I am a bit unconfident about it...

Here, to give a basis of the argument I need to debunk, here's an article from right-libertarian think tank Reason.com to respond to:

https://reason.com/volokh/2021/04/24/race-and-violent-crime/

Blacks, which here means non-Hispanic blacks, were 12.5% of the U.S. population, and non-Hispanic whites were 60.4%. It thus appears from this data that the black per capita violent crime rate is roughly 2.3 to 2.8 times the rate for the country as a whole, while the white per capita violent crime rate is roughly 0.7 to 0.9 times the rate for the country as a whole.

Note: keep in mind he's extrapolating a certain part of the U.S, New York, to the rest of America's national crime statistics

Something in the vein of a masterpost like Naomi's research and rhetoric masterdoc

Easily understandable and accessible, yet with a great amount of statistics put upon it

    • mkultrawide [any]
      ·
      8 months ago

      It's been years since we talked about it in college in one of my classes.

      https://www.jstor.org/stable/2095046

      That is a paper that covers it, but there are other ones out there that come to the same conclusion. I think there might be one from the FBI that also comes to that conclusion. It matches up with other research from the World Bank, which has found that the single most powerful predictor of the variance in violent crime rates between US states and between countries is income inequality (even more so than stuff like the number of guns, which has kind of a dubious statistical connection, anyways).

      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/08/income-inequality-murder-homicide-rates