Originally posted by MoeGates>According to the NCVS, there were 256,770 rapes or sexual assaults in 2000, which is a little less than 3x the 90,491 reported for 2001 by the UCR
Here's a passage from "Comparing the UCR and NCVS". Emphasis is mine.
Because the NCVS was designed to complement the UCR program, the two programs share many similarities. As much as their different collection methods permit, the two measure the same subset of serious crimes, defined alike. Both programs cover rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, and motor vehicle theft. Rape, robbery, theft, and motor vehicle theft are defined virtually identically by both the UCR and NCVS. (While rape is defined analogously, the UCR Crime Index measures the crime against women only, and the NCVS measures it against both sexes.)
It's not apples to apples. By adding molestation of boys - which is not included in the UCR statistic under rape - you are not comparing the same number. Now you have to base it off of the total population of the United States - not just the number of women. You can only generate a number based on % of Americans that would have been raped.
I still stand by my assertation that the 1/3 number is highly inflated. Keep in mind that I was still spotting the average woman almost 20 years in extra life, and that the 1/3 number requires that people are raped from today until infinity - and that rates can never drop.
Hey, in a perfect world, no one would be raped ever again. I'm all for that. I just don't like people scaring the public with statistics that cannot be backed up with facts. Violent crime is decreasing in America - let's not try to panic people with misleading statements.
Common sense should tell you that this number is way off.
(edited by Guru Zim on 4.12.02 1523) Your analogy is similar to:
"They already have cars that you can drive, why not blenders?" "I can already write with my hands, why not my pancreas?" "They already have beef that I can eat, why not granite?"
Originally posted by Pool-BoyIsn't it Martha - whatshername (the woman who wants to get into Augusta) that seriously proposed a plan that all men be sterilized, and if they want the procedure reversed in order to have kids, they had to petition the government for permission? Gee, that woman is a winner...
I never claimed that the NAACP was equal to the KKK... and YES, the CP means colored persons- and the very fact that they are an organization that promotes anyone, as long as they are not white, makes them racist. First off, they make a distinction between people based on the color of their skin (I thought MLKjr's whole vision was a world with men and women who were colorless in the eyes of society?), and secondly, it SPECIFICALLY EXCLUSES whites. That is racist! Like I said, if I made an group with virtually identical goals, and called it the NAAAPBB (National Association for the Advancement of all Persons but Blacks) that operated in the exact same fashion as the NAACP, except it exclused blacks and included whites, it would not last 2 days- the cries of anger and RACIST would dog it at every turn.
My opinion is- if you want to get rid of racism, STOP differentiating between the races as a matter of policy. The NAACP points out that colored people are inferior, because they need a helping hand to keep up with the "white man." And it also teaches that colored people are all victims, and I am sorry, someone with a victim mindset will have a lot harder time being really sucessful.
You can be proud of your heritage, and you can talk about your skin color as a means of describing yourself, but in any other way, race-grouping is nothing more than racism...
the reason the NAACP isn't racist is that Whites are the majority and it's ok to bash or do anything against he majority.
start to exclude a minority, then you're getting into trouble...
one comic once said [can't remember the name right now] that it's only PC to make fun of White Middle Class Hetro Males...
DDP: Well, there's this little passage I got memorized, Diamond Dallas 25:17. Sort of fits this occasion:
"The path of the bookerman is beset on all sides by the inequities of the talented, and the tyranny of workrate freaks. Blessed is he, who in the name of tradition and sports entertainment carries the stiffs through the matches of Nitro, for he is truly the workrate's keeper, and the finder of lost quality. And I will lay the smack down upon thee with great vengeance and furious roid rage those who attempt to outwrestle and expose my brothers. And you will know my name as the Bookerman, when I lay my catchphrase upon thee!"
I second everything vsp and bash said. My guess is that the author either does not do any actual grading or is simply a very poor teacher who cares more about their research than about teaching (sad but very common in higher education).