post is really drawing the empty vessels out of the woodwork. Maybe Sarc will come along soon for the trifecta.

              1. Brian,
                As you actually know nothing about New Zealand and its public health policies, you’re better off having the rest of us think that you a fool than opening your mouth and removing all doubt

                1. Thanks for another content-free screed, Donny! Maybe you should just go back to plagiarizing — it doesn’t take much to demonstrate you don’t understand the stuff you lift from others, but at least it doesn’t have the same acerbic edge to it as the stuff you manage on your own.

                  1. “just go back to plagiarizing”
                    Wow you just love to make things up Brian. Of course you had no answer whatsoever to my calling you out about New Zealand. Why not? Because you know knew nothing about the ground truth.
                    Your fantasy world and your Orange Clown resulted in Dem control of both the White House and Congress. Thank you for your gracious assistance.

                    1. my calling you out about New Zealand

                      For you to “call me out,” Donny, you’d actually have to say something that requires more intellectual content than “Orange Clown” and “muh thmart fwiends.” And we both know that’s not happening.

        2. That’s an interesting statistic. Although apparently 85% of children were born to couples. They just don’t get legally married. Also, there’s only about 4,000 kids a year total in the country.
          Not sure why it’s relevant to anything tho.

    3. One of the reasons is that the US actually puts people into jails, rather than letting them run free.
      The UK has been particularly absurd about it. There’s an older story from around 2000 about a thief – with 100+ crimes on record and serving two “suspended sentences” – who breaks his leg while running from police during another unsuccessful burglary. The judge releases him because “breaking your leg is enough punishment”.

      More recently, here’s another example from 2020, of another thief “serving” multiple “suspend sentences” for over 200 crimes getting let go.

      1. I also understand that petty property crime in Europe exceeds that in the US but is not prosecuted to a large extent. But I could be wrong about that.

    4. Three hundred million plus people does result in a fair number of bad people. Remove the drug convictions for those not selling and we might take a good chunk out.

      Those who are violent, deprive others of health or property or place them at risk, should spend time outside of society. I never understood why we think someone who murders or rape is redeemable.

      1. A lot of those drug convictions are plea deals to drop the violent offenses, they aren’t really in prison for the drugs.

        1. Good point. 95% of convictions are pled. That means the seriousness of the index crime is markedly underestimated in these statistics. Things are far worse even for the index conviction, never mind the 100’s of other crimes not being prosecuted.

    5. Anders Brevik killed 77 people in Norway, and he got a 21 year sentence. That’s only 3.2 months per murder.

      It’s true that sentences are longer in the USA. But I don’t think the problem is the sentences, but rather the stingy way we grant early release.

      I was a prison volunteer and I met many inmates who did their crimes as teens, but who matured and changed in 20 or more years since incarceration. Many of them IMO could be safely released. But for whatever reason, 90% of them will remain in jail for many more years.

      I would favor keeping stiff sentences, but I would liberalize the early release system despite the length of sentence.

      1. “I would favor keeping stiff sentences, but I would liberalize the early release system despite the length of sentence.”

        That sounds reasonable to me (with some exceptions like Brevik). I would couple it with the understanding that recidivism would not be tolerated.

        What’s the old joke, “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action”. I think that applies to crimes as well – you got caught joyriding as a teen and promise not to do it again? No problem. You get caught stealing another car, then another one? You aren’t learning.

  6. As others have noted, crimes accounted by prison population will not show the same statistics as crimes accounted by arrests, by charges, or by convictions. Sentence lengths will always skew the prison population toward the characteristics of the longest-sentenced inmates.

    Likewise, accounting for incarceration by race will tend to be at least in significant part a function of prosecutorial polices, with a risk that those may vary systematically by race. The question who gets charged with violent crimes vs. who gets to plead to lesser offenses may be one of the variables.

    Once again, I ask Professor Volokh what questions he thinks this kind of statistical activity can usefully inform?

    1. And we ask whether you have an actual point or are just whining that someone does not present data that you find perfect and unrebuttable in every respect. If you think other statistics are more relevant, please go find them. If you think statistics are simply a distraction from the important work of abolishing law enforcement, please say so.

      1. I think the point is a serious question.

        Is it true that black defendants get stiffer sentences than white defendants, after you control for the relevant factors?

        That would be a difficult matter to study since it would be fact intensive. A single type crime can be committed in different ways some more serious that others. Was there a plea deal which reduced the crime to a lesser crime? Was there a prior record?

        Even defining the relevant factors could be tricky.

        1. I agree it’s an important question but one where anyone offering easy answers, left or right, should be met with skepticism.

        2. It was true in the 1970s, there was even a Supreme Court case on it.

          1. And in the 1970s, the OUI BAC was 1.5 and drunk driving was a recreational sport. As was beating up your girlfriend and dumping raw sewerage into the rivers.

            You do realize that was 50 years ago, don’t you???

      2. ” If you think statistics are simply a distraction from the important work of abolishing law enforcement, please say so. ”

        Michael P has demonstrated himself to be an enthusiastic provider of slobbering succor to racist, authoritarian, abusive policing. I would use the proper term to describe a conservative in this position, but Prof. Volokh has banned the use of that term to describe conservatives at this blog.

  7. I’m surprised at the DWI figure since those are largely 48 hour sentences, if that. Unless it includes the longer sentence for related offenses such as vehicular homicide, that’s a LOT of people because of the relatively short sentences.

    1. I expect that the DUIs in prison are there for multiple convictions over time.

      1. They may be for vehicular homicide, where the pro-criminal lawyer can no longer empower the dangerous criminal and loose it on our hapless population.


    Now, the first racist fact these people will say is: “13% of the people (Blacks) commit 50% of the murders”

    But how can a fact be racist?
    Well, I am part of that 13%.
    I haven’t murdered anyone.

    So let’s look at the FBI data. But before we do, understand these stats are for ARRESTS. Some of these crimes were committed by the same person. Some of these people were proven innocent.

    But I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I’ll concede that every crime on the FBI data report was committed by a different black person. Here is the latest FBI data. Black people did commit 53% (5,025) of the 9,466 murders (Not me though, I swear) [link]

    There are 47 million black people in the US.

    So, even if a different black person committed every murder, it means 99.989497% of black people DIDN’T commit a murder that year.

    That also means 99.994923% of white people didn’t commit a murder.

    So its not 13 percent committing half the murders. .010% of black people are murderers and .005 percent of white people. Which means, if I’d have to meet 10,000 people before I met a black killer.

    So, Karen, I would DEFINITELY talk to black murderers if I knew one.

    If you add up all the crime, it means 94.6% of black people don’t commit ANY crime in a given year and 95.8% of white people don’t get arrested.

    So why are black people considered to be criminals?

    Because you’re racist, Karen.
    Also, sociologists know that crime is an economic phenomenon. Poor people commit more crime (It’s a little more complicated because it correlates more to inequality) BUT…

    Being that white wealth is 10x black wealth, it makes sense that black commit more crime, right?


    That’s according to the Bureau of Justice statistics, not me. So why do black people kill more black people than whites kill whites?
    Well, actually, they don’t.
    The Black on Black crime rate is 63%
    The white on white crime rate is 56%

    So, why don’t we ever talk about white on white crime?
    Now truthfully, it’s because we live in a country where whiteness is the default. Black people are considered “black people” while white people are just considered “people”
    But again, let’s stick to facts and data.
    Back to the FBI arrests. [link]

    The Black on Black murder rate is 89%
    The white on white murder rate is 81%.
    So, Karen, how often do you discuss white on white murders?

    Now the next part is a little easier to explain:
    When they wonder why we don’t address black on black crime in our communities, there’s a great explanation (Remember we’re sticking to facts):
    Because white people don’t know shit.
    Seriously, that’s an actual fact.

    MOST white people don’t live around black people, so they’d have no fucking clue WHAT black people talk about in black communities.

    According to the US Partnership on Mobility and Poverty, whites live in neighborhoods that are 75% white and 8% black, so how would they know?

    Now the next part is trickier to do on Twitter. Whenever I explain this part to white people, I ask everyone in a room to raise their hands if they spent an hour doing non-religious community service this month. 2 hrs? 3 hrs? Hands start to drop
    Usually only black hands are left

    It turns out, I could have just used this peer-reviewed study that shows: “Specifically, African American individuals show the highest rates of participation, followed by White persons, individuals of other ethnicity, and Hispanic American individuals.”

    Well, who gives more money to charity? (We know whites have more disposable income, so let’s base it on percentage)

    There’s a study for that, too! [link]

    Why do I bring this up?
    Well, this is the part you do at home. And this part may be trickier now that COVID canceled everything. I once used Eventbrite for this part but Facebook Events is way easier.

    Go to FB and look up “stop the violence” events going on in your city…

    Now look up “Black Lives Matter” protests.
    I BET there were more stop the violence rallies
    It is a verifiable fact that black people work harder to stop violence in their communities than they EVER blame police violence. They commit more money and time to the issue.

    What does this have to do with anything?

    Well, anyone who actually went to a black church, barbershop, cookout, grandmother’s house, strip club or anywhere that black people exist, would know that black people talk about this issue INCESSANTLY.

    There are black fraternities, sororities, church groups, mentoring organizations, fish fries, summer camps, after-school programs, community centers, athletic teams, science clubs, music groups and a whole motherfucking rap song dedicated to stopping violence in black communities

    There’s a good reason white people don’t know this:

    Why the fuck would any black person talk to a white person about black on black crime?

    Finally, there’s the biggest question of all:
    If the black on black rate crime is damn near the same rate as white on white crime; if black people work HARDER and spend more money on it; if the insignificant differences in interracial crime can be explained by poverty…
    Then why does this Vacation-Bible-School-sandwich of a myth persist?
    I could tell you that people use it to deflect from the real problem of white supremacy. I could tell you that some people are idiots. I could even explain that “wypipo gon’ wypipo” but we’re sticking to facts.

    See, it is a FACT that the people who are least affected by white supremacy and racism are the most likely to deny its existence.
    It is a FACT that white people are the only demographic in America that thinks there is LESS discrimination that there is.
    It is a FACT that whites really believe or don’t care how police treat black people.

    1. What’s with the ‘Karen’ stuff?

    2. I don’t get it.

      Saying “13% of the people commit 50% of the murders, therefore blacks as a group are bad people” – yep, that’s racist.

      Saying “13% of the people commit 50% of the murders” isn’t.

      Is saying “95% (or whatever) of murderers are men” sexist?

      1. I mean, read the thing. It is long – sorry ’bout that. His point is

        1) 13% does not account for repeat offenders
        2) Even taking it as clean, the bare statistic of murder rates is a pretty useless one to mention unless you’re trying to argue causation
        3) If you want to go down that rout, there are lots of other better statistics that tell an actual factual story.

        If you click through there are lots of studies being cited to back up what seems like just statements, but, the filter.

        I don’t think all of this is correct (he sites some kinda small studies a few times) but it’s good counterveiling info.

        1. I actually did read it, thanks.

          “1) 13% does not account for repeat offenders”

          I’m not tracking your point. 13% (or whatever) is the percentage or the population that are black. How do repeat offenders change that number?

          And just trying to connect with your point: Do murderers repeat their crime often enough to matter? Just off the top, if a lot of murderers are doing it more than once, that seems to argue that sentences are too short, but what does that have to do with race of the murderer? Are you arguing that one race or another is more prone to murdering multiple times, and that has some policy implication? I wouldn’t think so – I tend to think each case should be viewed on its own merits.

          “2) Even taking it as clean, the bare statistic of murder rates is a pretty useless one to mention unless you’re trying to argue causation”

          Again, I’m confused. 95% or whatever of murderers are male. That just is. It’s not making a ‘men are bad’ argument.

          “3) If you want to go down that rout, there are lots of other better statistics that tell an actual factual story.”

          I’m not a fan of curating the facts to fit a particular story.

          Frankly, I don’t care a lot about the race/religion/sex of murderers very much, any more than I care about their favorite football team. I think each murder case and murderer ought to be looked at as an individual, and I suspect that EV does as well. But when people say ‘the police are discriminating against Steelers fans because they don’t like Steelers fans’, then pointing out that Steelers fans are in fact committing crimes proportionate to the interest police have in them is appropriate.

          1. 1) The 50%, not the 13%. How many are repeat offenders? We don’t know.
            And not all murderers are caught the first time.

            95% or whatever of murderers are male

            Yes and?
            That’s the point.

            The ‘and’ around here re: race is getting kinda VDare-ish.

            As for 3) the point of facts is generally a story. A policy upshot, an observation about society. Random factoids these are not.

        2. Even if his statistics are right, and I don’t think they are, he still states that Blacks are twice as likely to be a murderer than Whites.

    3. What we see here is lying through misleading statistics.

      Here’s the one item you need to put this in context.

      Despite African Americans making up a minority of the population, they make up a majority of the murder victims in the US. That difference is the higher rate of victimization.

      13927 murder victims
      5787 white
      7484 black

      Denial of this fact means that solutions to it can’t be found.

      1. If it’s not causal, then it’s not a good rout by which to seek solutions.

        And it’s not been established as causal, even if you keep somehow slipping into a context where you think it is.

        1. You keep using the word “causal”.

          Here’s what I said.
          African Americans are murdered at a higher rate than every other ethnicity in the US.

          That type of FACT typically deserves attention. But you seem to want to deflect from that fact. Why?

          1. But if you want an actual look at the facts and correlations, the following is quite useful. Perhaps Professor Volohk can take a look and comment.


            A few key facts here.

            1. Economic status is at best poorly correlated with homicide rates. Poor “white” counties have lower homicide rates than affluent “black” counties.

            2. What IS highly correlated with homicide rates are single motherhood rates. At nearly the same rate as race.

            3. Perhaps most interestingly, RECENT African American immigrants have incarceration rates much closer to “white” Americans than to “normal” African Americans. Something to strongly consider.

            Understanding these correlations is critical to reducing the above average rates of murder of African Americans in our communities. Avoiding or deflecting from them condemns many more to die.

            1. If you look at this Twitter rant, you’ll notice how deceptive it is.
              He shifts between complaining that blacks are individuals here, then pointing out that “whites” all act like this over there.
              You see the part where he converts murder rates into the non-murder rates (and ratios in percentages) to make it seem like the numbers are much smaller, and actually the same? Do you think he would accept an argument that only 14 of the over 1,000,000 police shot an unarmed black person, so the other 99.9986% prove there is no racism?
              Notice the switch from crime rate (absolute) to race-on-race crime ratios?
              Notice how by the end of the rant, he’s just blatantly and openly being racist: “wypipo gon’ wypipo”?

              This is a racist idiot’s rant, designed to preach to fools and idiots that cannot actually think and already agree with him. Perfect for Twitter, but it’s sad that even Sarcastro would try to repost it here.

              1. I can’t help but think you meant to respond to Sarcastro, and not the link I posted, which isn’t on twitter.

    4. Sar. I am curious if you were raised in an intact, patriarchal family, perhaps with some religious devotion, and an expectation of education. If you were, I am curious if your family were first or second generation immigrants rather than fake black people from the American South. They are all half British Isles misfits in genetics. None are even really black.

      When a race whore calls anyone racist, demand the genetic analysis.

      1. “None are even really black. ”
        David, show yourself to be a failure in genetics, and a likely failure in life. Wie schade !

      2. I don’t care what you have to say, except as a sad reminder how low my fellow humans can fall.

        You are not worth responding to; you never have good points, only bile.

        1. Nevertheless, did you grow up in an intact patriarchal family?

    5. “If you add up all the crime, it means 94.6% of black people don’t commit ANY crime in a given year and 95.8% of white people don’t get arrested. “

      You do understand the logical error there…

      1. Ed, explain the error, please.

        Why do you think the author might be comparing black criminality with white arrests?

        1. Because he has his head up his arse…

    6. “”

      And? Is he your idol because he took some facts and misrepresented them in order to do his job of telling a good story?

    7. They way Harriot spins the stats shows that he is either an idiot or being deliberately deceptive.

      The bottom line is that, per capita, the black population commits murder at a far higher rate than the white population. At the same time, only a very small percentage of both black and white Americans commit murders.

      So, it comes down to what conclusions or arguments people try to make with this data.

      If someone claims that all or most black people are violent animals because of these stats, that is both inaccurate and racist.

      But, if someone uses this statistics as evidence that black Americans are shot and killed by the police at a higher per capita rate, not because of “systemic racism” but because the fact that there is a higher rate of murder and other violent crimes per capital among black Americans, which leads to police being threatened with death or great bodily injury more often per capita by black Americans, it is totally valid.

      Black Americans make up about twice the percentage of those killed by police, compared to their percentage of the population, but they commit about 4 times the murders.

      I think another useful stat to determine if black Americans are being targeted for killing by police is the rate of murders of police by race.

      A study of 33 years of data on killings of police, showed that from 1980 to 2013, 41% of cop killers were black.

      So, if about 41% of cop killer are black, but only about 25% of those killed by police are black, that strongly suggests that there is no systemic racism in police involved shootings. It might even suggest that the opposite is true and the police are more reluctant to shoot black suspects in situations where they shoot white suspects.

  9. Possibly of interest: Turns Out Ma’Khia Bryant’s Parents Are Both Criminals And Her Dad Was The Guy In The Video Kicking The Chick On The Ground Before She Got Shot

    1. How is this relevant to the justness of her shooting???

      1. Why was her shooting unjust?

      2. You’re asking Dr. Ed to make sense?

      3. For starters, it shows that the officer saved a Black life — did you see the picture of her spinning a basketball?

        Above and beyond that, can you say “joint venture”?

  10. If a person selling marijuana or cocaine on a street corner (an activity I perceive to be not much different from retailing beer, except in the context of authoritarian, prudish, archaic statutes) is accosted by a rival, and gunfire develops, would that likely come to classified as a ‘crime of violence’ all around (including with respect to the person who was trying earn a living and wanted to avoid violence)?

    If so, these statistics — or, at least the way in which they are presented — seem to be of relatively low value. I believe curbing the drug warriors would diminish crime to far greater extent than these statistics seem to indicate.

  11. RAK,
    Of course it is a crime of violence.
    Get off the weed for a few hours.

    1. It is a crime of violence related to — and which would not have occurred without — the foolish, racist drug war.

      Focusing on the first part while disregarding the remainder misleadingly understates the costs imposed on society by our drug warriors, including the precipitation of readily avoidable violence.

    1. Via the morgues! 😉

  12. Want with prisons/jails springing all the non-violent offenders during COVID, why’s crime & violence up so much now? You don’t think, it’s those last extra 5 million guns bought with NICS Background Chexks doing all the crime, do you? ????

  13. How about turning it around approximately 50% of the murder victims are black while blacks represent only 13% of the population. That they are overwhelmingly killed by other blacks makes in not particularly racist, but does make it tragic.

    The waste of all of those mostly young lives is a tragedy.

    The question is how do you reduce the body count.

Please to post comments