Black on White Homicide and Rape: The Real Stats

Blacks commit 51% of all homicides. 7% of all Black homicides are Black on White. 89% of all Black homicides are Black on Black.
Although Whites are 64% of the population, Blacks kill them in only 7% of their murders. Blacks massively underselect Whites for homicide by a figure of 90% which is near-total underselection. Blacks go massively out of their way to not kill Whites.
Blacks are 13% of the population but Blacks kill Blacks in 89% of their murders. This is near total overselection. They are overselecting their own kind by 550%. Black go massively out of their way to deliberately target their own kind for homicide.
3% of all homicides are Black on White.
It’s trivial. Black on White homicide is trivial.
Comparing only Black and White victims, Blacks rape Whites in 50% of all rapes. Blacks rape Blacks in the other 50% of all rapes. (And I am not even sure those figures are good because I took them off an Alt Right site.)
If there were only Blacks and Whites in the US, the US would be 80%
White and 20% Black.
Although Whites are 80% of the B-W population, Blacks rape Whites only 50% of the time. White women are seriously underselected for rape by Blacks by 37%. Blacks rape Blacks 50% of the time while Blacks are only 20% of the Black-White population, so Blacks overselect Blacks for rape by 150%. Blacks go seriously out of their way to deliberately rape Black women. Blacks go substantially out of their way to avoid raping White women.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

29 thoughts on “Black on White Homicide and Rape: The Real Stats”

  1. That’s not quite true. Where do you get your stats?
    Go ahead and snicker about the site being called bjs, I did.
    Total over six conservative years:
    White on Black: 0
    Black on White: 135,206
    Black on Black: 148,380
    Average over six consecutive years:
    White on Black: 0
    Black on White: 22,534
    Black on Black: 24,730
    So how can you call Black rapes trivial, when whites don’t do anything to deserve it? We don’t rape them, they rape us.
    If you go by the FBI statistics, you see an imbalance, but not quite so one-sided.
    Blacks killed 409 whites, and whites killed 189 Blacks.
    But note this is HOMICIDES, not MURDERS. This would count someone being robbed and blowing away their robber instead of bending over for it.
    Blacks kill twice as many whites as whites kill Blacks. So where do you get that it’s “trivial”, especially with the recent riots, Blacks going out of their way TO kill whites, from the sniper who bragged about killing cops, especially white cops, to the thugs dragging people out of their cars and murdering them.
    They go out of their way to seek out white or Asian victims, especially when they get “bored”. Or when they seek revenge for a cop killing a thug.
    It’s not Hatfields and McCoys, it’s criminals vs. honest people. I’d prefer the honest people saved, even if the criminals have to die, what about you?

    1. The argument, is if you were to shoot people at random, regardless of race, then blacks should be killing non-blacks about 80% of the time. You would expect more white victims of black violence purely through arithmetic, there are more potential victims. You would expect fewer black victims of white violence purely through arithmetic, there are fewer potential victims.
      Yet the split is 50/50.
      However, I disagree with the assertion that blacks are deliberately not shooting whites, or targetting blacks.
      I don’t live in the US, but my understanding is that there are black neighbourhoods. Black criminals are likely to be surrounded, and doing deals with other black criminals. If you choose someone at random in the USA to shoot, they’re more likely to be white than black. But if your black, and you’re looking in your immediate vicinity, then the probability that victim is black greatly increases, especially if you’re in a ghetto.
      So the black on black statistics may be more due to the fact that blacks are living amongst other blacks, than any sort of racial profiling.

        In the Ghetto the most popular color is green for money and that is the reason for crime. Gang territory disputes second. Domestic squabbles third.
        Occasionally people from the inner-city will travel to a white lower-income suburb that is relatively near (10 km) and relatively urban to rob a business or person or sometimes a white drug dealer. However, there are white, Arab, Italian-American thugs in these places who will sometimes assault them for the sheer fun of it. Being a minority criminal prowling and being up to no good in a shabby Italian-American neighborhood is ill-advised.
        Far more rarely, they will venture into the middle-class suburbs but this is more risky for the minority inner-city criminal. First of course, he stands out and the police will harass him/search his vehicle.
        Whites who engage in drug-related activities are often the victims. A white female addict is gang-raped in a crack-house, a white junkie is robbed and his car stolen, a white sex addict is shot by the prostitute in his vehicle, a successful white cocaine dealer is robbed in his apartment by associates of his ghetto wholesale supplier.
        Whites in overlap run-down neighborhoods are victims of robbery. Sometimes they have the misfortune of living in these places but more often they are simply loitering around them. Spending time on the street on foot raises your chances.
        Whites raped. This is the most common, sadly.

      2. Most Ghetto crimes are for money and most crimes against Americans of European descent occur in immediate overlap areas.
        Racial animosity is one factor but the biggest is simply money in North America or a crime of opportunity. A white woman who addicted to drugs or selling her body for drugs in a ghetto area is gang-raped or abused or even robbed. A white junkie is robbed trying to score. A white John is robbed by a prostitute herself with a handgun.
        All of these crimes are simply for material gang.

      3. Except if that were true, eventually Blacks would run out of non-Black targets.
        But they keep spreading into their betters’ areas in search of new targets.
        Remember the thugs who shot that Australian baseball player because they were “bored”? They went out of their way to find a white victim, rather than stay local and kill a fellow thug, right?

    2. yeah that’s similar to the ShamRen stats that show Blacks choose other Blacks 40% of the time, and Whites 38%.
      ASL- yeah, 38% is well below the expected 64%, but when you factor in that Blacks are committing nearly 3x the crime they should, Whites are still victimized.
      And, yes, most stats include a White + All Hispanic Bloc, which would mean “we” represent 81% of the population, not 64%.

    3. Tim Wise broke down this claim of :white men rape zero black women”

      The rape data claim has been a common one for several years, and is based on selective data reading and a misunderstanding of issues of statistical sampling.
      So here’s the thing: the only data we have on rape/sexual assault by race of perp and race of victim is data from the Dept of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Series statistical reports. The NCVS is done every year, and basically involves conducting a random sample of about 70,000 or so people around the country, asking them about their experiences with crime in the previous year and tabulating it. Among the questions they ask is one about the perceived race of one’s attacker, in the case of violent crimes.
      The full statistical table set has not been publicly available since the 2008 report, although one can request it from DOJ and they can provide it. In the last few years of the report being published, the data for rape was showing that in 2008, about 16.4 percent of all rapes committed against whites were committed by blacks, which came to about 19,000 rapes that year (16.4 percent of about 117,000 rapes). And in the same table it says that 0.0 percent of rapes of blacks were committed by whites…However, there are asterisks by both numbers, which the people who make a big deal of these numbers naturally ignore. The note at the bottom of the table notes that both these percentages (and thus the numbers that are derived from them) are estimates based on fewer than 10 actual cases. What this means is that of the 70,000 or so people they sampled, fewer than 10 white people and fewer than 10 black people said they had been interracially raped, but they have to make an estimate for the larger population from this small sample size…in all likelihood they just didn’t happen to have any black person out of the 8,000 or so they sampled (and probably about 4000 women) who had been raped by a white person, and they probably had a couple of white women out of the 20,000 or so white women they sampled who had been…and then they just extrapolate outward. But obviously the sample size makes it difficult to ascertain what’s really going on here. In the DOJ’s own methodology section of an earlier report from the mid-2000s, there was a note about estimates involving “zero” numbers, which noted the real number could be between 0 and several hundred incidents at a 68% confidence level, and for a better confidence level it would be quite a bit more than that…needless to say it isn’t actually zero. Basically the rape numbers are highly problematic in the NCVS and tend to jump around a lot. So for instance, in the 2002 report, there were 8,448 white-on-black rapes based on estimates! But obviously white men were on a mass raping spree of black women in 2002 and then suddenly stopped…that number too was based on crazy estimates from a small sample…Bottom line, the NCVS is really only good for estimating crimes like robbery, aggravated assault and simple assault, because those happen in large enough numbers to make the predictions accurate, both in general and the interracial projections as well
      Now, one thing is of course true. In any given year (including 2002) the numbers for black-on-white rape are far higher than the numbers for white on black rape. But of course the important point is that about 75% of all rapes of whites are committed by other whites, so clearly the real threat to white women (and men for the percentage of rapes that represent men) is other white men, contrary to the claims of those who regularly make this argument.

      1. Blacks are more represented among examples of sex criminals than Europeans accounting for population. This is counting both interracial and intraracial rapes.
        Blacks have higher testosterone while also having higher sensitivity to it and score higher than Europeans and East Asians on measures of impulsivity. Throw in the mean IQ in the 80s and you have a picture.

  2. I was looking at the race of offenders and victims of those executed since 1976 in the U.S.;
    and it was 35%, whereas Blacks have commited 51% of murders, so yeah, there is no bias against Blacks there.
    HOWEVER, 60% of the Blacks executed were done so for killing Whites, when that number should be 7%.
    In conclusion;
    -about 21% of executions were for Black-on-White crime, but only 3% of murders are.
    -But on the flipside, overall, a Black murder convictee is less likely to be executed than a White.
    the truth will set you free

    1. To Barack Thatcher:
      In conclusion;
      -about 21% of executions were for Black-on-White crime, but only 3% of murders are.
      -But on the flipside, overall, a Black murder convictee is less likely to be executed than a White.

      White jury members tend to vote much more often for execution than black jury members, regardless of the race of the victim, and if I recall correctly, a decision to execute, often requires a unanimous vote. So in cities like Detroit or Baltimore where there are tons of black on black murders, the juries are likely going to have multiple black jurors many of whom are against the death penalty, which would tend to throw a monkey wrench in any attempt at execution.

      1. TJF-
        That could be the cause of my second point.
        The Mohammad-Malvo trials were moved to Virginia, despite a majority of crimes occurring in Maryland, because Maryland (31% Black overall) is very slow with the death penalty and/or a Black Jury won’t ‘fry ’em’….
        One of the major counties, PG, is 63% Black iirc. That would equate to 7 or 8 Black Jurors.
        It also could be an explanation for why Black-on-White is over-represented, in that areas with a high Black percentage won’t be executed, but those from more rural areas, will.

        1. One of the major counties where they did their shootings, I mean.
          They also could have the trial in Federal Court, but went to Virginia, because it is a less-Black hanging’ state.
          The North Virginia counties are pretty White, whereas PG county, one of their ground-zeroes, is 63% Black.

    1. Yeah, but does that really matter?
      I mean, no one here is arguing that, on average, Blacks have less impulse control, afaik.

  3. To Rob:
    Blacks commit 51% of all homicides. 7% of all Black homicides are Black on White. 89% of all Black homicides are Black on Black.
    I get somewhat different data for 2013 (Note perps are now starting to be classified by ethnicity as well as victims but there is not a clear breakdown of black on Latino or non-Hispanic white on Latino murders.)
    I am using the numbers for 2013 but the numbers for 2014 (linked at the bottom) are similar:
    Race/ethnicity of Perps / White Victims
    Non-Hispanic white and/or undefined white 1977/ 3005 = 65%
    Black – 409 / 3005 = 13.6%
    Latino – 532 / 3005 = 17.7%
    Race/Ethnicity of Perps / Black Victims
    Non-Hispanic (or undefined) white 113 / 2491 = 4.5%
    Black 2245 / 2491 = 90%
    Hispanic 76/ 2491 = 3%
    Total murders by blacks (ones where there has been an arrest)
    2245 + 409 = 2654
    Number of whites killed by blacks
    409 (Which includes Latinos)
    Hence the percentage of murders committed by blacks where the victims were white is equal to 409 / 2654 = 15.4%.
    But the nation’s clearance rate for murder is only 64% – so we can not accurately determine who is doing the killing more than 1/3 of the time:
    In some crime ridden cities like Chicago and several other major crime ridden cities the clearance rates for murder are much less than 50%.
    26% clearance rate for murder in Chicago
    Numbers for 2014:

    1. 15.4% of 51%, gives us, 7.9%.
      The number is supposed to be 81% (White + All Hispanic bloc), 81% x 13%, which is 10.5%.
      We’re doing okay.

        1. Of course, if the Alt-Reich was truly clever,
          they’d argue “segregation was better for Blacks”!.
          But they’re not.

      1. To Barack and Rob:
        Barack said:
        15.4% of 51%, gives us, 7.9%.
        The number is supposed to be 81% (White + All Hispanic bloc), 81% x 13%, which is 10.5%.
        We’re doing okay.

        Rob said:
        7% of all Black homicides are Black on White. 89% of all Black homicides are Black on Black.
        For 2013 we have
        Black Perp – White Vic 409 / All Homicides 5723.
        So 409/5723 = 7.1% of all homicides are black on white.
        So although Rob said 7% of all black homicides he may have meant 7% of all homicides are black on white which would be correct.
        Remove a single adjective and the statement is accurate, I’ve made similar errors multiple times.

        1. yes.
          When factoring in all the data, it’s likely that Blacks are 50%+ victims of all homicides. It’s tragic. The Tea Party/Bill O’Reilly do have a point with the “Black on Black crime” and “whadda about Chicago” talking points.

    1. But the actual number of serial killers is so small in a given year that there aren’t many meaningful conclusions to be drawn upon such small sample sizes.

      1. Sure there are. The demographics of American serial killers and mass shooters go in line with racial breakdowns of violent crime in not just America, but around the world.

Leave a Reply

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


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)