The Myth of Black on Black Crime

Black on Black Crime Does Not Exist. Crime exists. Black people who commit crimes exist. Black victims of crimes exist. Black people who commit crimes with victims are also black exist. It even exists in a high percentage. 

So why do I say this phenomenon doesn't exist? Because the percentages are essentially the same no matter what racial group, we are looking at. Yet, the label of “Mexican on Mexican crime” or “Chinese on Chinese crime” is never used. “White on White” crime is unheard of. Even though statistically, white people are most likely to be killed by other white people, Latin Americans are most likely to be killed by other Latin Americans; Asians are most likely to be killed by other Asians, etc. 

So, why all the focus on “Black on Black” crime? I think it all comes down to accepting reality and to a lesser degree, responsibility for the terrible conditions black Americans have lived in since we first got off the boats in 1619. 

Most conservatives (let’s keep it real, this is a right wing position) feel that blacks and other American minority groups do not have an excuse to not be on a level playing field with white people, since slavery “ended” in 1865. 

However, what they ignore are the “Black Codes” that were passed to ensure that “free” black people were restricted to jobs that either had low wages, or put them in debt. Then there were Jim Crows laws, which created laws that legally separated the races, until 1954 when Brown vs. Board of Education ruled that unconstitutional. Then of course you had “white flight”, when after the 1954 ruling white people who now faced the possibility of living next to black neighbors all left the cities and moved to the suburbs. Now since they (white people) were allowed to live in these cities and create businesses and lives for themselves already, when they all left the moment black people were legally allowed to move there, they took all the jobs and businesses with them. 

On top of the government’s oppression of us via law, their policies also screwed the now, mostly black inner city neighborhoods. In my city of Detroit for example, the auto industry was everyone’s way to making a decent living. However, in the 60s when major outsourcing took place, unemployment numbers skyrocketed. The same thing happened to many major U.S. cities, and there was no plan to assist the people who were willing and able to work. 

So, no jobs where you live, and hundreds of years of systemic oppression can lead to what? Crime. As the song from City High goes, “What would you do if your son was at home, crying all alone on the bedroom floor cause he’s hungry?” Most people will start doing what they have to do to survive and to make sure there children and families aren’t starving and suffering. 

In any place I’ve ever lived (Detroit, Oak Park, Farmington Hills, Big Rapids in Michigan, and Chandler, Phoenix, and Tempe in Arizona), the strong majority of the people who are selling drugs or robbing people are broke. Again, add in the lack of job availability, and the problem grows. And when illegal activities are a black market business, you can’t call the cops. You can’t take someone to court for lost product. You have to take matters into your own hands. And when there are a lot of black market activities in your neighborhood, it’s easy to become paranoid. Paranoia is why you see so many people in the “hood” carrying guns, even if they don’t sell drugs or rob people. It’s because you don’t know who else around you is. That’s when the high murder rates kick in. All of these factors together lead to the phenomenon the media calls “Black on Black crime”. Crime is committed based on location and proximity, not race (excluding hate crimes, obviously.) Nobody who is already poor is gonna travel across town to rob someone’s house. Nobody is gonna travel cities away to go murder someone. These things happen right at home. And it’s mostly based on the history of how black people were/are treated in the good ole U.S.A. We didn’t even mention the wealth passed down from generation to generation, which creates an incredible disadvantage for those of us who haven’t been afforded the opportunity to build wealth from the countries inception. We also didn’t mention the 1994 crime bill that racially targeted minorities. 

Black on Black crime is a myth. It’s just crime. Give these people REAL opportunity to make a living for themselves and their families, and you will see that it isn’t a racial thing. So all my right wing readers (if you exist), please think about all of these things before you say “It’s just their culture” or “where are the fathers?”, just remember that we didn’t land on Plymouth rock….you know the rest. 

Impeachment Talk Just Got Real

So Nancy Pelosi is finally joining the rest of the elected Democrats and pushing for the impeachment of Donald Drumpf. I am on the fence if this is actually a good idea for a few reasons, mainly because I don't want a more competent version of Tiny Hands in the White House (that being Mike Pence). But, in principle, if the President is doing illegal shit, then we cannot set the precedent of letting him get away with it in an effort to avoid wasting political capital. It's messy.

This was ONE issue where Nancy and I actually agreed. I typically thnk her instincts are off, she backs the wrong candidates, is way too pro-status quo for my liking, and basically represents everything about the democrats thats progressives like myself want to change about the party. 

HOWEVER....

On THIS issue, I felt she was correct. Getting Mike Pence as President would not only take the country in a WORSE direction than Trump (again, he won't get into petty Twitter fights or be so overt in his bigotry but still do all the same policies), but it could end up being Bill Clinton all over again. 

Remember what happened when the Republicans burned all that energy to impeach Slick Willy? What happened? He won the next election by about 8.2 Million popular votes. To compare, Donald Trump had 3 Million LESS popular votes than Hillary Clinton, but won the electoral college. So, my point is that Bill Clinton was really popular and the impeachment did absolutely NOTHING to slow down his popularity. See where I'm going with this?

Is Donald Trump corrupt? Yes. Is he and has be done illegal things while in office? All the evidence points to yes (emoluments involving his hotels, illegal continuation of Iraq war, etc). Is he a bigot who should've never been President? Of course. Is he "like, a smart person?" No. 

I don't know where I fall in this argument as of today. But I also am not ignoring reality, as it seems that this is happening for real this time. 

Banning Substances Never Works

Banning substances. The war on drugs. Dare to be different. Just say no. 

All of that is bullshit. 

Banning substances that human beings enjoy has literally never worked, if by "worked" we mean reducing the number of users of said substance. If by "worked" you mean caused a massive number of people to be incarcerated and have criminal records, then yes, it's worked to perfection. 

Remember the Italian Mafia? Remember how in the early 1900's the government banned alcohol, and the Mob then controlled the entire market, which caused many deaths that wouldn't have happened if the alcohol industry was regulated? Not deaths because people drank too much, but deaths due to bad batches of booze, deaths because anytime you deal with the black market and you can't call the police when something happens, you will deal with murder and extortion as well.

To bring it to 2019, that same thing is basically the case with drugs in the United States. Replace the words "Italian Mafia" with "Drug Cartel", and replace "alcohol" with "drugs" and the paragraph doesn't change much. Now, while most of the states have FINALLY come around to the idea that legalizing cannibis is the rational and correct position to have, we still haven't done so on a federal level...AND now they're coming for your e-cigs and vapes. 

Sadly, my state of Michigan is the first to ban flavored vape juice. New York is in the midst of doing the same thing. Why is this sad? Because I am a grown man and I like flavored vape juice. Their reasoning is also shitty. "We want to protect the kids and since there's flavor, that might attract some kids to it so therefore, nobody can have it." If that's the case, cigarettes should've been banned a long effing time ago because most people I know who started smoking started before the age of 18. While we're at it, let's ban alcohol again since it worked so well the first time. Most people I know have gotten their buzz on way before the age of 21. Especially all flavored alcohol, since that's clearly the standard of whether or not something is marketed to kids. 

Just educate the kids, man. Tell them that smoking/vaping is bad for you, tell them too much alcohol will lead to terrible outcomes, tell them that drugs will turn them into a person they would never want to be. You can tell them all of this. You can ahve age restrictions on said products, and have harsh punishments for those who sell to minors or buy on behalf of minors. But banning the substance itself will surely only push it underground, where MORE kids will have access because the black market doesn't ask for I.D. 

Besides, tobacco flavored vape juice is just gross.   

Science Is Always The Way to the Truth

Let's talk science.

We all use cell phones, check the weather, drive cars, fly on airplanes, use electricity in our home, go to the doctor when we are sick, etc. There are many more everyday uses of this process to acertain the nature of reality. Breathing for one (we all accept that we need oxygen to survive), cooking meat (we know and accept the reality that a certain temperature will kill off the harmful bacteria in the meat, which will prevent us from becoming sick), stuff like that. However, when it comes to very specific things, for some reason, many of us lose faith in what the scientists say. Even though without them, we wouldn't know anything. 

1. Climate Change - even though over 97% of climate scientists on earth all agree that climate change is warming the planet and it is largely man-made, for some reason (cough - fossil fuel corporations-cough) we refuse to do anything substantial to deal with it. It's ALMOST like rich people who won't be around for the devastating effects of climate change don't care about what happens after they die with their millions...

2. Religion - if somebody told you today, in 2019, that they were swallowed whole by a large fish and survived for 3 days, and then escaped the whale, would you believe them?  If someone told you they had a literal verbal conversation with a snake, would you take it serious? If somebody told you they saw a 3 headed dragon with red skin, would you ask what movie they saw or would you assume that they were speaking about a real-life incident? If one of your BEST friends told you they had a grandparent that lived to 900 years old, would you laugh or would you treat the conversation as if it was real? These are all stories that are in the Bible and taken as truth by a large number of Christians. The same Christians who believe science in almost all other instances, except when it contradicts what's in their "holy" book. 

3. LGBTQ issues - there are many observable behaviors in the animal kingdom that show homosexual and bi-sexual relationships. Penguins, chimpanzees, dogs, and many other species come to mind. If this was REALLY some sort of choice or reaction based on past experiences (as I've heard many anti-LGBTQ advocates say), then why are non-human animals doing it too? Did the devil influence them too? Did they learn the behavior from us? Or MAYBE...just maybe...it's natural?  Also, the idea of trans-people can be shown in nature as well. According to https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/science/nature/article/2016/09/29/7-gender-bending-animals-animal-kingdom, there are at least 7 "gender-bending" animals, some of which include Lions, Spotted Hyenas, and Clownfish. Weird, if this was a human concept that only humans dealt with because "choice" or "something in your past made you that way", then explain that to the lions, because I guess they didn't get the memo. 

4. Evolution - granted, it's a very difficult subject to understand, which is why I think so many people don't believe it's true. To think that a single celled organism eventually created all life that we on the planet today, is incredibly hard to believe. However, if you want to see this phenomenon in the modern day, there are a few examples. Take a domestic pig, let the little pink, sort of ugly sort of cute animal in the wild for a few weeks. I guarantee you will not recognize that pig the next time you seem them, as it will have grown tusks, become hairy, and also become very aggressive. Then there's the fox experiment (http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160912-a-soviet-scientist-created-the-only-tame-foxes-in-the-world), where a scientist basically took the tamest foxes from an original group, and only bred the tamest puppies from each litter. Within 40 years, each generation of fox had floppier ears, curlier tails, whined when the human they were closest with left them alone, and even flipped on their backs to ask for belly rubs. What does that behavior remind you of? Domestic dogs. Another example of modern day evolution you can see with your own eyes is from this site https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080417112433.htm. To make a really long story short, in 1971 a group of researchers took 10 Italian wall lizards from their home island of Pod Kopiste and moved them to a neighboring island called Pod Mrcaru. After about 36 years, the lizards they orignally brought were no more, and a completely new species of lizard had inhabited the island. Still not convinced? I got one more. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2019/may/birds-on-an-island-in-the-indian-ocean-evolved-flightlessness-twice.html In this article, they explain "Birds on an island in the Indian Ocean evolved flightlessness twice. On Aldabra, in the Seychelles, lives the last surviving native flightless bird in the Indian Ocean. But fossil evidence has revealed that the Aldabra rail lost the ability to fly not only once, but twice." Basically what the article goes on to explain is that a bird species from Madagascar flew to a remote island, where over time they lost the ability to fly. They went "extinct" doe to sea-level rise. However, the original species of bird still exists in madagascar, and a separate group of birds (same species) for whatever reason took a flight to the same island. And guess what happened next? After a few generation, these birds also lost the ability to fly. WHAT OTHER EXPLANATION DO YOU HAVE OTHER THAN NATURAL SELECTION AKA EVOLUTION?

So guys, let's trust science in ALL of it's aspects, not just the oens that are convenient for us so we can excercise cognitave dissonance. Being purposely ignorant to easily proveable facts helps nobody, and ultimately may destroy the entire planet. So, get it together guys. 

Comparing States Differing Gun Laws

So it looks like I gotta write about guns again. 

If you would like to read my previous thoughts on guns, click here.

So after the 3rd mass shooting in Texas over the last month, I just want to take the time to compare the 5 states with the strictest gun laws to the 5 states with the most lax gun laws, and see which states have a higher body count. Just to see if this whole "gun restrictions don't work" argument is legit. (Spoiler, it's not.)

From https://www.deseretnews.com/top/3430/0/The-10-states-with-the-least-restrictive-gun-laws.html 

Wyoming: 18.8 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

Kentucky: 16.2 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

Arizona: 15.8 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

Mississippi: 21.5 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

Louisiana: 21.7 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017. 

Above are the 5 states in which it is easiest to obtain a firearm. Divide how ever many millions of people live in that states by 100,000, and then multiply your answer by the number of people killed per 100,000. That will show you how many people died in 2017 alone in each state. Below, are the states with the strictest gun laws. Let's compare the death rate, shall we?

Also from https://www.deseretnews.com/top/1428/0/10-states-with-the-strictest-gun-laws.html

Connetitcut: 5.1 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

New York: 3.7 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

Massachusetts: 3.7 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

New Jersey: 5.3 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

California: 7.9 in 100,000 died via gun in 2017.

Do you see how much lower these numbers are? It's crazy, but it's ALMOST like the states that make it harder to obtain weapons have fewer deaths as a result of those weapons. The reason I bring all this up is to say this. Texas is basically right in the middle, with about 12.4 dead bodies out of 100,000 in 2017. Texas also has a big population, so that total is around 3,513 gun victims. That's around the same number of people who were killed in the Twin Towers. Also, another fun fact, someone in Texas is killed with a gun every 30 minutes. 

Just close the loopholes; No more private sales, implement a national registry, universal background checks for all gun purchases (to include social media), and no AK-47 (or equivalent) sales allowed to anyone who isn't currently in the military AND overseas fighting. No need for a weapon that can shoot that many rounds in a matter of seconds to be in the hands of anyone who isn't in active duty/combat. 

Do I think any of this will change? Sadly, no. Americans love guns more than we love other Americans, and as long as that mindset is the prevalent thought process, just be aware that another mass shooting is coming. Soon. 

Black Expectations

You can never get credit when you're black in America. Everything is either a backhanded compliment (he's so articulate, he's so well read) or an unrealistic expectation(if Jay Z can be a billionaire, any black man can!). Just because Barack Obama was the President, does not mean that the MAJORITY of African Americans, Afro-Latinx Americans, or Africans who live in this country have the same shot. But I digress, this is more about how we can never be any type of way without extreme judgment. I'll give examples.

I've always been told that I talk white. Now, despite the overwhelming majority of my family being black, my friends parents and their children all being black for the most part, I still went to school with mostly white people for most of my life. When we lived in an all black, working class neighborhood, my parents enrolled me in private school in the neighboring city, rather than having me go to school in the neighborhood. Then a mass gang fight broke out, spilled all over our yard, scared the shit out outta my Mom, and the next thing I knew a "For Sale" sign was up. We sold that house, and moved a little further away from the city. 

Stepping into school that day, there was ONE other kid who looked KINDA like me. He was a biracial kid named Randy (we're still friends). Besides Randy and I, I can name every other black student at the school at the time. Joe, Janae, Dennis, Brittany, Will and Justin. So, needless to say, walking into that classroom was the first time I ever noticed that I was not like everyone else. The other students knew it too, and they definitely took a while to warm up. 

During this time, I would often visit my old neighborhood to get my haircut (shout out Shears in the Park and Salon Ultimo), visit my Grandma and Grandpa who lived in the house my Dad grew up in on 6 Mile and Livernois, or head east towards Mt. Clemens where my entire Mom's side of the family lived. "Oh you can tell he go to school with dem white folks," was a phrase I heard many times. I never thought anything of it. It's also important to mention that during this era of my life, I was heavy into basketball, and was on a league at the old YMCA which used to be on 7 Mile and Lahser. So I had a very healthy dose of the hood from my former neighborhood, family members, and basketball team mates, and a healthy dose of suburban life due to where I went to school. 

Slowly as middle school and high school approached, more and more black people began attending the schools I went to. Most of them talked similar as each other, used similar words that you would hear in rap music, and all lived in neighborhoods like the one I had moved from. This is when the whole "acting white" thing really comes into play. Because again, I always loved rap music, I always loved basketball, I liked to wear clothes that were considered fashionable, but I sounded so different. 

"This nigga talk like a white boy."

So what does one do when they begin to grow into adulthood and they begin to realize that there are certain codes of conduct that each race is supposed to adhere to? Well, some of us actively try to become the sterotype that everyone views when they see us to be accepted. Some of us might start hanging out in areas where we know our safety is, at best questionable, but that's where "real niggas" chill, so you gotta be there. You might hang out with people who are into the things you hear about in music, possibly who all wear a particular color, and do illegal things for money. You might get into group fights at movie theatres and in bars that you normally wouldn't have gotten into, you may get into stand offs with guns on both sides outside of the Fox Theatre on Woodward, and you might also have your left earring ripped out during one of these altercations in the club. 

The other side to this coin, is when you do find yourself in a struggle or a situation that isn't the best for your well being, people act like there is absolutely no excuse for it other than your own actions. Even though statistically, black people are 4 times as likely to be arrested for drugs as white people, generational wealth that has accumulated since the countries founding is equal to roughly $100,000 per white family is only about $10,000 per black family (since we couldn't own anything until the 1960's and even then there were unfair disadvantages such as the way the G.I. Bill was distributed), black people with college degrees are statistically less likely to get jobs than white people with a high school diploma, somehow because Jay Z and Diddy exist, there is no reason for ANY black person to have difficulty building wealth. What people ignore is reality. Jay Z is from the Marcy Projects. Name another Billionaire from the Marcy Projects. No? Name a millionaire from the Marcy Projects. Exactly. What people fail to realize is these people are the exception, not the rule. So to compare the average black man to any of these elites is simply ridiculous and unrealistic. 

Barack Obama was the first and only black President. From 1776-2019, there has been ONE black President. Let's stop pretending that things have changed so drastically since 2008 that the playing field is level. It is absolutely not level. Refer to the above statistics.

My point is this. My blackness does not have anything to do with how I pronounce my words, my style of dress, or any of the above. I could be blasting Coldplay in my headphones, walking down the street in an Abercrombie shirt, and still get pulled over by police. I can say the R's at the end of my words very clearly, and still be called the N word with said R attached. You can never impress everybody. For some people, I'll always be a white dude in black skin because I talk proper and I'm into politics. To some, I'll always be a thug because I dress a certain way, listen to trap rap, and curse casually when speaking to my peers; despite never having a violent charge on my record. 

So instead, I'll just be Shane, and y'all can take it or leave it.  

The Republicans Have to Get Off Koch

David Koch's death should make NOBODY sad outside of his family.

I'm not saying we should celebrate it, but I don't want to hear about his philanthropy efforts through the arts or any of that bullshit. let's talk about who he REALLY was. 

He was the real life leader of the Republican party. 

He was never involved in politics in any official capacity. Ever. However, don't you find it funny that his name always pops up in political conversation? Here's why.

The man was worth $58.7 Billion. Koch Industries (with brother Charles) lobbied the entire Republican party at every level of government for YEARS. What did we get out of it? Extremely low taxes for corporations and the class of people who have at least six zeroe's after the 1 in their bank account (a million guys, keep up.) Extreme income and wealth inequality. CEO's who make on average 280 dollars to the average employee's $1. Funded climate science denial thinktanks. Lobbied against unions. Lobbied against gun reform. Lobbied to lossen environmental regulations. Lobbied against public transit. There's more, but I think you get the picture.

Any person who has enough money to lobby all these different causes and never has to run for a government position has way too much power. Billionaires are almsot by definition detrimental to society. This particular billionaire happened to not only be a detriment BECAUSE he had that much wealth, but he also turned that money into power by buying off the entire republican party. 

Good riddance Dave. We won't miss you.