Posted on October 5, 2005

The Color of Crime

Nicholas Stix, Men’s News Daily, Oct. 4

Imagine if one demographic group in America were 33 times more prone to commit crimes than another group. How would you feel about the relatively crime-prone group? The relatively crime-free group? Wouldn’t you want to know about such differences?

But we don’t have to imagine anything. The above contrast was not a hypothetical case, but rather the statistical relationship of black to Asian crime in America, as detailed in the ground-breaking new report, The Color of Crime, released by the New Century Foundation, the organization that sponsors American Renaissance magazine.

* “ . . . between 2001 and 2003, blacks were 39 times more likely to commit violent crimes against whites than the reverse, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.”

* Between 2001 and 2003, blacks committed, on average, 15,400 black-on-white rapes per year, while whites averaged only 900 white-on-black rapes per year.

* “Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.”

But there are five-and-one-half as many whites as blacks. If anything, the numbers should be reversed. After all, as leftists always tell us, all groups are supposed to be equally represented in all categories, for good or ill. (Well, not really. Leftists never call on the NBA and NFL to institute racial parity for white players.)

* Nationally, youth gangs are 90 percent non-white. “Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.”

* The only crime category in which Asians are more heavily represented than whites is illegal gambling.

* “Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.”

But how can that be, when for years commentators of all political persuasions have insisted that the majority of the victims of black crime were themselves black? But it has been true for some time, because blacks increasingly target whites based on the color of the latter’s skin. The commentators have been guilty variously of lying and laziness.

* Far from being guilty of “racially profiling” innocent blacks, police have been exercising racial bias on behalf of blacks, arresting fewer blacks than their proportion of criminals: “ . . . blacks who committed crimes that were reported to the police were 26 percent less likely to be arrested than people of other races who committed the same crimes.”


The Color of Crime—not to be confused with a 1998 piece of propaganda of the same name by tenured University of Maryland professor of criminology, Katheryn K. Russell—is the most scientifically rigorous research on crime and race available. It’s the state of the art.

The mainstream media will surely be anxious to publicize and discuss The Color of Crime. After all, hasn’t the public been inundated since the late 1990s (and ultimately, since the 1960s) with dubious charges of racism (“racial profiling”) against law enforcement and the justice system? And don’t the MSM always tell us that they will report on anything newsworthy? After all, the New York Times claims to be “the newspaper of record.”

In a future column, we shall see just how the MSM has responded to The Color of Crime.

In any event, the report gave in precise numbers what any sentient being over the age of twenty and living in the United States has long known. A 75-year-old Irish neighbor of mine is a retired nurse who was run out of a once-lovely Brooklyn neighborhood forty years ago by “integration” (read: brazen black crime in broad daylight). During a friendly conversation during a quiet morning on our peaceful street last spring she said, “The problem is . . . you know what the problem is.”