I'd take just being safe from violence from people
> African Americans are the primary group arrested for murders, robberies, and weapons violations, despite representing only 13 percent of the total US population. Meanwhile, the share of violent incidents involving black offenders (25%) was greater than the population percentage of black persons (12%), highlighting disproportionate representation in violent crime statistics.
Also for the same crime stats 69% for white and 26% for black is what I'm seeing for 2024-2025, with 60% and 30% of the population respectively. so 13% more for black and 9% more for white, we're talking about a 4% difference when looking at overall crime. accounting for reporting issues and requirements is a different story. Just like your other comment, such a deceptive line of thinking you people like to push. The numbers you show are accurate, but the interpretations you interpolate are lies of omission, or at best willful ignorance to support a prejudice.
Even for correlating with age I don't agree with this type of conclusion that lacks the lightest touch of critical thinking.
And of course 99% of crimes (felonies) are committed by people over 15, so they're not safe as well.
You know, the problem with people like you is that you've already decided what result you want to see. So you'll observe evidence, and you'll criticize it, until it fits the narrative you're expecting. Whereas a person looking for truth, will continue to criticize the results even when the results make sense to them, or fit their expectations and prejudices. When the data confirms your prejudice you feel vindicated and cling on to it.
If you look at a heat map overlay of crimes in the US, you'll certainly see areas where black people live and have lived historically with the most crimes. If you did the same with the data representing current and historical poverty rates you'll see the same pattern. Heck, I've even seen maps of the US south that compare all of that data with soil fertility, it turns out the areas where cotton would grow the most is where the slaves were imported into, and then after the civil war ..well you probably know the rest.
Either way, I think you missed what I said originally in this thread about justice and fairness. You wouldn't want to be held responsible for an arbitrary group someone else placed you in, would you now? so why do that to others.
Numbers are also deceptive, would you be concerned more about mass shootings, rape, child abuse, human trafficking, robbery? crimes of poverty, crimes of vice, crimes of psycopathy. If I'm going to school I'd care more about mass shooters, if I'm a woman and jogging, I'd care more about rape, but even then recent trends are more important than generalized long term stats. For some crimes just one incident a year is too much, for others you can have thousands and it might still be normal with a big enough population (e.g.: car break ins).
The thing that pisses me off the most with your kind of thinking is that even following your reasoning, why is race important? You presume some kind of biological connection. Even among racists, some prefer to ask questions and follow the "it's their culture" thinking, which has some merit, as Europeans are finding out from all the recent migrations. But you know the really insidious part of your reasoning? When you see a certain group being convicted of crimes more than others, your assumption is they commit more crimes, instead of asking if the cops are arresting and targeting that group more than other groups.
I mean, it isn't really a big secret, you can be a rich guy on wallstreet and snort coke night and day and you'll be left alone. But people serve decades in prison for possessing weed that's legal in other states. There are cities like portland and SF that have a largely white population that see lots of crimes of poverty and opportunity as well, similar to other cities where those people tend to have more melanin on them. I urge you to visit seattle or portland, with an expensive car, you should follow the local custom of unlocking your car, so they don't break the window when they want to go through your things to see if there's anything worth taking (they still break the window though, most are too lazy to check if the door is open).
I mentioned attractiveness because when I dress up nice and lose weight, it's a wildly different world. When that isn't the case I'd say at least 60% of my interactions with people is negative. Out of that I'd say maybe 2% is extreme enough to be considered violence in my view.
I'll say this though, I didn't mean we should avoid interaction or being nice to each other in the off chance people are unpleasant or unkind. I'm just saying, don't go into it with that expectation unless you're pleasant to look at yourself.
Some people, especially as they grow old (and especially women unfortunately), see a remarkable decline in how they're treated, and that in turn causes them to be jaded towards people. If you don't tie how people respond to you to how you treat them to begin with (It's huge struggle for me, not preaching here), it's less of a bitter pill.
The fear of crime is more socially harmful than crime itself, net.
A hundred years ago, folks in the US trusted their neighbors more, despite violent crime being more likely than today. The US is objectively safer now, but, ironically, people are more afraid than ever of talking with strangers, and more distrustful of their neighbors.
If folks back then could chat with a stranger without being gripped by paranoia, I think we can do it today. Don’t let the media scare you from living life. Have chit-chat. Have fun!