Diary

All Lives Do Matter and There Is No Need For An Apology

At a recent gathering of liberal miscreants, Martin O’Malley was shouted down by members of an even greater group of miscreants- blacklivesmatter- while he said “all lives matter.”  He later apologized for his statement.  This stems from a culture of victimization within the African-American community perpetuated by the race industry and their liberal enablers.  Martin O’Malley can count himself among the enablers.  They perpetuate the belief that the criminal justice system is inherently biased against blacks.

It is always easier to point the finger and assign blame than it is to accept responsibility for the problems that plague one’s community.  But there is one simple fact: black incarceration rates are a function of black crime.  From 1976 to 2005, blacks committed more than half the murders in the United States.  They account for greater than 35% of all violent rimes committed in a country where they represent 13.2% of the population.  When the statistics on black crime are presented to the race industry/enablers, they suggest or claim it is bias on the part of the decision-makers.

But who are the decision makers?  The race industry points their fingers squarely at the police.  But, let’s look at violent crime.  In numerous studies since 1978 it has been proven that the race of an assailant identified by a victim matches almost evenly with the arrest data.  No one- not even Al Sharpton- can explain why victims of crime would be biased in reporting the race of their assailants.  In these cases, the police are doing their job.  If a victim reports a black male around age 20 robbed them, are the police to search for and arrest a white male?  They conveniently move past these facts since facts get in the way of their mindset of denial, but blacks commit crimes at a higher rate than other demographic groups.

Being ignorant, they move up the chain and accuse prosecutors of overcharging blacks and judges of over-sentencing.  If blacks were over-represented in prisons, it had nothing to do with the fact they committed a crime.  Instead, they were the victims of biased and overzealous prosecutors, judges and  juries.  Yet studies have proven the opposite.  One study out of Georgia found that blacks were statistically more likely to receive a more lenient sentence than a white, everything else being equal.  A California study found that the longer sentences for blacks was caused by prior convictions, not their skin color.  A federal study found that blacks had a lower chance of prosecution than whites and a greater chance of being found innocent by a jury.  However, if found guilty, blacks were more likely to receive a prison sentence- an outcome that reflected the gravity of the offense and their criminal record.  These studies have been replicated since in a variety of areas and looking at a variety of crimes.  In short, the race industry remains on that elusive search of the statistical Holy Grail of racial bias in the criminal justice system.

Yet this overwhelming evidence has not deterred the race industry.  Today, law schools dedicate themselves to finding the statistical “gotcha” to prove institutional racism.  Every time they think they have achieved their goal, another study comes along proving the opposite.  Even when they “prove their case,” the differences are so trivial as to be statistically insignificant.  Instead, they are confronted with the numerous studies showing racial disparities in the commission of crimes and in that area and for whatever reason, blacks commit crimes at a greater rate than whites.  Therefore it would logically stand to reason that the arrest rates, prosecution rates, incarceration rates and sentence lengths would be greater than those of whites.

Considering that greater than 50% of prison inmates are drug offenders, the race industry points to the difference in sentences for possession of crack versus powder cocaine.  Although this issue should be addressed, it ignores yet another fact.  In any given year, more traffickers in powder cocaine are arrested, prosecuted and incarcerated than those trafficking in crack cocaine.  From 1996 to 2000, the federal government prosecuted more powder cocaine traffickers than crack traffickers.  And while it may be true that the overwhelming majority of crack traffickers are black, that is a problem intrinsic to the black community.  Commonsense dictates these facts, not racism.  In effect, the crack dealer and scourge of the black community becomes the victim yet again.

A simple fact explodes their “crack is racism” theory.  Possession of 5 grams of crack gets you an automatic 5 year sentence.  Likewise, possession of 5 grams of methamphetamine gets you the same sentence.  Statistics indicate that 54% of meth offenders are white, 39% Hispanic and only 2% black.  Using their faulty logic, are the meth laws then anti-white or anti-Hispanic?  Their logic works like this: crack penalties have a disparate impact on blacks—> disparate impact is racist—>crack penalties are racist.  And the purveyors of the narrative are short-sighted since they are the very ones who railed about the inner-city crack epidemic in decades past.  Instead, an effort to protect the black community from the scourge of crack cocaine was magically transformed into a conspiracy against blacks.  Another inconvenient fact for the race industry: blacks make up 37.5% of the prison population.  Take out the black drug offenders and that number drops to 37%.

Instead, the more important questions that the race industry should be confronting are several.  How many convicts were living in a stable relationship with the mother of their children?  What is the marriage and illegitimacy rate in the black community?  What kind of guidance did or could the convicted give to younger people in their community?  Were they someone that others could look up to?  But the ultimate question remains the same today as it did in decades past: when will the black community take responsibility for the actions of their own members and stop pointing the finger at non-existent institutional racism?  The sooner they take on the necessary soul-searching, the sooner the country will be the better for it.  Because in the end, when you point a finger, there are three more pointing back at you.