Urbana police investigate attack on 18-year-old man

Urbana police investigate attack on 18-year-old man

URBANA — Urbana police are investigating an incident in which four men allegedly struck an 18-year-old Urbana man on Wednesday afternoon.

According to an Urbana police report, the man was walking on a sidewalk in the 200 block of East Washington Street at 2:15 p.m. Wednesday when he was approached by four other men and one woman.

One of the men accused the victim of following them and made two comments about his race, according to the report. One of the men began to punch him in the face, and he was soon joined by the other three men. The woman did not participate, according to police. Then the five people got into a red Saturn SUV and drove away.

While an ambulance was brought to the site, the victim refused to receive medical treatment, according to police.

One of the attackers was described as a black male. He is 5 feet, 10 inches tall; weighs 200 pounds; has long, straight black hair that was "slicked back" and brown eyes; and was wearing a white T-shirt and blue jeans.

A second attacker was described as a black male. He is 5 feet, 7 inches tall; weighs 150 pounds; has short black hair with waves and brown eyes; and was wearing a black jacket and black pants.

The descriptions of the other two attackers and the woman were incomplete.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
militantlibertarian wrote on January 05, 2012 at 10:01 pm

Hmm, So Since The Specter of race has been brought up in article, if the victim is white, asian or latino would this constitute a hate crime? It always seems to be when its the other way around.

militantlibertarian wrote on January 05, 2012 at 10:01 pm

My bad the way it was written made it seem like the victim had things said about him, not the alleged attackers, disregard that previous  reply.

militantlibertarian wrote on January 05, 2012 at 10:01 pm

My bad the way it was written made it seem like the victim had things said about him, not the alleged attackers, disregard that previous  reply.

jerrysbear wrote on January 05, 2012 at 11:01 pm

You read it correctly the first time. The attackers made racial comments about the victim; therefore, it should be a hate crime.

CJ Williams wrote on January 06, 2012 at 12:01 am

Ms. Reitz will not charge it as a hate crime.  Wrong race was the victim.

militantlibertarian wrote on January 06, 2012 at 1:01 am

Gotcha, haha I thought that was how it was first time I read it, then I reread it and wasnt sure hahaha.

wilderbssmstr wrote on January 06, 2012 at 8:01 am

It's never a hate crime when a white person gets beat up by a black peron.  Stop being foolish.

I'm just happy the police didn't get there in time to catch the bad guys.  I couldn't imagine how many investigations would be called for into how the police mistreated the offenders.


Joe American wrote on January 06, 2012 at 8:01 am

So if Ms. Reitz doesn't charge these two-bit pansy thugs with a hate crime, is she saying that it's "less" of a crime to target people based on their race?  And is she opening up an all-out melee on choosing who can and who cannot walk through your neighborhood?

Fromthearea wrote on January 06, 2012 at 8:01 am

Start...  Prosecuting...  for...  HATE CRIMES!!!  It works both ways!  How much more cut and clear do you need it Champaign County?  How much easier do you need for your job to be on this one?   Somebody I know was walking out of a bar and got jumped because he was white and was sent to the hospital for it.  A local news man was hurt, I'd say that was pretty high profile.  What's it going to take?  People getting killed?  Will that get the ball rolling?

The police are doing their jobs, how about you Champaign County prosecutors???  I imagine I'm correct in saying everybody local is pretty peeved about this, no matter what race.  This kind of thing does not make anybody look or feel good, and it's got to be affecting the university.

Prosecutors, you're not doing the county any favors by only picking the low hanging fruit, prosecute for hate crime on this one!  Start setting some precedent!  

bremax wrote on January 06, 2012 at 11:01 am

While this clearly fits the definition of a hate crime, it will not be prosecuted as such. 


Black priviledge consists of unequal treatment under the law.  Blacks have protections and rights that whites don't have.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on January 07, 2012 at 12:01 am
Profile Picture

I agree, it's so hard being white with all this "black privilege" going around.  I mean, yeah, blacks were systematically enslaved and/or segregated in this country for a couple of centuries, are still discriminated against in some ways, and still way too many of them grow up and live in extremely unsafe neighborhoods with poor infrastructure...but at least they don't have to suffer like whites do from such awful indignities such as disparities in hate crime prosecutions.  The horror.

Local Yocal wrote on January 06, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Profile Picture

For those who wish to decipher fact from "the new propoganda" coming from the pointy hooded FOP, attorney Michelle Alexander's book, The New Jim Crow, and a visit to the courthouse or traffic court would enlighten anyone on the status of "black priviledges" currently practiced under the law. Steve Harrington, thief of over $150,000 from the Sonic Drive-In franchises or Urbana police officer Kurt Hjort could attest to who really has the priviledges under this here law. Nothing like a scary teenage mugging to exploit for the furthering of more racial mythologies. "Black priviledges"? Pray you never be so unlucky.

bremax wrote on January 06, 2012 at 5:01 pm

Over the past 60 years, a wide ranging array of laws and practices based on the color of skin rather than the content of character.  It is ironic that we build towering monuments to MLK at the same time that we tarnish his dream.

Black Priviledge consists of the following race based advantages (this is a non-inclusive list):


1.  Race based K-12 educational policies designed to suppress white and asian acheivement, and enhance black acheivement in order to get equality of outcome.

2.  Racial quotas for discipline put in place at Unit 4 by Arthur Culver,  punishing blacks less and whites more for equivilant infractions.

3.  Race based affirmative action for college admissions designed to benefit blacks and hurt asians.

4.  Race based grading, and racially oriented majors to improve black GPA and graduation rates.

5.  Race based hiring for government jobs designed to benefit blacks.

6.  Race based hiring for corporate jobs designed to benefit blacks.

7.  Race based government contracting designed to award contracts to black business owners at higher prices than other contractors.

8.  Race based application of the criminal justice system designed to imprison whites and asians who hurt blacks for longer sentences than blacks who hurt whites and asians (hate crime legislation).

9.  Media coverage of crime designed to hide black violent crime rates.


That is a lot of priviledge!


Local Yocal wrote on January 06, 2012 at 5:01 pm
Profile Picture

Yeah, yeah, yeah, all those ineffective affirmative action policies that are so hated by the white supremists got some thinking blacks have it easy, and somehow deny white people their usual priviledge. Fret not; white priviledge isn't going away any time soon in Champaign County.

Looking at real life outcomes would educate anyone as to the reality of living while black in Champaign County:

1) The Northwestern/IDOT racial profiling numbers show all four police departments are more likely to stop black drivers for pretext stops, than white drivers. The drug dog is more likely to be used on a black driver than a white driver.

2) In 2007, a study showed 18 of the 20 SWAT Team raids for drug interdiction were done on black households.

3) Over 50% of the drug cases in Champaign County are against black people, while blacks only make up 15% of the population, and only about 9% of the drug-using population.

4) Over 80% of the SRO contacts are with black children in 2009. In 2006, the youth detention facility reported that 49 of the 51 juveniles sent to prison were black. The vast majority of expulsions and suspensions are meted out against black children.

5) Less than 5% of the U of I student enrollment is black.

6) Unemployment in Champaign County hovers near the 9-10% mark, but for blacks, it's about 15%, with some estimating that for black males, ages 18-35,  unemployment rates are as high as 40%.

7) Black tradesmen and craftsmen report it is near impossible to gain entrance into the local unions and near impossible to land any of the government contracts in the building trades.

8) The population in the county jail is usually 65-75% black most weeks of the year.

The fact is in Champaign County there is a relunctance to hire blacks, educate blacks, and a preference to patrol and punish blacks far more harshly than their white counterparts. But let someone here be the first to say something honest for once....isn't the real reason these outcomes exist for some of you who hold a vested interest and have your insinuating opinions all the time here...isn't the real reason there is such a large achievement gap between the races in Champaign County is because...you think, blacks are an inferior race and culture? Step up and be heard if you got two.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on January 07, 2012 at 12:01 am
Profile Picture

Yes, it must be "privilege" whenever small steps are attempted to help lift the African American community out from some of the hardships it currently faces.

Have you ever been inside an inner-city school in a low-income African American neighborhood, or even seen such a neighborhood for yourself?  It's hardly a surprise that most of the people who grow up in such conditions do not turn out so well.  It's sad that programs and policies designed to assist such students are branded as "designed to suppress white and asian achievement."  What policies can you provide examples of that actively sought to suppress white and asian achievement?

Affirmative action programs at colleges do not just allow anyone who qualifies to get into a university over a white or an Asian just because they happen to be black.  They exist so that, say, a B student at a poor, inner-city school that likely has a severe shortage of quality teachers and educational opportunities might get in over a B+ student from an economically privileged area.  When you consider how god-awful most low-income schools are that should only seem unfair if you have an agenda against programs designed to help blacks, which you pretty clearly do.

What is "racial based grading?"  And "racial based majors?"  So you believe that offering majors in African American Studies is just a way to "improve black GPA and graduation rates?"

And don't even bring up the prison system into this argument.  The prison system is one of the largest obstacles to the African American community.  African Americans have a long history of being disproportionately incarcerated as opposed to whites for similar crimes.

It is amazing to think that there are people out here who think it is easier to be black nowadays than white just because there are a few programs and policies out there to assist the black community and help them achieve better things.  bremax, maybe you have a different agenda than resentment towards black folks that you are trying to push here, but I can't imagine what that might be.

Sid Saltfork wrote on January 07, 2012 at 8:01 am

How about people taking responsibility for their actions, their children, and their community?   Governmental programs, and laws will not solve anything until people demonstrate to each other that they can conduct themselves properly in a diverse society.   People work together each day.  Their kids go to school together each day.  Their kids play on the same teams.  People can get along together.  Every group has it's criminals.  Poverty increases crime.  There are more poor white kids getting public assistance than any other group.  The issue is economic, not race.  End Affirmative Action; and focus on poverty.  Affirmative Action has not solved the problem.  My nephew in Arizona attended a high school where he was in the minority.  Since there was an Afro-American student association, and a Hispanic student association that were given field trips with privileges; the few anglo kids requested to be allowed to form a student association.  My nephew was told: "Stop whining, your White." by the principal.  Maybe, it's time for everyone to "stop whining".   If this is a Diverse Society, there is no need for laws for groups.  It is too expensive, and divisive.  

45solte wrote on January 07, 2012 at 10:01 am


'few people are aware of how much of what passes as black identity today, including "black English," has its roots in the history of those whites who were called "rednecks" and "crackers" centuries ago in Britain, before they ever crossed the Atlantic and settled in the South.'

'Saying "acrost" for "across" or "ax" for "ask" are today considered to be part of black English. But this way of talking was common centuries ago in those regions of Britain from which white Southerners came.'

'Many aspects of Southern life that some observers have attributed to race or racism, or to slavery, were common to Southern blacks and whites alike — and were common in those parts of Britain from which Southern whites came, where there were no slaves and where most people had never seen anyone black.'

'Most Southern blacks and whites moved away from that redneck culture over the generations, as its consequences proved to be *****counterproductive****** or even disastrous. But it survives today among the poorest and least educated ghetto blacks.'

'White liberals come into this story because, since the 1960s, they have been aiding and abetting a counterproductive ghetto lifestyle that is essentially a remnant of the redneck culture which handicapped Southern whites and blacks alike for generations.

Many among the intelligentsia portray the black redneck culture today as the only "authentic" black culture and even glamorize it. They denounce any criticism of the ghetto lifestyle or any attempt to change it.

Teachers are not supposed to correct black youngsters who speak "black English" and no one is supposed to be judgmental about the whole lifestyle of black rednecks. In that culture, belligerence is considered being manly and crudity is considered cool, while being civilized is regarded as "acting white." '


'These are devastating, self-imposed handicaps that prevent many young ghetto blacks from getting a decent education or an opportunity to rise to higher levels.

Multiculturalism today celebrates all cultures but it is the poor who ultimately pay the price of that celebration in stunted development, missed opportunities and blighted lives.

No one today would dare to do what Northern missionaries did after the Civil War, set up schools for newly freed black children in the South with the explicit purpose of removing them from the redneck culture that was holding back both races there.'

'...what the multiculturalists are doing today repeatedly fails.'

'But results are no longer the test. The test is whether what you say makes you feel good as someone who is a "friend" of blacks. But friends like that can do more damage than enemies.'

45solte wrote on January 07, 2012 at 11:01 am



"Pull up your pants and buy a belt 'cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt," he said. "If you walk into somebody's office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won't hire you? They don't hire you 'cause you look like you're crazy," the mayor said. He added: "You have damaged your own race."

'While this might seem like it is just plain common sense, what Mayor Nutter said undermines a whole vision of the world that has brought fame, fortune and power to race hustlers in politics, the media and academia. Any racial disparities in hiring can only be due to racism and discrimination, according to the prevailing vision, which reaches from street corner demagogues to the august chambers of the Supreme Court of the United States.'

'Just to identify the rioters and looters as black is a radical departure, when mayors, police chiefs and the media in other cities report on these outbreaks of violence without mentioning the race of those who are doing these things. The Chicago Tribune even made excuses for failing to mention race when reporting on violent attacks by blacks on whites in Chicago.

Such excuses might make sense if the same politicians and media talking heads were not constantly mentioning race when denouncing the fact that a disproportionate number of young black men are being sent to prison.

The prevailing social dogma is that disparities in outcomes between races can only be due to disparities in how these races are treated. In other words, there cannot possibly be any differences in behavior.

But if black and white Americans had exactly the same behavior patterns, they would be the only two groups on this planet that are the same.'

'In the United States, despite the higher poverty level among blacks than among whites, the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994. The disparities within the black community are huge, both in behavior and in outcomes.

Nevertheless, the dogma persists that differences between groups can only be due to the way others treat them or to differences in the way others perceive them in "stereotypes."

All around the country, people in politics and the media have been tip-toeing around the fact that violent attacks by blacks on whites in public places are racially motivated, even when the attackers themselves use anti-white invective and mock the victims they leave lying on the streets bleeding.

This is not something to ignore or excuse. It is something to be stopped. Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia seems to be the first to openly recognize this.

This needs to be done for the sake of both black and white Americans – and even for the sake of the hoodlums. They have set out on a path that leads only downward for themselves.

Although much of the media have their antennae out to pick up anything that might be construed as racism against blacks, they resolutely ignore even the most blatant racism by blacks against others.

That includes a pattern of violent attacks on whites in public places in Chicago, Denver, New York, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Kansas City, as well as blacks in schools beating up Asian classmates – for years – in New York and Philadelphia.



These attacks have been accompanied by explicitly racist statements by the attackers, so it is not a question of having to figure out what the motivation is. There has also been rioting and looting by these young hoodlums.

Yet blacks have no monopoly on these ugly and malicious episodes. Remarkably similar things are being done by lower-class whites in England. Anybody reading "Life at the Bottom" by Theodore Dalrymple will recognize the same barbaric and self-destructive patterns among people with the same attitudes, even though their skin color is different.

Anyone reading today's headline stories about young hoodlums turning the streets of London into scenes of shattered and burning chaos, complete with violence, will discover the down side of the brotherhood of man.

While the history and the races are different, what is the same in both countries are the social policies and social attitudes long promoted by the intelligentsia and welfare state politicians.'

'...those who have achieved less have been taught by the educational system, by the media and by politicians on the left that they have a grievance against those who have achieved more. As in the United States, they feel a fierce sense of resentment against strangers who have done nothing to them, and lash out violently against those strangers.'

'In the United States, young black thugs attacked whites with baseball bats and took their belongings in Denver, while voicing their hatred of whites. But it is all a very similar attitude to what has been found in other countries and other times.

Today's politically correct intelligentsia will tell you that the reason for this alienation and lashing out is that there are great disparities and inequities that need to be addressed.

But such barbarism was not nearly as widespread two generations ago, in the middle of the 20th century. Were there no disparities or inequities then? Actually there were more.

What is different today is that there has been – for decades – a steady drumbeat of media and political hype about differences in income, education and other outcomes, blaming these differences on oppression against those with fewer achievements or lesser prosperity.

Moreover, there has been a growing tolerance of lawlessness and a growing intolerance toward the idea that people who are lagging need to take steps to raise themselves up, instead of trying to pull others down.

All this exalts those who talk such lofty talk. But others pay the price – and ultimately that includes even those who take the road toward barbarism.

The orgies of violent attacks against strangers on the streets – in both England and the United States – are not necessarily just passing episodes. They should be wake-up calls, warning of the continuing degeneration of Western society.'

'Even when black youth gangs target white strangers on the streets and spew out racial hatred as they batter them and rob them, mayors, police chiefs and the media tiptoe around their racism and many in the media either don't cover these stories or leave out the race and racism involved.

' "Alternatives to incarceration" are in vogue among the politically correct elites in England, just as in the United States. But in Britain those elites have had much more clout for a much longer time. And they have done much more damage.  Nevertheless, our own politically correct elites are pointing us in the same direction. A headline in the New York Times shows the same politically correct mindset in the United States: "London Riots Put Spotlight on Troubled, Unemployed Youths in Britain." There is not a speck of evidence that the rioters and looters are troubled – unless you engage in circular reasoning and say that they must have been troubled to do the things they did.

In reality, like other rioters on both sides of the Atlantic they are often exultant in their violence and happy to be returning home with stolen designer clothes and upscale electronic devices.

In both England and in the United States, whole generations have been fed a steady diet of grievances and resentment against society, and especially against others who are more prosperous than they are. They get this in their schools, on television, on campuses and in the movies. Nothing is their own fault. It is all "society's" fault. '





45solte wrote on January 07, 2012 at 10:01 am




'These successful black schools and others contradict what the "experts" say is needed to improve black education. Today's Dunbar and Douglass High schools' teachers and students have resources that would have been the envy of their predecessors. Class sizes today are a fourth of what they were yesteryear. What about the argument that segregated schools, as in Brown v. Board of Education, are inherently unequal? Or, as argued in Serrano v. Priest, that equalization of expenditures per student is essential for equal education. These observations are not arguments for segregation or unequal school financing; they merely challenge assumptions that have become gospel.

Former teachers and alumni, whom Sowell interviewed, said that the most basic characteristic of their school was ****law and order*****. *****Respect****** was the term most used to describe the attitudes of students and parents toward the schools. "The teacher was always right" was a frequently used phrase. Without a *******civilized learning environment********, academic excellence is impossible no matter how much money is spent.'


Local Yocal wrote on January 08, 2012 at 7:01 am
Profile Picture

Anedoctal opinions to justify the harsh patrolling and prosecuting of blacks by the criminal justice system. Yeah, it's those white liberals who coddle them black thugs that are creating the problem. Got it. Well, we always knew there was some systematic thinking behind the brutality, now it's out there for all to see. Some really do believe blacks are somehow different, and more violent.

Can we really believe, whites do not get drunk or do drugs? Do not fornicate and fight? Do not steal and rob? Do not disobey traffic laws or fail to keep their insurance/license papers up to date? Do not shoot people with guns, rape and pillage? Having gone to high school here, gone to the university here, and taught on the campus, I never knew the white race was so supreme.

Sid Saltfork wrote on January 08, 2012 at 10:01 am

Your right.  The attacker involved at the train station attack was white.  The shooter at the mall was black.  They both come from the economically disadvantaged class.  The issue is not race.  It is economics.  Affirmative action based on race is not solving anything.  Affirmative action based on economics is another matter.  Hate crime legislation does not solve anything either except to divide people.  It is time for the end of any programs, or laws that try to even the playing field based on race.  Programs to assist the economically disadvantaged regardless of race are needed.  Scholarships for the economically disadvantaged to attend universities, and vocational programs based on academic performance would allow the best, hardworking students to improve their station in life.  Since the end of the War of Secession; poor whites, and poor blacks have contested each other.  Both groups lived side by side in poverty.  The color of their skins were different; but their economic conditions were the same.  Much could be accomplished if both groups were to see their commonality rather than their race differences.  It is not to the benefit of the 1%, or 1% wanabees, for this to happen though.  

45solte wrote on January 08, 2012 at 1:01 pm

Your 'pointy hooded,' 'white supremists,' 'white race/supreme' references are duly noted.     

Annecdotal?  Sowell includes citations.  And if you want to step into the arena of empirical backing of claims, the Social Justice movement is quite lacking in that area .  Take for instance 'white privilege.'  You can't see it, white people are not necessarily aware of it (so the theory goes). Therefore, conveniently, you cannot measure it.  It 'is,' merely because you say so.  And when any white person takes issue with the tennets of 'white privilege,' you whip out your Psychiatrist hats (despite the fact that you are neither degreed nor credentialed to engage in such clinical diagnostic activities) and start analyzing (in a Viennese parlor sense) for the 'real' reasons driving 'resistance.'  

You probably weren't in the public schools here during the Culver administration.  Black students were not being written up for identical offenses commited by white students, while white students students were getting off.  Quite the opposite, actually.  If you haven't had been in the Unit 4 schools in a while, go for some observation visits (if rules permit), maybe.  See for yourself whether or not black students are being singled out and unfairly treated in the schools these days.  And I do mean see .  Disparate impact is not synonymous with racism.

You state: 'Over 50% of the drug cases in Champaign County are against black people, while blacks only make up 15% of the population, and only about 9% of the drug-using population.'  Where is all the evidence to support the theory that disparate impact equals racism? There must be a sizeable cache of it hidden somewhere.   

Yes.  Absolutely, white people do all kinds of chit.   Always have, always will.    While arguments can be made against not just letting people 'be' (no matter the level of dysfunction, recklessness, harm, etc. involved), because the damage to their feelings and self-esteem would be too great if we cornered them with a good 'What the **** are you doing?!' inquiry).  But, horror of horrors, there was a time when we were a little more front-and-center with 'cultural' norms. Shame had some redeeming qualities---whatever it took to guide (shove, push) someone down a better path 'cuz they were messing up (and yes, people weren't afraid to define good and bad).   I think we were better off for it.   It was a time, too, when individual merit and achievement were valued (as opposed to resented and grievanced against) by a greater percentage of the population.  Social Justice theory seems quite opposed to the concepts of individual merit, and achievement.  I really don't get it (which of course is the problem, per the elites doing all the theorizing---what would a white prole know about the 'big picture'<<<<actually quite likely more than you will ever come to know from living on a college campus most of your life---but, that's a whole other issue).  Tell people that it's wrong for those who have achieved to have what they have for reasons x,y,z (even if they are rags to riches----beacause if they aren't black there is some 'privilege' factor that makes said achievement unearned).  So, the Social Justice solution is to turn around and do the exact same thing?  Give the allegedly 'unearned' stuff from achievers to people who have not earned it 'either.' 

Farmer Vincent wrote on January 08, 2012 at 10:01 pm

"Some really do believe blacks are somehow different, and more violent.

Why yes, Local.  People do think backs are more violent.  They believe that because it's the truth.  For one simple and very obvious example:  http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm

Blacks are seven times as likely as whites to commit homicide.  That's a lot.  Around half of the homicides in this country are committed by African-Americans, despite the fact that they only make up around an eighth of the population.  So yes, they are indeed more violent.

Even Alabaster Jones admits this when he writes:  "still way too many of them grow up and live in extremely unsafe neighborhoods".  He may not realize he admitted it, but he did.  Why does he think the neighborhoods are unsafe?  Who makes them unsafe?  Isn't it the people living there who make black neighborhoods unsafe?  I mean, he thinks there is too much crime in black neighborhoods, but isn't it pretty obvious that it's the black people who live there who are committing all these crimes?

You'll blame poverty, of course.  Even if that were an adequate explanation, it doesn't change the fact that black people are indeed far more likely than whites to commit violent crimes.

However, the poverty explanation is not really true.  Sure, there is some correlation between poverty and violence, but there is more to it than that.  Here are three interesting charts:

Chart 1 ranks the states by the percentage of their population living in poverty:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty_rate

Chart 2 ranks the states by the amount of violent crime per capita:  http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank21.html

Chart 3 ranks the states by the percentage of the population that is African-American:  http://www.censusscope.org/us/rank_race_blackafricanamerican.html

So you can find some interesting things with these three charts.  Take West Virginia, for example.  It is consistently one of the poorest states in the nation.  According to Chart 1, it is the eight-poorest state.  Yet, it is also consistently one of the safest states in the country.  According to Chart 2, it is the twelfth-safest state.  How do you account for this, Local?  I don't know, but perhaps Chart 3 could shed some light on this.

The safest state in the country is Maine.  Maine is not a particularly wealthy state.  In fact, according to Chart 1, it has the 18th-highest rate of poverty of all the states.  So it's poorer than average.  So how come it's so safe?  I don't know.  Maybe we should look at Chart 3?

The most striking example is Kentucky and Tennessee.  They have nearly identical poverty rates and are even right next to each other.  So why is Tennessee the second-most violent state, while Kentucky is the eleventh-safest?  You want to look at Chart 3?

Delaware is a bit wealthier than Connecticut, but a lot more violent.  Why?  Chart 3, anyone?

I could do this all day.  Obviously there is something going on here besides just poverty.

But I really want to get to your notion of the "new Jim Crow", at least as regards drug crimes.  That topic would take too long to explore completely, but let's look again at the first link.  Here's the money quote:  "Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs.".  So, blacks are more likely to kill someone in the first place, and of the murders they do commit, they are more likely to be drug-related.  So obviously, even if it is true that blacks and whites use drugs at the same rate (and I don't know how you could know that, except by self-report), blacks commit more severe drug-related crimes, on average, than whites.

But comparing drug sentencing to Jim Crow is preposterous anyway.  Under Jim Crow, blacks couldn't "opt out" of the Jim Crow system.  Now they can.  All you have to do is not do drugs, and you don't have to worry about disparate sentencing.  It's worked for me all my life.

Which brings us back to the question at hand.  Violence.  If blacks can "opt out" of the alleged system of unfair sentencing simply by avoiding drugs, how can whites "opt out" of the problem of violence?   Stop walking down the street?  Apart from moving to North Dakota, what should we do?

Local Yocal wrote on January 09, 2012 at 5:01 am
Profile Picture

I would respond to the recent comments, but my last two responses were removed from the site, and since I do not use ad hominem attacks, vulgarity, or hate speech in my posts ever, I await an explanation from the site administrator as to why my posts were removed. There are apparently some rules here I am not understanding.

Sid Saltfork wrote on January 09, 2012 at 11:01 am

Local Yokel; I noticed the same thing.  They did go away.  You did not use any "vulgar" speech like Floridagirl did in the Deland drug bust article.  That got everyone kicked out of the pool.  The story regarding Steve Franks, and the County Clerk election went away also.   Wait...........     Am I still in the pool right now?