Abort all black babies if you want to reduce crime

[C_C]

.....
or so says William Bennett :

------------------------------
Morality maven William Bennett was in holier-than-thou hell yesterday after the White House and just about everybody else blasted him for saying the crime rate could be reduced by aborting "every black baby in this country."

The best-selling author of "The Book of Virtues" insisted he was no racist and refused to apologize.

"I was putting forward a hypothetical proposition," Bennett said on his "Morning in America" radio show.

But the Bush administration quickly distanced itself from the cultural conservative. "The President believes the comments were not appropriate," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

While Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrats demanded that Bennett apologize, NAACP chief Bruce Gordon said he was "personally offended and angry that Bennett felt he could make such a public statement with impunity."

The Rev. Al Sharpton called the conservative's comments "blatantly racist." "He's a man who thinks black and crime are synonymous," he said.

But Bennett was defended by his brother, high-powered Washington lawyer Robert Bennett.

"What I would emphasize is that he called this morally reprehensible," the lawyer told CNN's Wolf Blitzer. "I think it's largely making a mountain out of a molehill."

Responding to a caller on Wednesday's radio program, Bennett said he disagreed with the hypothesis put forward in another best seller, "Freakonomics," that crime goes down as abortions go up.

"But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down," said Bennett.

Bennett, a Republican who opposes abortion, then added that this would be "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down."

"Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything" links the drop in crime to a drop in the number of children born into poverty after Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion. But authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner did not assume that those aborted fetuses would have been black.

"Race is not in any way central to our arguments about abortion and crime," Levitt wrote on his blog yesterday.

The Brooklyn-reared Bennett was education secretary under President Ronald Reagan and the nation's first drug czar under the first President George Bush. A darling of the religious right, Bennett's credentials as moralizer-in-chief were tarnished two years ago when he admitted he had a gambling problem.

Dumb's the word

What William Bennett said:

"But I do know that it’s true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down."

-----------------------

And this guy was the education secretary of the USA.
I dunno if i should laugh or cry at such insane stupidity and racist comments from a guy who was the secretary of education!!
The more i live here, the more i wish we didnt have the USA as our neighbour down south!

[archie mac]

I DISAGREE 100% but I still think people should be allowed to make these sort of comments.

[andyc]

B*****d

[Paid The Umpire]

Hey, this is a good idea. Lets post things that no-one will agree with while trying to get people in trouble for answering!

[Dasa]

Originally Posted by archie mac

I DISAGREE 100% but I still think people should be allowed to make these sort of comments.

Agree with that. You can't stop idiots saying whatever they want..

[Shounak]

I think there's some statistic about more black people being in Prison then in University..

Can anyone confirm or deny?

But I agree with Archie Mac..

[Pratters]

Politics sucks. Any one watch American History X if possible.

[Shounak]

Originally Posted by Pratyush

Politics sucks. Any one watch American History X if possible.

Seen it.. That's the 2nd time you've made reference to that movie.. Must really love it..

Top movie though..

Politics don't suck.. Bigots do.. Sheep even more..

[Pratters]

Originally Posted by shounak

That's the 2nd time you've made reference to that movie.. Must really love it..

Yeah its one of my top 5 movies definitely.

[C_C]

Originally Posted by shounak

I think there's some statistic about more black people being in Prison then in University..

Can anyone confirm or deny?

But I agree with Archie Mac..

I am not sure about the exact stats but percentage-wise there are more black folks in US prisons than white folks and more white folks in college than black folks.

However, what that statistic doesnt take into account is that the US police system is noticably anti-black or anti colored for that matter in some places - i've lived outside Philly for just under a month and once a cop on the other side of the intersection pulled a gun on me while i am out for my early morning jog and crossing the streets - i've seen it happen to black folks as well. If you look at american police-based sitcoms, they focus a disproportionate amount of times over black folks ( indeed, America's most wanted rejects almost twice the percentage of white-based crimes than black crimes to run in its network).
It also doesnt take into account that the US economy was essentially built on the backs of slavery and indentured labour- the latter of which were pretty common until even WWII era. That is a major factor for the higher poverty levels and lesser per capita income levels amongst the black populace compared to the whites - very few of them have ancestral assets ( like land, accessories, houses, etc.) passed down the generations while most white folks do.

PS: i never said these kinda speech should be censored. What i would like to see is lesser prejudices and better educational systems in place that would irradicate the erroneous thinking process that leads to this kinda idiotic statements.

PPS: Pratyush - if you liked American History X, try renting To Kill A Mockingbird. Its much older, featuring Gregory Peck and Sidney Poitier ( i think) but the storyline is really impactful- its one of those few movies which has done justice to the novel it is based on.

[Shounak]

I can understand why police would target black people more. I know this sounds bad, but it does make some sense.

Here drivers have to display a BIG red P on the front and back of our cars for the 1st 3 years of our license. P platers get pulled over all the time and get asked for our licenses and have background checks done regularly. If I drive my parents car without the P's, I never get pulled over. I've been pulled over more times in less then a year then both my parents have together in 25 years.

It's because P platers commit more traffic offences then most drivers and are more likely to drive cars which aren't 100% roadworthy.

Similar thing with police and poor people. My suburb is dead, pretty much no crime. I've seen two cop cars in about 10 years. What about some of the rougher suburbs in Melbourne, where it isn't safe to go out at night. If more cop cars patrol those areas and make more arrests, are cops targetting poor people?

You generally don't hear the stuff C_C is saying from middle to upper class, law abiding black people.. Because like me, if a cop comes upto them, they have nothing to be worried about. The racism catchcry's come from the lower class black people committing the crimes..

[C_C]

You generally don't hear the stuff C_C is saying from middle to upper class, law abiding black people..

Err.
you very much do- thats the whole point.
That is, atleast, in the US.
Infact, last year, a Black member of the Congress got a shakedown done on him when he was on his way to the liquor store- made the papers here.

In the US, the media and the police specifically preys on black folks when it comes to crimes - if yer white, you are the most likely to get off with a minor offence and if yer black, you are least likely. Brown folks and east asians are somewhere in the middle- but the whiter you look, the lesser you get probed by the cops - even amongst my indian friends in know in the states, the darker ones have been probed by the police more often than the lighter ones - and they are all university students/professionals.

And one thing - poor doesnt automatically equate to criminal. Infact, as far as i know, there is very little difference in crime rates amongst the poor and wealthy once you eliminate the crack addicts,alcoholics and the likes ( who may've been professionals or poor folks before they caught it but many of them end up in the streets).

[Shounak]

When it comes to getting off with a minor offence, that comes under the DA or the prosecutor. Which isn't fair at all.

I was more talking about the police aspect, but if two people get caught for the same crime and are prosecuted differently, then that is unfair.

I'd have thought Indians would be at the bottom of the coppers priority. Here at least, Indians aren't even known to the cops. It's got to do with numbers, but Indians are generally law abiding citizens.

No matter what you say, there is more criminal activity in poorer areas then richer ones. Even if you look at crime rate sorted by median house prices or something, you'd find that poorer areas have more crime.

It's not just about addicts and stuff. Things like break ins. I can leave my front door wide open, all windows open and I can be reasonably certain that if I left it for a few days and came back, everything would be where I left it. Not every place in Melbourne is like that at all..

But I do agree that the US seems to be a lot more discriminating and less egalitarian then the Australia. I probably couldn't apply my knowledge of Australia to the US WRT these matters..

[C_C]

Well it happens in prosecution too, but i am talking about the Police action itself - not all crimes require a person to lodge an FIR against you - many criminals are caught by the police and the police bears witness ( for eg, vandalism/public nuisance/trying to sell contrabands/speeding etc.). In such cases, it often comes down to whether the policeman ( or policemen- depending on how many policemen approach you/nab you) deciedes to lodge a report or not. In states, you'd find that the police is a lot more likely to let it go if the 'criminal' in question is white and vice versa.

No matter what you say, there is more criminal activity in poorer areas then richer ones. Even if you look at crime rate sorted by median house prices or something, you'd find that poorer areas have more crime.

It's not just about addicts and stuff. Things like break ins. I can leave my front door wide open, all windows open and I can be reasonably certain that if I left it for a few days and came back, everything would be where I left it. Not every place in Melbourne is like that at all..

It is a bit misleading. I am sure Top_Cat wouldnt mind putting his two cents in - he's our resident police associate.
But as far as i am aware, most crimes committed in poor areas comes down to various forms of addictions. Obviously a crack addict isnt exactly gonna take a 45 min bus ride into the suburbia to break into a rich guy's house which has security systems installed. He is just gonna go into a poor area and break into a shanty lil house that is easy to break into. or he isnt gonna hold a supermarket attendant in the suburbia at gunpoint- he is gonna go to the ones in the poor areas, since addicted people tend to conglomerate into poorer sections of the city ( they dont have that much $$ to spend on rent/upkeep etc. they just want a roof over their head-even if that - and spend the rest of the $$ on addictions).
I am pretty sure that once you take out the 'addicts hanging around in the poor neighbourhood ' factor, there isnt much of a difference in terms of # crimes between the rich and the poor. Ofcourse the nature of crimes differ - poorer folks are more prone to stress-related meltdowns/crimes of negligence while richer folks are more prone to corporate crimes...

[C_C]

I'd have thought Indians would be at the bottom of the coppers priority. Here at least, Indians aren't even known to the cops. It's got to do with numbers, but Indians are generally law abiding citizens.

Actually the Indian folks in Canada are in mid-tier zone( except for in Vancouver, since Surrey is the car theft capital of Canada and there is some Indian highschool punk gangs vs east asian highschool punk gangs stuff unlike color-based discrimination in many parts of the US ). Some places in America ( like California/New York-New Jersey etc.) Indians dont get bothered a lot either. But in many parts, they are gonna mistake you for Arab, aka de facto Al Qaeda/Taliban and harass you.
The crimes in the US against Sikh people(such as vandalising properties owned/operated by Sikhs/personal harassment, etc) have gone up by more than 10 times since 9/11 - apparently many Americans dont know the difference between Taliban and Sikh ( Head-dress = towel heads = evil ******* Al Qaeda).