Some creature called Darryl Lynn Hughley or better known as DL Hughley, went on a rant this week regarding President Trump's 90-day immigration ban. This diatribe, while only three minutes in length, was all over the place and all those places were not good places.
Hughley doesn't hide his leftist leanings. He's ultra liberal and very critical of the right and white community. At the same time he's had his run in with his own ilk, so it's not like he's afraid to speak his mind regardless of how wrong or out of touch that mind may be.
Here was something I found astonishing:
Now let's start out light. Assault weapons? What are assault weapons? How many white dudes who commit crime are doing so with “assault weapons”? Now, what about his claim about white dudes being dangerous along with said assault weapons? Notice how he follows that up with the talk of banning assault weapons but leaves out banning white guys? It would seem fair enough once is an inanimate object while one is a human being.
However, that's not the case because the very next sentence he points out banning Muslims doesn't make sense because they in Hughley's opinion are not the problem. Interesting he uses the word “thing” to describe the white man and the gun but doesn't include the white guy in his BAN DESPITE said white man being the most dangerous. Come on.
And yeah, reading the Koran can lead to suicide bombing. It does nothing for your argument when rational people hear this. Reading the Koran is like pointing out that someone reading Mein Kampf doesn't make them a threat. Of course it doesn't but in the wrong hands; that book and almost every religious book written 2k years ago can lead to things like.... Crusades. 9-11. Burning women as witches or stoning women in 2017 for being raped.
Just one minute later he doubles down:
It's obvious DL Hughley is triggered here. But does that make him racist? I don't take the glee in making those distinctions. He is, however, a race baiter. A sensationalist in the mold of an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. All bark with no bite (spoiler alert). All hysteria with no logic. A race hustling pimp. His illogical - partisan race baiting is so pronounced it would make Emanuel (reparations) Cleaver of the Congressional Black Caucus fame weak at the knees.
This is the same man who doesn't think Black on Black crime exists. No, he really thinks that. Despite places like Chicago, Baltimore, LA, NY... where the victims and offenders are almost exclusively Black; it doesn't exist.
Now it's obvious DL Hughley isn't a deep thinker. He sees an FBI report, looks at some numbers and viola, there are more white people killing white people than black killing black people. That would be a valid point say if you lived in Flatland, where everything was in a two-dimensional reality. However, we live in a complex space and biology is rooted in mathematics. Just simple per capita data points out DL Hughley flaws.
77.35% of the US population as of 2014 identified themselves as White (including Hispanics who identify as White) or 246 million.
13.3% in America are identified as Black or African American.
Whites in this country are 6x the population of Blacks. So, for Whites to kill more than Blacks would not only make sense but it would be expected. And the numbers bear that. Whites do commit more murders than Blacks, barley but they do. Now if we are talking about the most “dangerous thing in America” there is nothing on two legs more dangerous than a Black person. More specifically a young Black male. Because of, Blacks, despite being only 13% of the population commit 52% of all homicides and 59% of all felony murders on record from 1980-2008 according to the FBI as you can see below.
A piece written by the Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley a few years back came out with these nuggets…
There are also these bombshells from Edwin S. Rubenstein, M.A., New Century Foundation (courtesy of the American Renaissance)
No reason to pile on, the case is pretty clear. Black folks, particularly young black men who might make up, what 2-55 of the population... are unequivocally more dangerous than a white man despite an attitude or any weapon he might have. He can denounce and ignore “black on black crime” as not being real but the truth of the matter is it's pure evasion on his part and others like him because when you look at the data it's black and white (pardon that glorious pun).
Now let me make an interesting analogy.
If Black folks commit such an exorbitant amount of violent crime despite such small numbers could it be reasonable for people to be leery of that demographic? Is it racist for police to be more cautious or leery of young Black males? Can you really blame someone from crossing the street at night to avoid crossing paths with said young Black men? It doesn't take a mathematician to figure this out, it just takes access to the local or national news.
I said earlier there is nothing on two legs more dangerous than a Black person. More specifically 2-5% of the population or aka young Black males. You care to guess what's “the most dangerous thing in America” on four legs?
Pit bulls make up only 6% of the dog population, but they're responsible for 68% of dog attacks and 52% of dog-related deaths since 1982, according to research compiled by Merritt Clifton, editor of Animals 24-7, an animal-news organization that focuses on humane work and animal-cruelty prevention.
This was a piece from Time magazine in 2014.
The correlation with Pit bulls and young black males is almost dead on and both highly disproportionate to their numbers of the US population in both dogs and people. There are people that will make the case that Pit bulls are only dangerous because they have bad owners. Pit bulls are good dogs in the right hands. Just like people on the left make excuses for the problems in inner cities with young Black males DESPITE the fact that before the 60’s under harsh conditions the Black community never had these problems. Remember, that was the days of the two parent household still - the Left has no time for that. Now, I know what you're thinking…. HE’S CALLING BLACK MEN DOGS.
That’s not it at all. I'm making the case that if you're going to go off hinge because you didn't like the election results and are triggered (still) then there is someone out there, despite being a nobody in terms of audience and notoriety is still going to take the time and check your ass. Because, I don't like being called dangerous without any empirical evidence to back it up; no more than does Darryl Lynn want to be compared to an animal that is bred to fight/maim/kill. Meanwhile, it was announced this week the gangs of Chicago want to meet with President Trump, while Darryl Lynn continues his SJW crusade fueled by false narratives and racial diatribes. This what it feels like to be winning again… 14 days and counting.
Posted by Joe Fletcher at 8:03 AM
Hughley doesn't hide his leftist leanings. He's ultra liberal and very critical of the right and white community. At the same time he's had his run in with his own ilk, so it's not like he's afraid to speak his mind regardless of how wrong or out of touch that mind may be.
Here was something I found astonishing:
Now let's start out light. Assault weapons? What are assault weapons? How many white dudes who commit crime are doing so with “assault weapons”? Now, what about his claim about white dudes being dangerous along with said assault weapons? Notice how he follows that up with the talk of banning assault weapons but leaves out banning white guys? It would seem fair enough once is an inanimate object while one is a human being.
However, that's not the case because the very next sentence he points out banning Muslims doesn't make sense because they in Hughley's opinion are not the problem. Interesting he uses the word “thing” to describe the white man and the gun but doesn't include the white guy in his BAN DESPITE said white man being the most dangerous. Come on.
And yeah, reading the Koran can lead to suicide bombing. It does nothing for your argument when rational people hear this. Reading the Koran is like pointing out that someone reading Mein Kampf doesn't make them a threat. Of course it doesn't but in the wrong hands; that book and almost every religious book written 2k years ago can lead to things like.... Crusades. 9-11. Burning women as witches or stoning women in 2017 for being raped.
Just one minute later he doubles down:
It's obvious DL Hughley is triggered here. But does that make him racist? I don't take the glee in making those distinctions. He is, however, a race baiter. A sensationalist in the mold of an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. All bark with no bite (spoiler alert). All hysteria with no logic. A race hustling pimp. His illogical - partisan race baiting is so pronounced it would make Emanuel (reparations) Cleaver of the Congressional Black Caucus fame weak at the knees.
This is the same man who doesn't think Black on Black crime exists. No, he really thinks that. Despite places like Chicago, Baltimore, LA, NY... where the victims and offenders are almost exclusively Black; it doesn't exist.
Now it's obvious DL Hughley isn't a deep thinker. He sees an FBI report, looks at some numbers and viola, there are more white people killing white people than black killing black people. That would be a valid point say if you lived in Flatland, where everything was in a two-dimensional reality. However, we live in a complex space and biology is rooted in mathematics. Just simple per capita data points out DL Hughley flaws.
77.35% of the US population as of 2014 identified themselves as White (including Hispanics who identify as White) or 246 million.
13.3% in America are identified as Black or African American.
Whites in this country are 6x the population of Blacks. So, for Whites to kill more than Blacks would not only make sense but it would be expected. And the numbers bear that. Whites do commit more murders than Blacks, barley but they do. Now if we are talking about the most “dangerous thing in America” there is nothing on two legs more dangerous than a Black person. More specifically a young Black male. Because of, Blacks, despite being only 13% of the population commit 52% of all homicides and 59% of all felony murders on record from 1980-2008 according to the FBI as you can see below.
A piece written by the Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley a few years back came out with these nuggets…
- Blacks commit violent crimes at 7 to 10 times the rate that whites do
- Black crime rates were lower in the 1940s and 1950s when black poverty was higher" and "racial discrimination was rampant and legal
There are also these bombshells from Edwin S. Rubenstein, M.A., New Century Foundation (courtesy of the American Renaissance)
- There are dramatic race differences in crime rates. Asians have the lowest rates, followed by whites, and then Hispanics. Blacks have notably high crime rates. This pattern holds true for virtually all crime categories and for virtually all age groups.
- In 2013, a black was six times more likely than a non-black to commit murder, and 12 times more likely to murder someone of another race than to be murdered by someone of another race.
- In 2013, of the approximately 660,000 crimes of interracial violence that involved blacks and whites, blacks were the perpetrators 85 percent of the time. This meant a black person was 27 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa. A Hispanic was eight times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa.
- In 2014 in New York City, a black was 31 times more likely than a white to be arrested for murder, and a Hispanic was 12.4 times more likely. For the crime of “shooting” — defined as firing a bullet that hits someone — a black was 98.4 times more likely than a white to be arrested, and a Hispanic was 23.6 times more likely.
- If New York City were all white, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent.
- In an all-white Chicago, murder would decline 90 percent, rape by 81 percent, and robbery by 90 percent.
- In 2015, a black person was 2.45 times more likely than a white person to be shot and killed by the police. A Hispanic person was 1.21 times more likely. These figures are well within what would be expected given race differences in crime rates and likelihood to resist arrest.
- In 2015, police killings of blacks accounted for approximately 4 percent of homicides of blacks. Police killings of unarmed blacks accounted for approximately 0.6 percent of homicides of blacks. The overwhelming majority of black homicide victims (93 percent from 1980 to 2008) were killed by blacks.
- Both violent and non-violent crime has been declining in the United States since a high in 1993. 2015 saw a disturbing rise in murder in major American cities that some observers associated with “depolicing” in response to intense media and public scrutiny of police activity.
No reason to pile on, the case is pretty clear. Black folks, particularly young black men who might make up, what 2-55 of the population... are unequivocally more dangerous than a white man despite an attitude or any weapon he might have. He can denounce and ignore “black on black crime” as not being real but the truth of the matter is it's pure evasion on his part and others like him because when you look at the data it's black and white (pardon that glorious pun).
Now let me make an interesting analogy.
If Black folks commit such an exorbitant amount of violent crime despite such small numbers could it be reasonable for people to be leery of that demographic? Is it racist for police to be more cautious or leery of young Black males? Can you really blame someone from crossing the street at night to avoid crossing paths with said young Black men? It doesn't take a mathematician to figure this out, it just takes access to the local or national news.
I said earlier there is nothing on two legs more dangerous than a Black person. More specifically 2-5% of the population or aka young Black males. You care to guess what's “the most dangerous thing in America” on four legs?
Pit bulls
Pit bulls make up only 6% of the dog population, but they're responsible for 68% of dog attacks and 52% of dog-related deaths since 1982, according to research compiled by Merritt Clifton, editor of Animals 24-7, an animal-news organization that focuses on humane work and animal-cruelty prevention.
This was a piece from Time magazine in 2014.
The correlation with Pit bulls and young black males is almost dead on and both highly disproportionate to their numbers of the US population in both dogs and people. There are people that will make the case that Pit bulls are only dangerous because they have bad owners. Pit bulls are good dogs in the right hands. Just like people on the left make excuses for the problems in inner cities with young Black males DESPITE the fact that before the 60’s under harsh conditions the Black community never had these problems. Remember, that was the days of the two parent household still - the Left has no time for that. Now, I know what you're thinking…. HE’S CALLING BLACK MEN DOGS.
That’s not it at all. I'm making the case that if you're going to go off hinge because you didn't like the election results and are triggered (still) then there is someone out there, despite being a nobody in terms of audience and notoriety is still going to take the time and check your ass. Because, I don't like being called dangerous without any empirical evidence to back it up; no more than does Darryl Lynn want to be compared to an animal that is bred to fight/maim/kill. Meanwhile, it was announced this week the gangs of Chicago want to meet with President Trump, while Darryl Lynn continues his SJW crusade fueled by false narratives and racial diatribes. This what it feels like to be winning again… 14 days and counting.
Posted by Joe Fletcher at 8:03 AM
ointer:
