- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 39,985
Id guess because it takes a certain amount of mental illnes growing since younger years most often allowed to go unaddressed in areas of more wealt tan typical large urban settings afford on avgIn the 20th century when most serial killers were white, white racists would claim "That's because being a serial killer takes more intelligence."![]()
Not getting caught does require more intelligenceIn the 20th century when most serial killers were white, white racists would claim "That's because being a serial killer takes more intelligence."![]()
I have dealt with cultural challenges when I lived in Japan and South Korea. I never even had the slightest temptation to rape a 12 year old girl. The difference is, I respected the people in my host countries. These migrants don't respect us. On top of that, I can't imagine a Christian minister blaming the Asian culture for compelling a person to do something so horrible.(From the Tweet)
This is the Islamic Center that wrote a letter in support of him stating that he’s a “family man” who had to overcome the “challenges of a new culture”
Yeah. People have a knack for coming up with nonsense answers for inconvenient statistics like the fact that the per capita crime rate went down after 20,000 Haitians moved to Springfield Ohio. Sorry but I don't at all believe that a century that in the first have gave us the Greenwood, Rosewood and St. Louis around routine lynchings was somehow skewing racial statistics about serial killings in favor of white people.
Well I just cant believe that if you take someone from one spot on the earth and move them to another spot on the earth that they become different people so the people do play a role.
If you take me for example and put me in a communist country I wouldn't suddenly become communist. I would probably even want to overthrow that government and create a different one.
More dishonest use of statistics by you which is to be expected at this point. The specific point I made that there's no way in hell the black serial killer numbers were being suppressed. So rather than deal with my specific point you decided to shift the time frame. But if you want to go with all time killings, there were about 1 to 2 million blacks killed as a result of the middle passage.Wiki, three different AI searches, and the Tuskegee Institute put the total number of black lynching victims in the US, from its inception to 2025, at a high of around 6500 to a low of around 3400 (appx 1300 were White victims).
So let's double that high number, to cover for lynchings done in secret, unreported or unprosecuted.
That's 13000 over roughly two and half centuries.
For the first quarter of just this century alone, 2000 to 2025, Grok estimates 16027 on the high side, to 14927 on the low side, the number of Whites killed by blacks.
Gab AI estimates are lower phrasing it as a "conservative estimate" of around 4400.
Duck Duck Go and Screwgle punted the question and would not answer.
National Conservative has been tracking interracial homicides as well. His number show about 400 to 600 every year, so 25 years worth, assuming the numbers remain fairly steady show around 12,500, splitting the difference.
Now of course, ratios come into play here: there are more Whites, for the time being, so victimization rates would tend higher, even after acknowledging that most violent crime is intraracial.
But that would cut the other way as well: lynchings would have been much greater in number when the White population was roughly 90 percent of the country.
![]()
![]()
My point in all this?
"Widespread lynchings" of blacks by Whites is nowhere near as widespread as Whites dying at the hands of blacks.
And as any scientist will tell you... most experiments end in failure.