Schipper on the “Black Hunter’s Mentality Against Whites”

La Griffe Du Lion, otherwise known as Robert Gordon (I know it’s controversial that’s that’s who La Griffe is, but that’s who I say he is, after lots of investigation), claims, after crunching lots of figures, that Black killers or violent criminals seek out White victims “with a hunter’s mentality.” Gordon is worse than an academic racist; he is actually a White Supremacist to boot. Most of the others are not really White Supremacists because they often say that NE Asians are superior to Whites.

There has been endless debate about Gordon’s number-crunching, and it does seem to have lots of problems. I have always thought that this theory was preposterous, but evidence seems to be mounting. Super-commenter James Schipper throws in his two cents, and I think he makes a good point:

Blacks commit about half the murders in the US. If all murderers in the US selected their victims randomly, then 50% of murder victims of all races would have been killed by a black. Since more than 50% of black murder victims have been killed by blacks and fewer than 50% of white murder victims have been killed by blacks, the notion that black murderers seek out white victims is decisively refuted.

What he means is that 94% of Blacks are killed by Blacks. If Blacks selected Blacks randomly or deselected them as we might expect Gordon’s preferential hunters to do, Blacks would be killed by Blacks 53% of the time. Instead, Blacks are killed by Blacks 94% of the time. Blacks massively overselect their own race as murder victims based on their percentage in the population for some reason. 10-14% of the killers of Whites are Blacks. Yet Blacks commit 53% of all homicides. If Black killers even selected White victims with no bias at all, 53% of Whites would be killed by Blacks. So clearly Black killers massively deselect White victims based on their presence in the population.

I have tossed this argument out to a few White people (that Black criminals prey on Whites with a hunter’s mindset), and they usually look puzzled, think for a while, and they say, “No, that’s not right, but it’s an interesting question.” Obviously there is little support for this notion among ordinary Whites. Another argument is that Blacks commit 57% of their violent crimes against Whites. Since Whites are at least 66% of the US, it looks like once again Blacks are deselecting Whites based on their presence in the population. In this case, they deselect them 15% more than would be expected.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

5 thoughts on “Schipper on the “Black Hunter’s Mentality Against Whites””

  1. Dear Robert
    Let’s amplify this a bit. The important statistic is not the percentage of the population that is black but the percentage of murders that are committed by blacks. Let’s suppose that blacks are 10% of a population and commit 80% of all murders in that population. Let’s suppose that the other 90% of the population are white. We further suppose that all murderers select their victims randomly. Finally we suppose that there 10,000 murders. We can then construct the following table.
    black victim white victim
    black murderer 800 7200
    white murderer 200 1800
    In this example, whites are victimized by blacks 80% of the time, but so are blacks. Whites may feel that blacks are picking on them because most of the time their murderer is black, but this is not due to selection by blacks but to the greater murderousness among blacks.
    What if blacks chose their victims randomly and whites never murdered blacks? Then we would have the following table:
    black victim white victim
    black murderer 800 7200
    white murderer 000 2000
    In that case, whites would be 92% of the murder victims, even though they are 90% of the population, and they still would be victimized by blacks 78% of the time. Blacks on the other hand would be victimized by blacks 100% of the time.
    have a good night. James

    1. Refutations to a Naive Fellow German (American?)
      Polish and German teenagers rarely “killed” a black or robbed him but so-called “stompings” of blacks in Polish or German neighborhoods or the minor assault leaving the black with bruised ribs were common on the outskirts (Southgate, Ann Arbor, Hamtramck) of Detroit that were Albanian, Polish and German (And Irish-Catholic to a lesser extent).
      Blacks usually did not REPORT an assault unless it was grievous but Polish louts (And there were a fair number of them) would often beat up blacks. Blacks were jumped in 2’s or 3’s.
      The Polish and Germans are gone but not so much out of white flight as simply no economic incentive to stay in Detroit.

  2. You really have to exclude the vast areas of the country where very few blacks live if you want to look at the equations from “the black side”. Likewise exclude the (relatively few) areas where no whites live if you look at it from the white side.

  3. Black folk tend to live in black neighbourhoods so will be far less likely to kill white folk. You have taken no account of distribution, its like saying sharks deselect swimmers in the uk, complete crap!

    1. There is almost no way to do this effectively with algorithms or formulae showing that Blacks tend to live in areas with more Blacks. Others try to use formulas showing that there are more Whites than Blacks, so a Black person sees many more Whites than Blacks in a day to derive their opposite conclusions. None of these speculative theories really leads anywhere, because none of them are based on actual facts. Bottom line is you cannot use stuff like you are talking about to derive any conclusions whatsoever, so what’s the use in talking about it?
      Around where I live, Blacks DO NOT live around mostly Blacks. No Blacks do for probably 150 miles+ in any direction from here, and there are quite a few Blacks around here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)