If I backed it up from statistics from a credible source?
2006-09-11 23:40:32 · 19 answers · asked by chuckey j 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Your statement is a generalization and no statistics could possibly back it up. Here's why:
Your statement says "cause" crime. You cannot prove who causes crime; however, you can quote statistics on who is "convicted" of criminal offenses. Many unsolved crimes are committed everyday, and it is impossible to generalize and say that those crimes were all committed by one race.
2006-09-11 23:50:52 · answer #1 · answered by The One 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course it is a generalization, that does not mean that generalizations cannot sometimes be true.
You may want to specify your wording, however, to ensure your meaning is understood.
Are you trying to say that blacks "cause" most crime or blacks "commit" most crime? While I've seen a lot of statistics from the UCR and NCVS that states that blacks commit more crimes than other races (in the U.S.), that does not necessarily mean that they "cause" the crime. One could reasonably argue that poor education, insufficient opportunities and other factors actually "cause" crime. Many other supporting evidence and documentation (as well as statistics, I'm sure) could go as far to say that it is caucasians, who have been making the laws and establishing these situations, that actually "cause" crime.
Then again, statistics are a matter of perception. Depending on your view, statistics can be twisted and molded to fit your argument.
Regardless, yes, it would still be a generalization.
2006-09-12 06:46:11 · answer #2 · answered by Physh 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it would be. Even a statistic, from a "Credible" source would have to be specific, and then you wouldn't use the word "most" -- you would cite the percentage. Otherwise, anyway you slice it, it's a generalization.
Also, "cause" crimes and "commit" crimes can be interpreted differently.
2006-09-12 06:46:00 · answer #3 · answered by Love2Sew 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You couldn't back up such a statement, because you talk about the causes of crime. Most people who cause crime are probably white, as the economic system is set up to make so many people losers economically, and this is strongly tied to crime. Virtually every 'white collar criminal' has a white neck under that collar, and the white collar criminals are the ones who devastate whole communities or even states (see California energy crisis) with their crimes.
If you said most black teens who are arrested are sent through the justice system and most white teens who are arrested are dropped off at mommy and daddy's with no justice system involvement, that's a generalization you could back up with statistics.
If you said most people incarcerated are blacks, you could back that up. If you said most crimes are committed by blacks, you couldn't back that up.
Self-report studies (did you commit this kind of crime, that kind of crime?) show that criminal activity is very similar across the 'racial groups' in America. What differs is arrest and incarceration rates.
Do you think every black person in South Africa, for example, is a criminal?
2006-09-12 06:44:51 · answer #4 · answered by cassandra 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just saying it is a generalization. But if it is a statistic then it is not, it's backed up with information.
2006-09-12 06:43:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not if you produce the stats which do show in
fact that in the USA close to 76% of all
convited Felons are actually "Black" male and female.
These are Public Records posted and available
to the Public at large, such as i.e. Divorce decrees etc.
2006-09-12 06:58:55 · answer #6 · answered by baltic072 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be a generalisation, but in Australia the crime is generally committed by white people, so what does that mean. Does it mean that the Americans have built a society that creates an environment where this happens. Dont blame people of a different colour, your society is rooted!!!!
2006-09-12 06:45:53 · answer #7 · answered by Brian B 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, because you have not defined what most is. Statistics can be misleading----I do not care how reliable the source. And anyway, why bring the subject up to begin with? Is your motive racist? If so, what do you hope to gain from it? Is your aim political, financial, cultural, or are you just trying to be mean spirited? Remember---God is watching.
2006-09-12 06:46:24 · answer #8 · answered by Preacher 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes, if not supported by numbers. If you have numbers then why to generalize(most people) ?straitaway give %figures.
2006-09-12 06:53:31 · answer #9 · answered by bala s 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Adolf Hitler, Mussoulini, Stalin, Slobodan Milosevich, George Bush(?) - are they all 'black'??
If you refer to the color of skin - you are generalizing! If you refer to the color of the soul - you'd be absolutely right!!
2006-09-12 06:50:18 · answer #10 · answered by Indian 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋