Next...oh my goodness, Retard. Seriously, when I put your logic next to your math I wonder if I am arguing with an 8 year old. What clouds your abilities? Crack baby?So anyway to your "facts"...
First, I find it a bit strange that fbi.gov would portray numbers this way. Why would they include hispanics in both columns? Maybe an idiot would fathom that it effectively eliminates the question as to where they should be put...how about in their own column? I personally can only imagine that its done for optics as I assume th numbers cause the white % to rise above 60% and the black total to fall below 40%. Just saying that if you even had a point to begin with (you don't) 59-41 looks like less of a disparity than 61-39. Nice try, but here again you seem to think that "proportionally" this is in your favor. Using your own 13% of the population value...should we not see the final tally be closer to that number. Of course we should, but instead you try to portray this like the populations are even. They are not. So what this really shows is that blacks are committing violent crime at a rate, at least, 3x higher than their population should portend. Looking at a couple of your statistics...
10093 murders "proportionally" should show us 1300 or so murders by blacks and yet it shows they actually commit, not 13%, but 51% of the murders. And this somehow is backing for your point that they whites commit "proportionally" more crime??? Ummmm... No, it doesn't. Just the opposite, Retard. Even if I take your numbers for assault, which on the surface seem disproportionate, still show blacks exceeding their proportional alottment by over 20%.
The only thing funnier than you presenting these numbers as if its a defense of black criminality is seeing the idiots who believe your post does that. Hard to imagine that much stupidity exists in one group arguing in one thread. You have a chart for that? Lol.
Off to work...have a great day.