Steve Sailer: Look What Happened Last Time Liberals Took Over Criminal Justice: The 1960s

Posted on July 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Cn76YaPWAAAD405

Steve Sailer writes: But take a look at the single most dominant notable feature of the graph: the huge increase in murders in the second half of the 1960s and the first half of the 1970s when liberals took charge of the criminal justice system:

Wow.

It might make you think twice about the new Abolish Mass Incarceration conventional wisdom whose rise has coincided (perhaps not coincidently) with the 17% increase in homicides seen in the 50 biggest cities in 2015 over 2014.

COMMENTS:

* I would love to see a similar graph for attempted murders (shootings, stabbings, etc) per 100,000 males aged 15-35. The picture would not look so rosy then, especially in comparison to the early 1900′s when a much larger percentage of the population consisted of young males and differences in medical care and evac, etc. meant that you were much more likely to die when shot.

* It may be new to millennials, but the conventional wisdom for the last four decades been that the spike in crime from c. 1965 to c. 1971 coincided with the institution of Great Society welfare programs that underwrote mass migration of the rural poor to inner cities.

What’s new here?

On the other hand, it might be worth a second look so that we can find less boring, more sophisticated causal explanations.

For instance, a typical movie in 1965 was ‘The Sound of Music.’ In 1971, ‘The French Connection’. In between those two points, movies steadily became more and more violent, starting with a ‘A Fistful of Dollars.’ People must have streamed out of movie theaters, increasingly surly and worked up, resulting in the spike in crime.

More seriously, this is the third time in three weeks that I’ve scoured the nets in vain for an article I saw that correlated the number of young black men swept up and incarcerated from the streets of New York City with the drop in crime rates during the Giuliani administration. Anyone?

* I remember reading some amazing facts about incarceration in Kansas in the 70s in Bill James’s book Popular Crime. It began with murderers being considered for parole after seven years. From there, the possibility of being released on parole became an automatic right if the convict had done nothing wrong in prison. But the craziest part was that the period spent awaiting trial was counted as time served – even if the murderer had been out on bail. So if a killer could get bail and delay his trial for as long as possible, serving four years for murder would be a realistic prospect.

Posted in Crime | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Look What Happened Last Time Liberals Took Over Criminal Justice: The 1960s

Steve Sailer: Whatever Happened to All Those Violent Trump Supporters We Were Warned About?

Posted on July 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes: It’s hard to remember all the media manias that have come and gone in attempts to derail the Trump candidacy. For example, the Great Six-Pointed Star Crisis of early July 2016 is already largely forgotten.

It’s hard to remember now after so much leftist violence, but one of the biggest coordinated press campaigns back in the late winter was the idea that Trump rallies were loci of “violence.” Thus, when there was mob violence at a Trump rally in Chicago in March, it was widely blamed initially by the press and politicians on Trump and his violent supporters. Of course, that was 180 degrees backward.

So how did Trump’s convention in Cleveland turn out? Did Trump’s cossacks sack Shaker Heights? Or did that not actually go through the formality of taking place?

COMMENTS:

* Trump’s supporters tend to be tough looking, blue collar white men. Lots of bikers, truckers, cops, firefighters, and ex-military types. They’re ready for violence and capable of winning fights, but they’re not really anarchic or lawless. They’re sort of like guards, not rioters.

Up until the 90s, there were lots of urban working class neighborhoods full of these types. Their neighborhoods tended to be relatively safe and minorities were often too scared to move in.

Lots of them used to be hardhat Democrats. Since the mid 90s, they’ve been economically and racially marginalized by both parties. Trump seems to really appeal to them.

They’ve never been much into racial guilt or acting deferential to minorities. They’ve beat up some rowdy black protesters who tried to disrupt Trump rallies.

* Hats off to Trump and [Stephen] Miller. I was totally blown away. Trump’s obvious sincerity when describing the murders of Americans by illegal aliens and the effects on their families was very impressive and touching. A truly great and historic speech in my opinion. Also the perfect setup for Hillary’s BLACK LIVES MATTER heartless hatefest scheduled in Philadelphia. It’s on now, and I couldn’t have asked for a better kickoff.

* Was there ever a time that it was against the law for non-citizens/foreign interests to own sizable/ shares/control over national media generators? Imagine Japan having editorial control over or even owning part of the LA Times prior/ during WWII.

Why is Carlos Slim allowed to own a sizable interest in the NY Times as Mexico continues to aggressively mass carpet-bomb us with strategic, sporadically virus-laden, biological warheads, with threats of sending even more if politicians don’t do his/Mexico’s bidding?

* The political geeks can’t figure out why Peter Thiel would endorse Trump, but it makes sense given their German connection. Germans like Thiel’s and Trump’s extended families, along with Scots like Trump’s mother, have a long history of valuing the United States as a second home and a refuge from the Old World. German Americans’ proprietary orientation towards this country leads them to treat it as an asset that needs careful management to maintain its value.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Whatever Happened to All Those Violent Trump Supporters We Were Warned About?

ADL: Thank you @NBA for taking a stand for all of us! #LGBT

Posted on July 22, 2016 by Luke Ford

Yahoo: Without any movement by state legislators in North Carolina to change newly enacted laws targeted at the LGBT community, the NBA on Thursday decided to pull the 2017 All-Star Game out of Charlotte.

“Our week-long schedule of All-Star events and activities is intended to be a global celebration of basketball, our league, and the values for which we stand, and to bring together all members of the NBA community – current and former players, league and team officials, business partners, and fans,” the league said in a released statement.

The NBA is focused on the New Orleans’ Smoothie King Center as the host for All-Star Weekend and the All-Star Game on Feb. 19, league sources told The Vertical.

For now, there are still other cities trying to lure the All-Star Game, sources said.

NBA commissioner Adam Silver had threatened to move All-Star Weekend out of Charlotte unless a discriminatory North Carolina law aimed at the state’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community was changed – and time to do so ran out because of the logistics and planning the NBA needs to run its marquee midseason event, league sources said.

The issue is centered on North Carolina’s House Bill 2, a law that mandates transgender people use public restrooms corresponding to the sex listed on their birth certificates. The law also omits LGBT people from North Carolina’s anti-discrimination protections, forbids local governments from widening LGBT protections and excludes all forms of workplace discrimination lawsuits from North Carolina state courts.

“While we recognize that the NBA cannot choose the law in every city, state, and country in which we do business, we do not believe we can successfully host our All-Star festivities in Charlotte in the climate created by HB2,” the league said. “… We look forward to re-starting plans for our All-Star festivities in Charlotte for 2019 provided there is an appropriate resolution to this matter.”

Posted in Trans | Comments Off on ADL: Thank you @NBA for taking a stand for all of us! #LGBT

Republican Convention Wraps With Trump’s Big Speech

Posted on July 21, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* I’ve heard from three people (an anti-globalization democrat & two mainstream republicans) who have been glued to the TV this week that are now voting for Trump. Seeing his family has humanized him to those who previously viewed him as a one-dimensional villain. The consensus across party lines is that Ted Cruz is a weasel.

* Ivanka’s obviously a super-impressive lady, but I don’t think that she–or her brothers–have their dad’s humor or moxie. Trump makes me LOL pretty regularly, but I’ve never laughed at anything his kids have said.

* Reporters have never been able to find a single person who has spent time with Cruz who can stand him.

* I agree that his future prospects are exceedingly dim, but I thought that before last night’s speech, which really hurt him. The more you saw of him on the campaign trail, the less you liked him. I have a theory that the reason he withdrew from the race immediately after the Indiana primary was not just because of Indiana but his fear that he was going to lose Nebraska the following week where he was ostensibly favored and that would hurt his future prospects. (Nebraska had an open primary, whereas next door Kansas had a caucus a few weeks earlier, which Cruz carried handily.) He certainly lacks the charm and likeability of Mike Huckabee, who also is very religious, so it is not religion which makes Cruz unlikeable. I think Huckabee may be the best natural politician in the traditional sense than anyone I have seen. If you recall, Cruz sidled up to Trump all last fall, even adopting the same positions, and then did an abrupt 180 degree turn at that Fox debate which Trump skipped. So he wound up burning all his bridges with Trump, and the prospects of being the VP or AG or Supreme Court nominee all went up in smoke.

* I ended up favoring Ted Cruz over Donald Trump, but I was glad that Trump raised the question about whether Cruz’s father Rafael was involved with Lee Harvey Oswald.

It’s plausible that Cruz’s father really is the man photographed handing out leaflets with Oswald.

I’d like to know whether Cruz’s father ever has responded to the question.

* Trump’s (feels like) 12 kids being everywhere at the Convention subliminally speaks to Affordable Family Formation and the Blue-Metro/Red-State divide.

That they are articulate, well-behaved, successful, and can be trusted to go out alone in public doubles-down on the message in ways that Palin never could. That Trump is not an overt or, apparently any kind of, religious nut and yet has 5 kids doubles-down on the double-down. Trump has 5 successful kids because he is a positive, successful guy. Wouldn’t we all if we could afford them? Isn’t that a sub-text of MAGA: hang-up the smart phone and live life well.

More generally, I see at the local level you can categorize people by the number of their off-spring:

* Less than 1.1 kids and that person is a Progressive that wants to invite the world to take care of them when they are old (ahem, for minimum wage) and buy their house for 5-10x what they paid for it.

* Greater than 2.9 kids and that person is a True-Con that wants to build a wall to stem the flood of immigration because they look around and are rightly worried what their children’s employment opportunities are going to be, and how or where their children are going to find decent, affordable housing.

* …the big difference between the rare right-wing terrorist (Breivik or Roof) and leftist or Islamic terrorists is how rare it is for right-wing terrorists to have accomplices. One sign that a particular ideology is especially violent is the ability of a would-be terrorist to find accomplices.

* Middle Easterners tend to be very clannish. So when you fight one of them, you fight the entire clan. That’s why it’s misleading to think that terrorists are just violent individuals. The reality is that these terrorists are members of much, much larger clans. If the terrorist hates you, his clan (whether it wants to or not) gets drawn into the conflict.

Euro whites are more individualistic and not much into the idea of clan loyalty. So they’re more likely to be lone wolves.

* Because Ted Cruz won the largest delegate haul in at least 8 states, he is granted an automatic speaking slot according to RNC rules. There was nothing Trump could do to prevent Cruz from speaking if he wanted to; and since Trump either knew or guessed that Cruz would never endorse him, he decided to let him make a douchebag out of himself on international TV. It was a masterstroke given the constraints of the situation.

What Ted Cruz did last night was literally psychopathic. With the whole world watching, with the fate the party and the country on the line, with the future of law and order up for grabs, Ted Cruz decided to nurse a personal grudge and throw a stink bomb at the man whom we were all there to honor and support, the man who is the reason for the whole occasion. No only was this atrociously bad form, it was also cowardly to a degree that makes me queasy.

There is something deeply, disturbingly wrong with Ted Cruz which makes normal people run in the other direction. This freak and anybody who supported him (including El Rushbo) will need to be dealt with after the election is secured.

* Supposedly Trump extended an invitation to Cruz a couple of weeks ago without any conditions after failing to get him to agree to live up to his commitment to endorse the RP’s nominee at one of the debates. Apparently, Trump got an advance copy of Cruz’s speech two hours before the scheduled appearance and, despite the fact that the draft contained no endorsement, he decided to let Cruz go ahead and speak. Had he cancelled Cruz’s appearance, the odium would have fallen on Trump. Maybe that was what Cruz was counting on. Since Trump didn’t blink, Cruz probably felt he had to go through with the speech, lest the odium fall on him. Being the vain and self-centered creature he is, Cruz may have convinced himself that his “brilliant” speech-making would sway the audience and carry the day. Trump, being the very savvy judge of men and a completely unscrupulous operator (think of Chris Christie’s withering cross-examination of Senator Rubio in the NH debate, which brought out Rubio’s best robotic qualities), probably arranged for his manager Paul Manafort to organize the chorus of boos and probably figured that, if Cruz delivered the draft speech without endorsing him, Cruz would be committing political suicide. It looks like Trump figured it out perfectly and Cruz not so much.

* Trump’s “attack” consisted of retweeting side-by-side pictures of the two wives– with his wife, Melania, by the way, actually being older than Cruz’ wife, Heidi! As far as I know, the picture of Heidi Cruz used was (a) taken in public; (b) taken by a professional photographer; and (c) not digitally retouched, in any way, to make her look any worse than she actually did, at that instant. Again, Trump’s retweeting, however dubious as a campaign tactic, was in direct response to that Cruz PAC’s sending a modeling photo of Melania in the buff, long before her marriage to Trump, to married women voters in Mormon precincts of Utah, telling those married female voters that they could have Melania Trump as their next First Lady– or else vote for Ted Cruz!

In addition to that Cruz PAC’s dubious tactic, a female Cruz surrogate had appeared previously on Fox News Channel, on Neil Cavuto’s 4 p.m. (E.S.T.) show, decrying the possibility of a Trump presidency by pointing out that Melania Trump was (a) an immigrant (!); (b) a third wife; and (c) a former professional model who had posed in the nude, and thus was, according to that female surrogate for Senator Cruz, unfit to serve as the First Lady of the United States!

Even more egregious, to my own mind, than the two above-noted instances of Cruz supporters’ maligning Melania Trump, earlier this year, was what Ted Cruz’ most famous and prominent surrogate, Glenn Beck, had to say about her, last year: Beck claimed that Melania Trump had appeared in “lesbian porno videos!” How often have the mainstream media mentioned this fact, while they were condemning Trump for “attacking” poor, innocent political wife, Heidi Cruz, the Goldman Sachs banking executive?!?

Finally, I read an ABC News story about Ted Cruz, this morning, which continued to push the myth that it was Trump’s campaign that had pushed the Cruz sex-scandal story, earlier this year. Everyone who followed Twitter knew that it was Rubio supporters who were pushing the story– not Trump supporters, let alone the Trump campaign itself. In fact, it was reported that the source of the eventual story in “The National Enquirer” was neither Trump nor Roger Stone, as falsely asserted by Senator Cruz himself; it was one (or more) of the private eyes hired by Rubio surrogates to trail Cruz and his supposed women friends! When Rubio withdrew, his surrogates immediately stopped pushing the sex-scandal story, and one (or more) of their private eyes decided to repurpose their handiwork by selling it to the aforementioned tabloid. Since the owner of that tabloid is a Trump friend, Trump was blamed for what was a Rubio dirty-tricks operation.

* I can recall the very first Republican debate (in Cleveland, of all places) last August, which was moderated by Fox. (That was the debate where Megyn Kelly famously asked Trump about all the bad things he had said about women over the years.) After the debate, where Fox did their best to torpedo Trump’s candidacy, Mr. Luntz held one of his focus groups, and they all agreed that Trump had lost the debate. Polls revealed the next day that Trump had won the debate. So much for the Luntz focus groups.

* This is one of those iSteve posts where the comment quality just craters for some reason. It’s like when you’re eating strawberries out of one of those big flats from Costco, and they’re all ripe and delicious but then you pick up that mushy one with the gray mold on it.

* The Don not only hit a grand slam home run tonight, he hit it out of the stadium, across the street, and into the parking lot, where it broke the window on Hillary’s limo.

* As far as what George Will will do should Trump win, I suggest he retire from the opining business. The man is 75, has had nothing of interest to say for the past 15 years, and ought to have put aside sufficient savings to live comfortably.

* Instead the DNC has Ivanka’s ugly step-sister, Chelsea Clinton. Can’t you picture her watching Ivanka on TV, then letting out a blood-curdling shriek, throwing herself on her bed, kicking her feet and crying into her pillow. “Mom! Don’t make me do this!!”

Posted in America | Comments Off on Republican Convention Wraps With Trump’s Big Speech

Steve Sailer: Misinformed Latino Cop Tries to Shoot Harmless Latino Autist, Wounds His Black Caregiver Instead. White People at Fault.

Posted on July 21, 2016 by Luke Ford

Steve Sailer writes: There’s a push these days to take away cops’ new quasi-military toys. That was part of the early right-of-center conventional wisdom out of Ferguson in 2014: it was all the cops’ fault for dressing like orcs.

In reality, working people these days are much more safety conscious than they were, say, 40 years ago. Rendering the cops as ill-equipped as they were during the Dallas Massacre doesn’t solve much.

Instead, you have to work with the fact that cops aren’t as brave as they used to be when they’d just walk up with a knightstick and whack a perp into submission. That can get you into real trouble these days. Nonlethal violence looks bad on video, like when the LAPD, having been denied the use of a chokehold, but not wanting to shoot Rodney King, hit him a whole bunch of times to finally subdue him. That didn’t work out so well for the cops

In Tom Wolfe’s 2012 novel Back to Blood, Miami cop Nestor Camacho bravely wrestles down a Rodney King-sized black perp, but an out-of-context video winds up all over social media.

Now, cops say things like, “I’m going home tonight,” meaning: “I’m not getting myself killed over this.”

So we need to work with that reality and develop stand-off means to allow cops to deal with possibly armed suspects without shooting them.

Comments:

* There is a big problem with how 911 calls are passed on and with how the police treat “man with a gun.” It was reported as “suicidal white guy with a gun” (it was a toy truck – the man was autistic and childlike). One the police arrive at the scene expecting a gun, they are primed to see one and as soon as they see one they feel justified in killing you immediately, especially if you don’t seem to be “compliant.” People are often not compliant because there is something wrong with them (mental illness, don’t speak English, etc.). The police killed Tamir Rice TWO SECONDS after they arrived on the scene, because he was “reaching for his gun.”

* This shooting is the clearest example yet of too many people getting shot by cops. This is a real problem, that has nothing to do with race. But for Obama, everything has to do with race, so instead of helping to solve it, he exacerbated a different problem.

I haven’t seen any pundit make the connection, but some of this stems from how atomized America is today. There’s little in the way of organic community institutions that can deal with stuff without calling 911, which brings cops at Def Con 1. Maybe if there were a neighborhood watch that could have taken a closer look at the autistic guy and saw he had a toy before someone called the police.

Maybe in the Alton Sterling case, there could have been a merchant’s association or whatever to give Sterling a job sweeping up the sidewalks in front of the stores instead of selling CDs.

Maybe in the case of the black lady whose mentally ill son was shot dead by a cop for holding a screw driver, there could have been some neighbors to call to help get him to the mental hospital without killing him.

* Police are not known for elementary marksmanship skill, as this pathetic episode demonstrates. The irony is that IF he had aimed, breathed, focused on front sight, P R E S S E D the trigger, he would have killed the autistic guy. So all in all, his incompetence computed into embarrassment and minor injury, nothing else.

* “White” Hispanic is newspeak for he is the bad guy in the narrative. If they could get away with it we would have “white” Asians, “white” African-Americans, etc.

* He tried to shoot a harmless, unarmed idiot and missed shooting instead an equally harmless and unarmed bystander. This is a tough one if you are queer for cops. The guy with his hands up (the stupid violent black guy) was trying to convey useful information to the trigger happy moron who shot him.

* This seems more like a hiring standards issue to me. If the police weren’t under the cruel yoke of AA I’m sure no one would have been shot.

* Many readers might think that this is churlish in the extreme from me, but here we see a so called ‘Hispanic’ autistic adult being accompanied by a ‘professional’ black ‘caregiver’ – evidently doing the job the autistic man’s parents will not do -.

I don’t know how long the autistic man’s parents have been in the USA, but I would love to see a pure accountant’s cost/benefit analysis of the tax contributions of the parents compared to the tax expenditure on the autistic man. Remember, the likely taxpayer cost of ‘care giving’ of this type must run into tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars per annum – that is more than one full time worker, somewhere in the system, must go out to work each and every day to support the autist.
Plus we have the absurd sight of a seemingly fit, active, healthy able-bodied man not contributing to the economy in an active way, but being employed as a ‘caregiver’.

Yes, yes, I know many of you will hate me for saying all this, but just think of what the huge sums of money poured into ‘care giving’ this ‘Hispanic’ could have done for giving inpecunious talented college students financial support.

* The whole episode has a very Dave Barry sort of farcical quality about it. Basically what you’d expect in South Florida.

BLM won’t admit that the incidents they complain of are more Keystone Kops clumsiness than KKK lynchings, because that would take the wind out of their sails, but most of life is farce, not drama.

* Which cases, in this country of nearly a third of a billion residents, would you care to cite? Alton Sterling? Philando Castile? Michael Brown? How many unreasonable cases would you expect to find, in any given year, in a country this populous, considering the nature of our population? It seems to me, if police are willfully or wantonly shooting innocent-and-harmless Black men, in significant and unacceptable numbers, as claimed by Black Lives Matter and the mainstream media, inter alia, then those advocates and activists should be able to rattle off any number of clear-cut cases of willful or wanton killings of innocent-and-harmless Black men. Instead, the “martyrs” cited, mourned and canonized are overwhelmingly people like Alton Sterling. Would you like for me to detail his case, including his lengthy and telling rap sheet, leading up to his death?

* If you rear end someone, as a private citizen, you have no right to exit your car brandishing a weapon– whether you legally possess that weapon or not. If you are a private citizen, you also have no police power– meaning no authority to order the other driver, whose car you just rear ended, not to move. If you shoot him with the gun that you are illegally brandishing, based merely upon the unreasonable supposition in your own hypothetical, then you have committed a further crime– the nature of which depends upon your aim and the resulting effect of your illegal action.

When a policeman, in the course of his duties, stops a car, whether as the result of a BOLO match or a reasonable suspicion of some other violation, such as speeding, he is exercising his police powers– and the consequent duties of the driver stopped is utterly different from when he has been rear ended by a bad driver, such as you. The policeman must act reasonably, under the circumstances; but, his circumstances, as an officer of the law, are utterly different from yours, as a bad driver who approaches another driver, whom you just have rear ended.

The bottom line is, each case must be analyzed on its own facts. Black Lives Matter activists, the mainstream media, and even many of Steve’s readers, seem to think that the police have no more authority to apply potentially lethal force, in furtherance of their duties, than does any private individual, and that police shootings of members of the public should be presumed to be illicit, with the shooter required to prove otherwise. That is not how the law works– thank goodness!

* Tamir Rice.

Two very obvious words that nobody seems to want to say because they are taboo:

Ghetto lottery.

I don’t know if this is true about the Tamir Rice case specifically. But I do tend to think that that any number of ghetto mamas are deliberately having their sons of say, late pre-adolescent and early adolescent years, run around in public and play with toy guns, in the hopes that a cop will shoot and kill him and then she can cash out in a lawsuit. Think about it: Let’s say you’re L’Booshondria, and you gave birth to little N’Deshawntavious when you were 15. Twelve years later, you’re 27 and he’s 12. And it’s easy to see that N’Deshawntavious will never amount to anything; he just joined the FFA, Future Felons of America. He can’t rap, can’t ‘ball (play a sport), and doesn’t have the meddle to be a dope dealer. Ghetto black single mothers love to try to monetize their sons and guilt-trip them into being her surrogate husband and provider. So, what is L’Booshondria to do with N’Deshawntavious who has no natural money making ability in the only ghetto ways available, rap, sports or drug dealing? Easy — Cash out on his black body using the ghetto lottery; bait the police into shooting and killing him.

Posted in America, Blacks, BLM, Crime, Police | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Misinformed Latino Cop Tries to Shoot Harmless Latino Autist, Wounds His Black Caregiver Instead. White People at Fault.