yeah because any given banker is as guilty for a war as a gangbanger that pulls the trigger. You class warfare guys really are getting silly about stretching reality to fit what you want.Excuse me, excuse me...I was just skimming through the thread and I had to butt in here. I see in this post you are responding to Comrade Freehold, Citizen Janus, maybe, I don't know, Citizen Wolf. Hardly the "class warfare guys" around these parts.Hey, anything that doesn't show proper deference to our betters is "class warfare".
If it isn't outright Kristallnacht.
Yeah, I saw that, it was pretty funny.
EDIT: Oh wait, that wasn't even the one I saw. I saw the one where he said millionaires should have a million votes or something. Man, this guy's on a roll!
Yeah. Someone once asked me how best to observe equality of the classes. I gave them directions to a graveyard and told them the only equality that will ever exist between the classes can be found there.
Doesn't mean I don't hold respect for you for what you're trying, though. You might someday succeed. I'll enjoy admitting I'm wrong on that day.
Up against the wall, mo'fo'!
Up against the wall, mo'fo'!Yeah. Someone once asked me how best to observe equality of the classes. I gave them directions to a graveyard and told them the only equality that will ever exist between the classes can be found there.
Doesn't mean I don't hold respect for you for what you're trying, though. You might someday succeed. I'll enjoy admitting I'm wrong on that day.
Wouldn't you rather have my plan for how to destroy capitalism first? And then let me see if it worked before you put me up against the wall?
It's incredibly simple, too.
Edit: I mixed up my communism and capitalism files for that. I also have a few others. Basically, I have plans to take down the entire world, if I ever had the power and were bored enough. Fortunately, I'm neither.
|
people can recover financially, talk to me when you can raise the deadSo it's okay to steal?
Is there really no amount of economic devastation that, to you, is equivalent to a single death? Is white collar crime so insignificant to you that literally billions being swindled deserves the same amount of investigation as a single violent death?
See that baffles me.
As i have said before, all criminals should see justice but yes NO amount of banker theft is the same as murder, and for every banker breaking the law there are hundred of street thugs killing or trying to
|
|
Up against the wall, mo'fo'!Yeah. Someone once asked me how best to observe equality of the classes. I gave them directions to a graveyard and told them the only equality that will ever exist between the classes can be found there.
Doesn't mean I don't hold respect for you for what you're trying, though. You might someday succeed. I'll enjoy admitting I'm wrong on that day.
Wouldn't you rather have my plan for how to destroy communism first? And then let me see if it worked before you put me up against the wall?
It's incredibly simple, too.
You don't need a plan, it destroys itself
But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....
|
|
But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....
ill pass, anything offered free is a trap. Looking at histories communists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in it
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you really think that there is a wide-ranging conspiracy to shield me from knowing about illegal activity? Or is it more likely that it is not nearly as widespread as you might think.
Or there's no means to prove anything when its a cops word against a corpses.
Folks in business suits also generally don't attract the attention of the police, as any crime they may be conducting is behind closed doors.
This is more, not less, reason to deny them the ability to shut the door. Why isn't that done?
Because they're white, and rich, and reasonable search and seizure actually means something other than "the cop wanted to" when they're involved.
They were smart enough to make lots of money, so one would think they are better at shielding their drugs from police search and seizure.
So tap their phones and put cameras in their houses. Who cares if 99% of them are innocent as long as you can catch someone doing something.
Because they're white, they're rich, and no one wants that happening to THEM. As long as civil liberties are only abrogated for minorities most people are fine with it hey, its not going to happen to me. As soon as you do it to one white guy "AAACK! I could be next! "
But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....ill pass, anything offered free is a trap. Looking at histories communists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in it
Because humans have a capacity for believing they can improve something to make up for the mistakes of the past. After all, that's what led to the United States being founded as a republic, despite the fact history of the time unequivocally stated that republics are doomed to ultimately be epic failures.
But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....ill pass, anything offered free is a trap. Looking at histories communists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in it
How'd you get roped in laisez-fair economics?
Same fallacy: law of the excluded middle.
[Dangles keys]
|
|
Because humans have a capacity for believing they can improve something to make up for the mistakes of the past. After all, that's what led to the United States being founded as a republic, despite the fact history of the time unequivocally stated that republics are doomed to ultimately be epic failures.But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....ill pass, anything offered free is a trap. Looking at histories communists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in it
Republics at least sound like a good idea. Communism is a race to the bottom, why struggle and strive when you can sit with a hand out? Just makes no sense to me
Republics at least sound like a good idea. Communism is a race to the bottom, why struggle and strive when you can sit with a hand out? Just makes no sense to meBecause humans have a capacity for believing they can improve something to make up for the mistakes of the past. After all, that's what led to the United States being founded as a republic, despite the fact history of the time unequivocally stated that republics are doomed to ultimately be epic failures.But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....ill pass, anything offered free is a trap. Looking at histories communists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in it
Because republics historically end either in violence or in dictatorship. It sounds like a good idea, but you're always risking it will be your generation that ends up being there when it comes time to pay the piper.
Communism, while a race to the bottom, sells itself on equality. It's not until people get that equality that they find out why striving for equality must be tempered with reason.
|
|
But Andrew, we're going to buy you a car. And you won't have to work in that shiznitty shift in that shiznitty convenience store in that shiznitty city. You can come back to UPS and be an air clerk again, it'll be great. Come with me Andrew, come to Galt....ill pass, anything offered free is a trap. Looking at histories communists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in itHow'd you get roped in laisez-fair economics?
Same fallacy: law of the excluded middle.
Because i believe in freedom, as absolute as possible. Economics do need some controls but as little as needed works best i think. I should be able to pick my employer and agree to a wage without anyone else getting in the way, i should be able to buy and sell items based on what i am willing to pay not what someone else decides is "fair" or if they want it banned entirely.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There has never been a truly communist state.... Those states that have tried communism did not meet the requirements to be successful.. Being primarily agrarian, peasant economies with neither the educational or industral base to carry it off.
Because i believe in freedom, as absolute as possible. Economics do need some controls but as little as needed works best i think. I should be able to pick my employer and agree to a wage without anyone else getting in the way, i should be able to buy and sell items based on what i am willing to pay not what someone else decides is "fair" or if they want it banned entirely.
Looking at histories communists capitalists makes me wonder how anyone can believe in it
Bookmarking for later
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of Andrew's thinking seems to come down to discounting.
As long as the banker didn't PHYSICALLY pull the trigger, he's free and clear to do whatever he wants. If it indirectly leads to millions of deaths and millions of aggregate years of suffering, who cares?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As i have said before, all criminals should see justice but yes NO amount of banker theft is the same as murder, and for every banker breaking the law there are hundred of street thugs killing or trying topeople can recover financially, talk to me when you can raise the deadSo it's okay to steal?
Is there really no amount of economic devastation that, to you, is equivalent to a single death? Is white collar crime so insignificant to you that literally billions being swindled deserves the same amount of investigation as a single violent death?
See that baffles me.
This is the softest ball you've thrown white collar crime yet. All criminals should be prosecuted, but not all crimes are the same- throw tons of support and cash for police enforcement of violent street crimes and take a look at other crimes...well...maybe someone should..nah, let's just stick with the violent street crime, that's the only thing anyone should be concerned about EVAR!!!!1
Maybe this one too.
Do you really think that there is a wide-ranging conspiracy to shield me from knowing about illegal activity? Or is it more likely that it is not nearly as widespread as you might think.Or there's no means to prove anything when its a cops word against a corpses.
Folks in business suits also generally don't attract the attention of the police, as any crime they may be conducting is behind closed doors.This is more, not less, reason to deny them the ability to shut the door. Why isn't that done?
Because they're white, and rich, and reasonable search and seizure actually means something other than "the cop wanted to" when they're involved.
They were smart enough to make lots of money, so one would think they are better at shielding their drugs from police search and seizure.So tap their phones and put cameras in their houses. Who cares if 99% of them are innocent as long as you can catch someone doing something.
Because they're white, they're rich, and no one wants that happening to THEM. As long as civil liberties are only abrogated for minorities most people are fine with it hey, its not going to happen to me. As soon as you do it to one white guy "AAACK! I could be next! "
All poor minorities have cameras put in their houses by the authorities? No wonder these budgets are out of control.
Wait, I see now. Morgan Freeman gave Obama that Bat-Man thing that could tap into all wireless phones. And wireless phones have been getting cheaper, so now even poor people have them. Clever O-Man, quite clever.
If it's okay for minorities' civil rights to be ignored, and for it to cost millions of dollars, to enforce a stop and frisk policy, why isn't it okay to monitor the phones of bankers and wall street tycoons?
Do you not see the disconnect?
There has never been a truly communist state.... Those states that have tried communism did not meet the requirements to be successful.. Being primarily agrarian, peasant economies with neither the educational or industral base to carry it off.
No one does pure capitalism either. Not even the United States. So, we can't judge either system's pure form because we've not seen either in action.
Unfortunately, as we've seen, both systems in practice are equally disastrous if not tightly controlled.
There has never been a truly communist state.... Those states that have tried communism did not meet the requirements to be successful.. Being primarily agrarian, peasant economies with neither the educational or industral base to carry it off.No one does pure capitalism either. Not even the United States. So, we can't judge either system's pure form because we've not seen either in action.
Unfortunately, as we've seen, both systems in practice are equally disastrous if not tightly controlled.
There was a fun bit in one of Gore Vidal's memoirs. (All Yank stuff, sorry, Comrade Dwarf.) His father was the founder of one of the airlines that eventually became...TWA, I think, and later served in FDR's administration as Commissar of Aeronautics or such some thing, I don't remember the details.
Anyway, he was describing the way that the air postal contracts got handed out during various administrations (and how that totally made and broke companies) and made some arch comments about the "socialism" of Humphrey (gave them to his friends) and the "free marketism" of FDR (put them up to honest bidding).
I probably didn't do it justice, but at the time it made me hee hee.
and made some arch comments about the "socialism" of Humphrey (gave them to his friends)
[Facepalm]
Hoover, that is.
Bookmarking for later
[Adds to library queue]
How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America is a bit of a wild ride. To sum up: desegregation was bad for blacks because their businesses were unable to compete with whites'; whites are racist because they are unwilling to let their businesses be taken without compensation and given to blacks; and that murder and robbery are punished more harshly than prostitution and jaywalking because of who commits the crimes. It is pretty dated now. I think he backed away from some of the nuttier arguments later.
I respect the Fourth Amendment. I respect the Fifth Amendment. My job would be easier without them, but I don't want to live in a society that lack them.
The public wants us to focus on robbery, murder, and street level crime. Go to a town hall ("community policing") meeting. You won't hear much of anyone complaining about white collar theft. You will hear about unsolved murders, the robbery rate, drug dealers selling in public, prostitution on the street, and that sort of thing. These concerns cut across colors. (Read Code of the Streets by Elijah Anderson for details about the quest of poor decent folks to keep the street life away.) You talk about privilege? "Don't worry about the violence and drugs ravaging your neighborhood because I want the bankers punished" is a statement of privilege - the privilege of enjoying the safety that our efforts have wrought.
Don't worry about the violence and drugs ravaging your neighborhood because I want the bankers punished" is a statement of privilege - the privilege of enjoying the safety t
You really shouldn't take your reading comprehension cues from Andrew R.
Its not that your focus should be on one or the other, its that outrageously unconstitutional methods are only recognized as such when directed against non minorities. Your claims that they're the same legal standard is an insult to perfectly good fertilizer.
How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America is a bit of a wild ride. To sum up: desegregation was bad for blacks because their businesses were unable to compete with whites'; whites are racist because they are unwilling to let their businesses be taken without compensation and given to blacks; and that murder and robbery are punished more harshly than prostitution and jaywalking because of who commits the crimes. It is pretty dated now. I think he backed away from some of the nuttier arguments later.
Never having read any Comrade Marable, I can't comment, although I did see him speak when he was a member of the Committees of Correspondence, a split from the Communist Party USA.
But I do know, from an Afro-American literature course I took that spent a lot of time on Zora Neale Hurston, that the black petty-bourgeoisie--undertakers, preachers*, various small business owners--were wildly ambivalent about the Civil Rights Movement and there are some circles of black America that look back in nostalgia to the days when they were able to develop their own, segregated communities.
*What about MLK? MLK, according to a critical bio I recently read, was at loggerheads with sizeable portions of the black church for most of his career.
You really shouldn't take your reading comprehension cues from Andrew R.
Its not that your focus should be on one or the other, its that outrageously unconstitutional methods are only recognized as such when directed against non minorities. Your claims that they're the same legal standard is an insult to perfectly good fertilizer.
Outrageously unconstitutional? Again, I respect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I work within that framework, and I work well. I know when to get a warrant, and when a warrantless search is appropriate, and when no search is appropriate.
I actually wasn't directing the above statement (regarding crime prioritization) at you, BNW. Sorry for any confusion. I was directing it at Freehold DM, meatrace, and thejeff, quoted below:
I'm concerned that you are going after low hanging fruit.
=============================================================
This is the softest ball you've thrown white collar crime yet. All criminals should be prosecuted, but not all crimes are the same- throw tons of support and cash for police enforcement of violent street crimes and take a look at other crimes...well...maybe someone should..nah, let's just stick with the violent street crime, that's the only thing anyone should be concerned about EVAR!!!!1
And it's not like people don't die do to white collar crime (or even not crime). It's just usually not as direct and obvious.
So it's okay to steal?
Is there really no amount of economic devastation that, to you, is equivalent to a single death? Is white collar crime so insignificant to you that literally billions being swindled deserves the same amount of investigation as a single violent death?
See that baffles me.
I do want to talk about this statement of yours, though.
This is more, not less, reason to deny them the ability to shut the door. Why isn't that done?
Because they're white, and rich, and reasonable search and seizure actually means something other than "the cop wanted to" when they're involved.
Again, I don't think that you swear the same fealty to the Constitution that I do. I believe in the rights of the people, and I feel comfortable with the status quo. We aren't violating people's rights willy-nilly at a whim. I'm around other police officers literally all day, every day. Those of us up in Homicide are extremely careful and tend to get a warrant for everything - just to make sure that no evidence gets suppressed. My friends in Patrol don't have the time that we do, and tend towards allowed warrantless searches that do not violate anyone's rights. Read the text of the Fourth: reasonable searches and seizures are allowed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Barcas, I don't mean to argue with your experience, but if you, as a police officer, can't see that "reasonable" is a subjective measure, and that race plays into said subjectivity, that's the whole problem right there.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Read the text of the Fourth: reasonable searches and seizures are allowed.
I'm ragging on policies like stop and frisk, which clearly show that its considered "reasonable" to assume that a young black male is guilty of a crime and thus search them, but that the standard for a reasonable search is patently not the same for other communities.
Stop and frisk is a NYC issue, and is being dropped due to new Mayor. Let's not paint all law enforcement everywhere by what one city does or did.
|
|
Stop and frisk is a NYC issue, and is being dropped due to new Mayor. Let's not paint all law enforcement everywhere by what one city does or did.
And beyond that think about what led to such measures becoming something seen as reasonable or ever required for the safety of the city. Stop and frisk is definitely pushing the line of constitutional actions but with the situation there what choices do they have? I do not know if stop and frisk was the right move but something had to be done.
|
|
Read the text of the Fourth: reasonable searches and seizures are allowed.I'm ragging on policies like stop and frisk, which clearly show that its considered "reasonable" to assume that a young black male is guilty of a crime and thus search them, but that the standard for a reasonable search is patently not the same for other communities.
It is reasonable that the young black guy running from the cops is up to something yes. If they are looking for a serial killer or child molester they are looking for a white man. not racist, simple fact. Cannot argue with reality for hurting feels
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is reasonable that the young black guy running from the cops is up to something yes. If they are looking for a serial killer or child molester they are looking for a white man. not racist, simple fact. Cannot argue with reality for hurting feelsRead the text of the Fourth: reasonable searches and seizures are allowed.I'm ragging on policies like stop and frisk, which clearly show that its considered "reasonable" to assume that a young black male is guilty of a crime and thus search them, but that the standard for a reasonable search is patently not the same for other communities.
Let's see if you have a problem with cops showing up at your door on a weekly basis to harass you on the idea that you are a child molester solely based on your race. Eventually I'm sure you'll get tired of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stop and frisk is a NYC issue, and is being dropped due to new Mayor. Let's not paint all law enforcement everywhere by what one city does or did.And beyond that think about what led to such measures becoming something seen as reasonable or ever required for the safety of the city. Stop and frisk is definitely pushing the line of constitutional actions but with the situation there what choices do they have? I do not know if stop and frisk was the right move but something had to be done.
easy to say that when you aren't the one being harassed solely based on skin color. See above.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stop and frisk is a NYC issue, and is being dropped due to new Mayor. Let's not paint all law enforcement everywhere by what one city does or did.
more would if police departments did not look to each other for ideas on what to do.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is reasonable that the young black guy running from the cops is up to something yes.
Since 90% of them at least didn't have anything on them this is patently false.
Also reasonable to assume he's sick of being thrown up against the wall by the cops.
|
|
Let's see if you have a problem with cops showing up at your door on a weekly basis to harass you on the idea that you are a child molester solely based on your race. Eventually I'm sure you'll get tired of it.It is reasonable that the young black guy running from the cops is up to something yes. If they are looking for a serial killer or child molester they are looking for a white man. not racist, simple fact. Cannot argue with reality for hurting feelsRead the text of the Fourth: reasonable searches and seizures are allowed.I'm ragging on policies like stop and frisk, which clearly show that its considered "reasonable" to assume that a young black male is guilty of a crime and thus search them, but that the standard for a reasonable search is patently not the same for other communities.
yeah im sure every black man in america gets a weekly visit. The ones to hang out on "crack selling corner" get visits more often im sure. But actions cannot possibly be involved in them being "victims" of a system just out to get them for fun......
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Had an incident yesterday that reminded me of Citizen R, and wanted to share it.
So, we got like 4 feet of snow Friday night, dug ourselves out on Saturday afternoon (had to cancel the Valentine's lunch reservations with Mrs Gersen, because we were snowed in), and got another foot or two yesterday.
Yesterday afternoon, an African-American youth -- obvious thug in dreadlocks and a hoodie -- comes skulking up my front walk through the new snow and does this sinister little tap on the door. I thought about grabbing a shotgun, but decided to risk opening the door without it.
The thug asks, politely, "Can I shovel the walk for you, sir?" When he's finished he asks if he's done an acceptable job. I tip him for the effort and he wishes me a good day.
I probably should have played it safe and blown him away on sight in defense of my home, but I was really tired of shoveling snow, so I'm sort of glad I didn't.
|
|
It is reasonable that the young black guy running from the cops is up to something yes.Since 90% of them at least didn't have anything on them this is patently false.
Also reasonable to assume he's sick of being thrown up against the wall by the cops.
Ok you win, no crime has ever been commited by a black man, all the statistics are made up and the cops are all just nazi and klansmen out to target innocent blacks as they are doing nothing wrong. All crime is commited by whites, conveniently in black neighborhoods to frame them and the poor angels just run from the police because cops like to slap around anything not white.
I've seen a lot of gang activity firsthand. I've had friends beaten senseless by neo-nazis, but never by black gangs. I've been held at gunpoint by whites, but never by blacks. That's not to say that blacks don't commit crimes, but in my experience African-American criminals disproportionately commit crimes against other blacks.
|
|
Had an incident yesterday that reminded me of Citizen R, and wanted to share it.
So, we got like 4 feet of snow Friday night, dug ourselves out on Saturday afternoon (had to cancel the Valentine's lunch reservations with Mrs Gersen, because we were snowed in), and got another foot or two yesterday.
Yesterday afternoon, an African-American youth -- obvious thug in dreadlocks and a hoodie -- comes skulking up my front walk through the new snow and does this sinister little tap on the door. I thought about grabbing a shotgun, but decided to risk opening the door without it.
The thug asks, politely, "Can I shovel the walk for you, sir?" When he's finished he asks if he's done an acceptable job. I tip him for the effort and he wishes me a good day.
I probably should have played it safe and blown him away on sight in defense of my home, but I was really tired of shoveling snow, so I'm sort of glad I didn't.
Go ahead and show me where i have ever said all blacks are criminals and should be shot on sight? That is coward ass accusation to trow around on the internet. And for the record i answer my door armed whether it is a black kid in thug gear or LDS in ties. You do not know who is on the other side until you are there.
|
|
I've seen a lot of gang activity firsthand. I've had friends beaten senseless by neo-nazis, but never by black gangs. I've been held at gunpoint by whites, but never by blacks. That's not to say that blacks don't commit crimes, but in my experience African-American criminals disproportionately commit crimes against other blacks.
Since moving to a very "race mixed" town (whites are less than 50% i would guess) i have had almost no issues with any race but white and black despite the large asian/arab populations and i have learned that trash of any color tend to attack what is close. Blacks attack other blacks so often because that is who they can easily reach the same as all white hick towns are white on white violence.
I haven't lived long enough in any city with fast and reliable public transportation (thus providing artificial "reach") to test that hypothesis, but it sounds like a realistic explanation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok you win, no crime has ever been commited by a black man, all the statistics are made up and the cops are all just nazi and klansmen out to target innocent blacks as they are doing nothing wrong. All crime is commited by whites, conveniently in black neighborhoods to frame them and the poor angels just run from the police because cops like to slap around anything not white.
Have you tried NOT being the poster boy for the either or fallacy?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
yeah im sure every black man in america gets a weekly visit. The ones to hang out on "crack selling corner" get visits more often im sure. But actions cannot possibly be involved in them being "victims" of a system just out to get them for fun......Let's see if you have a problem with cops showing up at your door on a weekly basis to harass you on the idea that you are a child molester solely based on your race. Eventually I'm sure you'll get tired of it.It is reasonable that the young black guy running from the cops is up to something yes. If they are looking for a serial killer or child molester they are looking for a white man. not racist, simple fact. Cannot argue with reality for hurting feelsRead the text of the Fourth: reasonable searches and seizures are allowed.I'm ragging on policies like stop and frisk, which clearly show that its considered "reasonable" to assume that a young black male is guilty of a crime and thus search them, but that the standard for a reasonable search is patently not the same for other communities.
not for fun. You're dating yourself a bit there. They're harassing them because they assume they want to look effective and not look bad or lose their jobs because quotas aren't being met. This isn't for fun, it's how a guy keeps his job.
I've seen a lot of gang activity firsthand. I've had friends beaten senseless by neo-nazis, but never by black gangs. I've been held at gunpoint by whites, but never by blacks. That's not to say that blacks don't commit crimes, but in my experience African-American criminals disproportionately commit crimes against other blacks.
Statistically, most crime is intraracial. That is, most complainants are the same race as the suspect who victimized them. Most (80%, I believe) interracial crime is black-on-white, especially violent felonies. Blacks commit approximately 50% of the violent crime in the United States; whites and Hispanics commit the other 50%. (The UCR doesn't differentiate between whites and Hispanics, so it's difficult to tell.) The Uniform Crime Reports are published by the FBI, which tell who gets arrested for what, and the demographics are backed up by the National Crime Victimization Survey.
Andrew is generally correct regarding the above observed rates being a function of geography. (Though it isn't a matter of public transportation so much as convenience.) Some more radical criminologists theorize that black-on-white crime is justified, and that black-on-black crime is just "horizontal violence" because they can't find any white folks to injure.
Freehold DM, we don't have quotas. I know some lazy-ass officers who don't do jack, and no one fires them for doing the bare minimum (i.e. answering calls for service and no proactive work). Interesting story, there was a city (Philadelphia, I believe) that demanded that police stop doing proactive police work sometime around 2000. They complied, and shootings went up like 800% in the following year; they still hadn't recovered last time I looked it up (which was 3-4 years ago). We're seeing a similar increase in New York City, as Stop and Frisk (a legal program with sound legal footing but bad PR) is down like 70% because officers are afraid of running afoul of the law.