After a huge dropoff with the ending of the crack wars around 1995, the black homicide perpetration rate has turned up again in this decade. For black male 14-17 year olds, according to tables prepared by James Alan Fox of Northeastern U., the number of homicide perpetrators in absolute terms is up 34% from 2000-2001 to 2006-2007, up 12% for black 18-24-year-0lds, and up 17% for blacks men 25+.
In contrast, for "whites" (which appear to include most Hispanics), the number of homicide perpetrators is up 3% for 14-17 year-olds, down -2% for 18-24 year-olds, and up 6% for 25+. The federal government carefully breaks out Hispanic data for almost everything except crime statistics, which makes non-black crime numbers hard to interpret. My guess would be that the homicide rate for whites/Hispanics is falling because the number of whites/Hispanics is growing rapidly due to Hispanic growth. Unfortunately, we can't use federal figures to break down white versus Hispanic crime trends, but I would guess that crime rate trends are pretty quiet among both whites and Hispanics in this decade.
Here in LA, there was a spike in Hispanic gang murders after Villaraigosa was elected mayor in 2005, but the LAPD remains in the capable hands of William Bratton, and that has faded out.
My assumption is that technological trends, especially the spread of cellphones and cellphone cameras, has made crime a riskier business, so crime rates should be dropping all else being equal.
When I debated economist Steven Levitt over crime in Slate in 1999, he asked me what my prediction for future crime trends was: I replied that I figured that black teens are currently benefiting from the example of their many older brothers and cousins whom the crack wars left in jail, wheelchairs, or cemeteries, but that eventually a new cohort of black teens would come along without direct experience of the horrors of crack wars of 1988-1994, and the homicide rate would go back up again.
Here in LA, there was a spike in Hispanic gang murders after Villaraigosa was elected mayor in 2005, but the LAPD remains in the capable hands of William Bratton, and that has faded out.
My assumption is that technological trends, especially the spread of cellphones and cellphone cameras, has made crime a riskier business, so crime rates should be dropping all else being equal.
When I debated economist Steven Levitt over crime in Slate in 1999, he asked me what my prediction for future crime trends was: I replied that I figured that black teens are currently benefiting from the example of their many older brothers and cousins whom the crack wars left in jail, wheelchairs, or cemeteries, but that eventually a new cohort of black teens would come along without direct experience of the horrors of crack wars of 1988-1994, and the homicide rate would go back up again.
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
Posts
52 comments:
"My assumption is that technological trends, especially the spread of cellphones and cellphone cameras, has made crime a riskier business, so crime rates should be dropping all else being equal."
This has not worked out in Europe where immigrant groups such as Muslim youths use Cell Phones to instantaneously gather and intimidate when any one of them are apprehended by police. They also quickly create roving groups which viciously attack Europeans who resist cajoling or insults by Muslims in public places and transportation.
Black syndicates in South Africa are also successfully using mobile technology in their relentless murder campaign against white farmers and Afrikaner city dwellers.
Your whole theory about the crack wars is questionable. It's not like violence or crack stopped after 1995, it just reduced somewhat. I can assure you that all young black men in inner city ghettos anytime in last 50 years have known people who were killed in drug and gang related street violence. Certainly the current group of criminals did not grow up in some violence free post 1995 utopia or anything remotely along those lines.
It's all about the police on the street and the ability to put people in jail, but not so much cell phones, etc.
When youth crime peaked in the early '90s police presence was nothing like it is today. I can clearly remember people openly selling drugs on the street with almost no worry of getting busted. Suddenly, in the mid '90s, cops seemed to be everywhere. The '94 crime bill really worked.
After the recession of the early '90s ended and the shift of resources from defense occurred, there was enough to pay for more incarceration and law enforcement. That's no longer the case, so it makes sense that crime rates are increasing.
One thing many Americans don't understand is how much of a police state the US really is. I had a friend visit from Beijing the other day, and he was shocked by how many policemen he saw on the road. In other parts of the world, police have a lower profile, and far fewer people are in prison. This is very expensive, but it works.
The homicide and general "violent crime" rate began declining in 1993, long before cell phones were common. In 1995's *Clueless*, a running joke is that everyone in super-rich Beverly Hills has cell phones, unlike on Main Street. Same for 1996's *Scream* -- the police chief grills a guy about why he has a "cellular phone," as though it were highly unusual, something only a drug dealer would have.
All crimes against children have declined too, starting also around 1992. And these are usually out-of-sight crimes, so cell phones couldn't have helped much here either.
The rise and fall of crime rates is probably more like the rise and fall of a predator population that relies on prey, or of a parasite population that feeds off of hosts.
The homicide rate peaked in 1933, then declined until 1958. It rises until about 1983 and stays high until 1993. It looks like 25 years up or down. So the homicide rate will hit bottom around 2018, then tick up again. The 2020s and '30s are going to be a real mess.
Of course, it'll be even worse than the 1960s and '70s because there's going to be a much larger NAM population 20 years from now, absolutely and in percents.
Maybe we should invest national funds to just relocate everyone when a crime wave is about to hit, just like we'd move them away from a tornado or plague. We'll meet the SWPL crowd halfway and all move to Canada.
Re: black teens without direct experience of the crack wars - similar to how there's a new generation of gay men without direct experience of the AIDS epidemic of the 80's, making all the same mistakes.
Wow. You predicted that the crime rate would eventually go up, rather than declining forever? What a genius!
Seriously, you have made some good predictions, but this one is pretty lame.
You seem to be implying that murder rates are a function of drugs rather than the three true correlates - race, age, sex. Threse three factors combine for quite reliable predictions.
I boldly predict that in this coming year young black men will cause more death and mayhem than elderly, female asians.
I remember the day I went back to Washington DC about thirty years ago. The radio was broadcasting an interview with the Chief of Police. He was asked about street violence and drugs. He said that as a matter of fact they had beaten drugs. The kids didn't kill for drugs anymore. They were killing for clothes now.
"In other parts of the world, police have a lower profile, and far fewer people are in prison. This is very expensive, but it works."
Now what could places like China(and Japan, South Korea or Iceland) have in common? I can't imagine what...Policing NAMs ain't cheap!
"In other parts of the world, police have a lower profile, and far fewer people are in prison. This is very expensive, but it works."
Now what could places like China(and Japan, South Korea or Iceland) have in common? I can't imagine what...Policing NAMs ain't cheap!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081229/ap_on_re_us/black_homicides
Best part of the article:
"Seizing on President-elect Barack Obama's incoming administration as an opportunity for more funding, Fox added: "There is an urgency for reinvestment in children and families. In essence, we need a bailout for kids at risk."
Obama will be the nation's first black president.
The study partly blamed Bush administration grant cuts to local police and juvenile crime prevention programs for the surge in crimes by young black men and teens."
Essentially: More money will need to be spent, lots more. Obama is the 1st black President. The crime increase is Bush's fault.
Like I said, policing (and caring) for NAMs ain't cheap! And Bush is the best thing that has ever happened to liberals, ever. Economic crisis? Bush's fault. Crime? Bush's fault. That guy will be their whipping boy for decades.
I'll say this: A disaster of massive fucking size is unfolding that will probably destroy this nation. Everyone had better prepare themselves...
One thing many Americans don't understand is how much of a police state the US really is. I had a friend visit from Beijing the other day, and he was shocked by how many policemen he saw on the road. In other parts of the world, police have a lower profile, and far fewer people are in prison. This is very expensive, but it works.
I live in Costa Rica and the police are hardly ever seen outside downtown San Jose and some
popular tourist areas. Most of us are basically on our own and thus have elaborate security measures. Good news is that short-barrelled
("sawed-off") shotguns are legal and easy to obtain.
Bill--
That's laughable in all regards.
First, China has the most police, with the most visible presence, including military. I was in Beijing and Shanghai, and can attest to the heavy police presence including police armed with AK-47's at most major intersections, around Tiananmen Square, in various tourist areas, and particularly around both Tsinghua and Beijing University.
Second, US defense spending has been at historic lows since Reagan, and Clinton's spending in police was fairly minimal. What money did go to local places ended up in Midnight basketball or newer weapons and vests. The increase in policing rather than an increase in spending and sworn police officers made the difference. Rudy and other mayors who devoted political capital on cracking down on "minor" criminals who were also major ones, and the ability to keep people in jail for extended periods, led to dropping crime rates.
Finally, and this is directed at Steve, Bratton is a total failure. The inability to stand up the Naji Ali or Mack Brown in the various outcries of the shooting deaths of various gang bangers has led the LAPD to "drive and wave." South Central is a boiling cauldron of gang violence, though the local media with the sometimes exception of the LA Weekly do not cover it much. What has not happened so far is the explosion of violence Westward into places like West LA, Santa Monica, and Beverly Hills.
If anything, the US is under-policed compared to European and Asian norms, but we have in many areas finally spent political capital in enforcement and incarceration, though it's spotty at best.
Has the rate of prison construction changed during this time?
What has improved is the forensic ability of police to gather information at the crime scene. Most crimes of passion are now solved. What makes the black youth violence tougher to solve is that it is almost random in nature.
Steve wrote:
"My assumption is that technological trends, especially the spread of cellphones and cellphone cameras, has made crime a riskier business, so crime rates should be dropping all else being equal."
Steve,
Ive been telling people for the past couple of years that the Intersection Cameras (EVERYWHERE WHERE I LIVE NOW), and store security cameras (every convieniece store and gas station has them, along with Wal-Mart, Strip Malls, etc.) make it very very hard for you to drive into and out of town "unnoticed" if you ever became a suspect in a crime.
If you run a red light where I live, the cameras take your car-tag's picture, literally placing you at a certain place at a certain time. You buy gas with a debit/credit card, you are placed. You walk into a gas station and buy gas, your image is on the tape in all your glory. Stop to buy liquor, you are on their camera. Many resturaunts and strip malls also have security cameras that they keep for a time before recording over the information. Add the ubiquity of cell phones, and cell phone cameras, more police and reduced 911 response times, and its harder than ever to "get away" with a felony in cities and bedroom communities. Gated communities have even better security still. Low-IQ people are going to have a harder time than ever trying to make it with a life of petty crime.
m
The same violent, uninhibited killer instincts that make black men so prized by football and basketball coaches also makes them so prone to brutal crime and other sociopathic behavior in society. I just know from work experience that you don't annoy a black guy, because if he explodes the retaliation will be very painful. He may go to jail, but you might lose your eyes, your ears, or your head. And it's better to keep your appendages than to risk a confrontation.
I once had to call security on an unruly average sized black patient at the hospital, and two 6'+ 250+ pound white guys showed up with guns in hand, who ten minutes later were quaking in their boots. They begged me to give this guy the narcotics he craved.
Crack cocaine has little to do with it. I mean I'm sure it makes this worse (as in this case), but the root cause of the problem is purely biological.
testing99 said...
Bill--
That's laughable in all regards.
First, China has the most police, with the most visible presence, including military. I was in Beijing and Shanghai, and can attest to the heavy police presence including police armed with AK-47's at most major intersections, around Tiananmen Square, in various tourist areas, and particularly around both Tsinghua and Beijing University.
When were you there? And where were you besides tourist areas, Qinghua and Beida?
The only parts of Beijing with heavy police presence are the embassy rows and the Capitol. You see Bao An all over the place but they're not real cops (more like security guards) and have no real authority (over people with a hukou anyway). In the laobaixing (common people) neighborhoods you just don't see many cops.
As far as the AKs, I never saw anything like that, except when Clinton came to visit. Cops were more visible and heavily armed in Hong Kong, but maybe times have changed.
Testing99,
I've lived in China on several occasions and have spent a great deal of time not only in Beijing and Shanghai, but in many other second tier cities (remember, a second tier city in China is likely to have 3-4 million residents). It's absolutely false that most major intersections in Beijing or Shanghai have a heavy police presence. Do you realize how many major intersections you're talking about? Your average US suburb has a more visible police presence than any Chinese city. Of course, I'm not arguing that the Chinese couldn't summon the force necessary to deal with whatever they felt needed dealing with, but there is absolutely no overt heavy handed presence. You can walk the streets of any street in any city in China at any hour of the night and feel safer than you would in any midsize US city (take Madison, WI, for example). Petty street crime does happen, but the kind of scattershot violence one finds routinely in US cities is unheard of there.
It's likely cultural. Google "Lauren London Thugs" to see what both Black women are saying about the preference for men (in terms of violent aggression) and what Black Male professional bloggers say about it in response.
Bottom line, Black professional men write that they are considered "edgy" by White or Asian women for glaring at a waiter during a date if spills something, Black women expect actual physical thuggery.
If this is widespread enough to change behavior, you'd be looking at cultural not biological factors. I think intuitively the cultural explanation makes sense given the short timespans of very different behavior by Black men.
I am in Beijing right now and although haven't been to the major tourist sights but I can report not seeing much police at all.
Our opinion about police presence in major Chinese cities is called "laughable" by one commenter. It shows the false confidence of bad comments.
Just put up a post with a graph on cell phone ownership and crime rates -- looks like cell phones became popular about 5 years too late for them to make a dent in the crime rates.
Post is here
I spent some time in Accra, Ghana a few years ago and found most people there to be polite and unaggressive. Those Ghanaians who don't warm to you simply act in a reserved and distant manner. I encountered no violence around town in the evenings, including visits to nightclubs frequented by locals. Pickpockets do have to be watched out for and I saw a hue-and-cry spring up in pursuit of one such thief.
Reliable crime stats from African countries are almost impossible to come by, but I did see some Interpol figures from the mid-1990s which reported a relatively low Ghanaian homicide rate. This certainly chimes with my own experiences there.
The variation in homicide rates among different African countries is therefore likely to be enormous, and I'd certainly recommend steering clear of places like Nairobi.
Here in England, there appears is a big discrepancy in crime rates between Black Caribbean youths and Black West African youths: the former tending towards much higher levels of violent criminality than the latter. I wrote 'appears' because Home Office figures don't break down crime figures past very broad racial categories like 'black', 'white' and 'Asian' (which in this country refers mainly to people of Pakistani, Indian or Bangladeshi descent). But you get some idea from seeing the perpetrators' names reported in newspapers.
Can biology alone really explain the discrepancies in violence between different sub-Saharan African countries, between different black-majority Caribbean countries, and between Black Caribbeans and Black West Africans in England?
I have not been to China, but I can also testify that elsewhere in east Asia the number of policemen on the street is extremely low, the exception being is some well touristed areas and around important government buildings.
In a 15 minute walk through some of the teeming central city blocks in Vietnam or Thailand I would see at most 1 or 2 policemen. And they will often be small guys, even for Asia, wearing sandels and without a sidearm.
By contrast in any decent Southern California suburban area that is near a NAM population you'll see many patrol cars cruising around, the cops with 9mm semiautomatic pistols on their side and shotguns and body armor in the trunk.
To quantify this, if I took a 15 minute late night walk right now I would probably see about 5 cops and 20 civilians. In the big Asian cities I'd see hundreds of people and 0 to 2 cops, giving a ratio of 50-200 times more visible police in the US v Asia.
Even in white small towns, there are more cops than in Asia to keep the drunks, unruly teenagers, and Oxycotin-selling Levi Johnston types in line.
I am not sure I have ever encountered an unruly Chinese teenager.
I am not sure I have ever encountered an unruly Chinese teenager.
Asian countries still practice corporal punishment.
(same guy in Beijing)
"I am not sure I have ever encountered an unruly Chinese teenager."
There are plenty!
On crime in Accra:
Differences within West Africa area huge. Lagos is very scary. Accra is calm. Differences in East Africa are also dramatic. Addis Ababa is a safe city while Nairobi is horrible. Biology is too overemphasized here.
"Black professional men write that "they are considered "edgy" by White or Asian women for glaring at a waiter during a date if spills something, Black women expect actual physical thuggery."
And the waiters think the only thing they have to worry about with black customers is no tip (no matter how much they work their butts off.) There was a long comments section in a Chicago newspaper on this subject with most people agreeing blacks don't tip, or tip miserably. Some said it was because of bad service. Nonsense. Whites know they can't do that, and I've known too many fine waiters personally, some with black mates, who got stiffed by black customers after doing a perfectly good job. It's a major reason restaurants don't want to open in predominantly black areas. One former waitress remembers a black man (don't know if he was "professional" or not) who had asked for no bacon on his shrimp dish. The waitress got it wrong, man got bacon. Man put his HANDS IN THE SHRIMP, called her a bitch and threw the bacon out. That she would have continued to wait on this "custmer" -- thug, really -- amazed me.
Bill sed:
"In other parts of the world, police have a lower profile, and far fewer people are in prison. "
I think the US is an anomaly in that you have a western-style concept of law and order and lots of Blacks and Latinos who come from cultures where law and order is a by-word. As long as Euros make out the majority in the US incarceration rates will be high, but once that Dem utopia arrives, look for very low incarceration and conviction rates.
In South Africa during Apartheid most murders and rapes (which both carried death sentences) were resolved. In part through a functioning forensics lab in Pretoria. Nowadays (post-Apartheid) murderers operate on avg. for 7 years before going to jail for the first time. I read that only about 5% are convicted. Most rapes go unresolved. That's African style law and order for you.
Enjoy the clean streets in the US while they last.
On the point about cells phones, if the police are called while the crime is ongoing, perps are caught 30% of the time (I forget the citation).
Ian,
I have noticed that many London murders involve blacks killing other blacks with both the perps and the victims being a mixture of Black-British, that is West-Indians and, latterly, Africans, who seem to have bought into the rap/ghetto bullshit.
Check out recent news stories on the spate, nay tidal wave, of London stabbings.
Richard
In Chinese immigrant communities, brutal Tong Wars took many lives. In mainland China during the end of the last empire, banditry and lawlesness flourished. During Mao's Cultural Revolution, young thugs terrorized the country.
I would suspect that crime rates tend to be low because the Communist party has a policy of harshly dealing with crime.
2nd gen Vietnamese-Americans have an incarceration rate equivalent to that of Mexican-Americans, despite being the descendants of a fairly selective wave of migrants. In the UK, a less selective wave Vietnamese migrants have done about as well as our Hmong and ethnic Lao.
It may well be true that there is less violent crime (or crime of any sort) in Asia, but I am not so sure that there are fewer policemen there.
If you DROVE through any major US city for 15 minutes you'd probably see one or more police officers, it's true.
But what if you WALKED through a crowded area of the US? You could easily walk through the central business district of NY or Chicago for 15 minutes without seeing a uniformed police officer. You'd pass thousands of people, but you wouldn't see any police walking the beat.
This is even true of high crime areas. When I lived in NYC in the late 90's I made a few unwitting walking tours of the South Bronx and the seedier areas of Bklyn and did not see any police officers.
"2nd gen Vietnamese-Americans have an incarceration rate equivalent to that of Mexican-Americans"
Can you point us to the data? I haven't seen crime stats that are so broken down.
"2nd gen Vietnamese-Americans have an incarceration rate equivalent to that of Mexican-Americans"
"Can you point us to the data? I haven't seen crime stats that are so broken down."
This UC Irvine study by Ruben Rumbaut from 2006 breaks it down by Ethnic group:
Debunking the Myth of Immigrant
Criminality: Imprisonment Among First- and Second-Generation Young Men
http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=403
They find a 5.6 percent 2nd gen. Vietnamese incarceration rate vs a 5.9 percent 2nd gen. Mexican American one. I don't know about "hispanics" as a whole, but Mexicans are more than 50% of US hispanics so that can't be too far off.
(My alternate title for the piece: "Rebunking the Truth of Children of Immigrant Criminality".... gee whiz I wonder wonder why they didn't pick that title when it describes the results just as well?)
Apologies to those that have seen me reference this study for the 20th time.
But what if you WALKED through a crowded area of the US? You could easily walk through the central business district of NY or Chicago for 15 minutes without seeing a uniformed police officer. You'd pass thousands of people, but you wouldn't see any police walking the beat.
-Anon
Trust me, it's different. You really don't see cops in China very often at all. When you do, it's kind of a big deal. I doubt the thing about not seeing cops in NY or Chicago business districts. We are so accustomed to cops in America that we take their presence for granted and often don't even notice them.
Testing99 must have been inhaling the bad air a little too deeply when he was in Beijing.
"The waitress got it wrong, man got bacon. Man put his HANDS IN THE SHRIMP, called her a bitch and threw the bacon out. That she would have continued to wait on this "custmer" -- thug, really -- amazed me."
You assume 'thug' I assume 'muslim'; You say tomato...
Many 'white' muslims would have taken great offense to having their dinner bespoiled by having the remains of a 'disgusting', 'unclean' animal brought to the table, it's all a matter of perspective.
You could easily walk through the central business district of NY or Chicago for 15 minutes without seeing a uniformed police officer. You'd pass thousands of people, but you wouldn't see any police walking the beat.
WTF? Cops are everywhere in Manhattan.
Truth said...
You assume 'thug' I assume 'muslim'; You say tomato...
Many 'white' muslims would have taken great offense to having their dinner bespoiled by having the remains of a 'disgusting', 'unclean' animal brought to the table, it's all a matter of perspective.
Muslims don't eat shrimp, either, so I doubt that was the issue.
Rude behavior in restaurants is unfortunately all too typical among this demographic. They don't tip, either. I'm not sure why restaurants are so often seen as appropriate venues for taking out one's aggression, but it may have something to do with their being so frequently portrayed as a symbol of racism (due to previous segregation).
Check out recent news stories on the spate, nay tidal wave, of London stabbings.
Its hard to tease out the details of these crimes in the British MSM. They are often ascribed merely to 'youths'. Also these days we hear a lot about 'knife crime' as if it were the knives themselves that went out doing the stabbing rather than the people wielding them. Generally the racial dynamics of these stabbings are left somewhat obscure. Usually black-on-black sometimes black-on-white (very much downplayed in those cases).
Probably every news editor in Britain prays nightly to wake up the next day and hear that a gang of white youths has knifed a black kid. Then the MSM can swing into action with righteous fury. Alas their prayers have not yet been answered.
There was one like that, but it was 1993. There have been other white-on-black killings but that one is the media touchstone and it most resembles the current spate of stabbings. The Stephen Lawrence case continues to get quite an airing over here. Just do a search on the name.
One would think people would wonder why one murder from 15 years ago apparently shows the unremitting racism of white youths and the British police while recent regular stabbings dont say anything about blacks as a group. But thats not up for public discussion.
The recent cases of Martin Dinnegan and Jimmy Mizen got a lot of media coverage though. They were white kids who were murdered by blacks.
There was major media coverage of Kriss Donald, a white Glaswegian boy who was murdered by Asian youths.
Major coverage too of the case of Tom ap Rhys Pryce, a 31-year-old Welsh-born solicitor murdered by two black teenagers. Ditto for Richard Whelan, stabbed to death by a black lunatic on the top deck of a London bus.
About a decade ago there was definitely a bias among important sections of the media, notably the BBC, to report white-on-black killings more thoroughly than black-on-white killings.
But the examples above show that is on the wane. Privately-owned print media is generally much less politically-correct than the BBC too.
Lumping together the Daily Express, the Guardian, the Sun and the BBC into one monolithic 'MSM' is a convenient rhetorical trick but it doesn't explain or predict much.
You wouldn't hear so much about Stephen Lawrence if certain corrupt Eltham CID officers hadn't been doing favours for villains, trying to get their sons off the hook by 'losing' important evidence. On top of that, there was the much-heat-but-little-light generated by the Macpherson Report smokescreen, and the Metropolitan Police's own political stage-managing of many aspects of the case.
Truth,
You've got it totally wrong re. 'hand in the shrimp'.
Any self-respecting muslim would simply have declined the dish as 'contamniated' and WOULD NOT eat it even if the bacon has been pulled out.In their way of thinking pork is like radioactive contamination of everything it touches.
Similarly, a good muslim would never but never eat in a non-muslim restaurant.Just the act of cooking food in the same pans as pork is regarded as a contamination - that's why i have zero sympathy for the thug - he just wants to make a big show of being a 'muslim' (like many blacks), without really undestanding the faith he professes.
"Any self-respecting muslim would simply have declined the dish as 'contamniated' and WOULD NOT eat it even if the bacon has been pulled out."
Your'e right, any self respecting ANYTHING would have behaved in a (manner similar to what you describe, but I don't feel that a lack of self respect is a trait unique to black people. As a matter of fact, I'm fairly sure that it isn't.
The poster who made this comment described the man in question as a "thug". I was always told that the word thug deals with criminal behavior which was not exhibited in this situation. Does a man's rudeness at a waitress brand him a "thug", or does a black man's rudeness at a waitress brand him a thug? That is one to ponder.
I took the criteria given at face value and came up with the logical assertion that the man got angry because it conflicted with his religious beliefs. That does not make what he did "positive", nor does it make him the water carrier for the entire black "race."
As far as one not understanding the faith he professes, how many (white) Christians do you know who have abstained from pre-marital sex, have refrain from passing judgement, always tell the truth, and tithe 10% of their income?
I took the criteria given at face value and came up with the logical assertion that the man got angry because it conflicted with his religious beliefs.
-Truth
Didn't you read my comment? Shrimp is a point of huge contention in Islam. There exists a big shrimp debate concerning whether shrimp is halal. If this guy was ordering shrimp, he must not be overly concerned about Islamic dietary laws.
Shrimp is generally considered to be makrooh, which means it is not explicitly forbidden but is still suspect. Same as taking a leak while facing the sun.
My guess is that it used to be considered strictly haram, but shrimp is so tasty and popular that exceptions were made.
Yes Sir:
I read your comment and I was vaguely aware that shrimp is considered a 'bottom feeder' in Islam, along with pork, as it is in Orthodox Judaism and Christianity. However, I don't think muslims who do not get deep into the Koran would know this, all muslims however are aware that pork is forbidden.
I do not even know for certain that the gentleman in question was a Muslim, but putting peices of the story together, this is what I come up with.
The bottom line here I feel is that had this waitress experienced rude treatment from a white patron, it is doubtful that she would have anointed this patron as the flag bearer for all whites, it was all to easy for her, and it term, you to anoint this person as the flag bearer for all blacks. I'm sure that you and the waitress have, a least once in your respective lives met a kind, personable black person and had you CHOSEN to, you could have elevated him/her to flag bearer status, you chose to ignore this one time and instead, focus upon the behavior of this 'thug'.
Judge not lest ye be judged.
The bottom line here I feel is that had this waitress experienced rude treatment from a white patron, it is doubtful that she would have anointed this patron as the flag bearer for all whites, it was all to easy for her, and it term, you to anoint this person as the flag bearer for all blacks.
-Truth
Actually, I get along with black people just fine most of the time. At least as well as whites, and often better. Here in Seattle black people are generally friendlier and more open than the white residents, who avoid interacting with strangers.
However, I have witnessed the restaurant phenomenon. Black people have a thing about being mean in restaurants. My assumption is that it has something to do with a perception of white restaurants as racist, because they used to be segregated a half century or so ago.
Have no idea if the black man who threw the back topping at the waitress out was a Muslim. In any case, a sincere convert practitioner (converts are usually more aware of the essence of a religion than are those born and raised in it) of that religion would politely send it away. However, as some note, shrimp is not eaten by muslims.
Tis non-tipping thing is also inflicted on black waiters and black owned restauranteurs. Maybe the idea of restaurants being segregated at one time has something to do with it, but that "demographic" has a very low rate of charity in general. They are not the ones sending millions to Africa or adopting African orphans. People who do not feel totally responsible for themselves -- even when they make way above the average per annum --do not feel responsible for other people. How can they? When someone defines himself as a victim when the victimization is largely illusory, then I don't trust his sense of being "discriminated against" in a freakin' restaurant. Everybody feels slighted from time to time. Women used to feel slighted in fine restaurants if they were dining alone.
Now that we have a black/white president, can we all just be expect obey the rules of civility in restaurants and other public places or else keep out of them?
The bottom line here I feel is that had this waitress experienced rude treatment from a white patron, it is doubtful that she would have anointed this patron as the flag bearer for all whites.."
The bacon thrower was not "flag bearer." He was comic relief by comparison with some of the examples. In any case, we are talking statistics and expectations.
You pretend not to get it, perhaps because the true truth is too distasteful. It can be like that for any ethnic group when they hear of stereotypical white behavior that is not flattering.
The whole point of the comment string (all of which I'd heard before) is that STATISTICALLY such behavior is common to almost expected (the bacon thrower was extreme, but STATISTICALLY not likely to be white; or Asian. Could he have been. Well, duh. I'm sure something like it has happened. But just, shall we say, less expected in some unadmitted way.
Some of the commenters were black as were some of the waiters who commented. Both blacks and whites agreed that blacks were poor tippers (though one poor guy said he always tipped extra well because he was balck and felt so bad about there stereotype.)
I don't like hearing that women tend to be poor tippers -- they are average tippers, but not usually extra-generous -- but it seems to be the case. I always tip extra, and my friend tips ridiculously high because she resents that stereotype.
I don't like hearing that women tend to be poor tippers -- they are average tippers, but not usually extra-generous -- but it seems to be the case. I always tip extra, and my friend tips ridiculously high because she resents that stereotype.
-Rael
I tip the standard pretty much every time, unless I get exceptionally good or bad service, and then I adjust accordingly.
However, I am against tipping on principle. When I was a kid, I used to work in service as a courier, which is a dangerous job that almost got me killed. I was very fast, courteous, and never lost or damaged a package. I was paid a very low wage, yet I never got more than a few tips, and those all came from women who tipped me for sport.
If I ran a restaurant, I would institute a no-tip policy, but all waiters/waitresses would receive a 17.5% commission on their sales in addition to the base wage. Under this setup, the more food and drinks they sold the more they'd make, and they couldn't be stiffed. That would work out well for everyone.
rael said
Now that we have a black/white president, can we all just be expect obey the rules of civility in restaurants and other public places or else keep out of them?
Can't we all just get along?
The diversity has proved, time and again, that the answer is no.
The solution used to be segregation. That was struck down (except in the better yeshivas). Now long and strong prison sentences are keeping something of a lid on things. Those are under attack.
"However, I have witnessed the restaurant phenomenon. Black people have a thing about being mean in restaurants."
I think it's great that you are get along with people different than you. I tend to do the same.
I was a waiter for about 7 years of my life, in college and beyond, let me tell you; generally speaking, blacks tip less than whites. I would say that this is true, and I politely told a few black people about this and they did not seem to know that they were expected to double the tax for a tip.
As far as being rude, that is a problem in the greater African-American society, not just with restaurants. I have not noticed this in blacks born outside of the US, have you?
I think the bottom line is that if you are a waiter and you go to the table with the attitude that someone is going to be rude, not tip, there is a good chance that they will pick up upon it and do just that. People tend to be perceptive.
A restaurant manager I had (black) gave a waitress (white) the best advice on this I have heard he said, and I paraphrase:
"Understand that your salary for working here is $2.10 per hour; anything else you receive is a bonus."
Truth wrote:
A restaurant manager I had (black) gave a waitress (white) the best advice on this I have heard he said, and I paraphrase:
"Understand that your salary for working here is $2.10 per hour; anything else you receive is a bonus."
I'm suprised to hear that coming from someone who once worked in the waiting profession, but it's a-hole legalism. The wages of wait-staff are probably adjusted downwards because of tipping, so tipping them is basically part of how they get paid. The tradition of tipping probably never should have started, but so long as it exists wait-staff have every right to expect tips, even if they can't demand them.
"I was paid a very low wage, yet I never got more than a few tips, and those all came from women who tipped me for sport."
For sport? well, better a thumbs up than down. I wonder how UPS & Fedex guys do. I mean their packages are usually more eagerly anticipated than office papers.
I too am against tipping. Other countries managed to get decent wait staff without expecting tips until tourists spoiled them.
"but so long as it exists wait-staff have every right to expect tips, even if they can't demand them."
But that's just it, waiters do expect tips, and the can't demand them. Therefore, one's best, most logical strategy is to do his best job on every table no matter what the client looks like, and hope to make it up in the agregate.
Post a Comment