Is it me or in this insane sports world of today.......

[Daniel]

12 minutes ago, Jimmy Leeds said:

Like it?

Yes, very interesting in that it really lays out why and how the alliance system developed, why the Serbs were such a problem for pretty much everyone, and who was really calling the shots for each of the major belligerants.  

My view was always that the main reason for the major conflicts of the 20th century was essentially an issue of the rest of the world dealing with German power, but this seems to change that view a little bit.

But really it’s sad that so many millions were thrown to the slaughter because of arcane disputes over nothing of any importance to 99.99 percent of the European population.  And it’s really frightening to imagine yourself fighting at the Somme or Verdun, not like if I’m unlucky I might get hurt, but if I’m really lucky I won’t get killed.   We’ve got it really easy these days in comparison.  

[Daniel]

Other thing I’ll add is that those who think Europeans need to atone for imperialism should probably comfort themselves in the fact that the bloodletting of World War I — which had its roots in rivalries over overseas possessions — was penance enough.  If you exclude the Belgians in the Congo, the Europeans in WWI killed many more of themselves than the people they subjugated.

[Jimmy Leeds]

WWI has always an enigma to me.  I'm very schooled in WWII

[thecoffeecake]

On 10/23/2017 at 0:58 PM, Daniel said:

This is truly scary thinking, and why SJWs are more dangerous than these neo-Nazis.  Political violence is illegal and wrong whoever is doing it, and thats what you’re condoning whether you think so or not.  That is if you think neo-Nazi rallies can be violently or forcefully suppressed by self proclaimed members of “the Resistance”, they can violently and forcefully suppress your rallies.  

Ironically, you’re giving these people more attention than they deserve.  Neo-nazis and the Klan are not relevant in American political life.  There are literally fewer members in their ranks than there are at the fourth quarter of a Jaguars preseason game and half of them are government informers.  That’s what’s so preposterous about SJWs and  BLM, is that they think these people are the root of all their problems.

My wife’s grandparents were both in concentration camps and most of their families were murdered by actual Nazis.  When they came here though they understood that the American Nazi Party has the same right to march through Skokie as the Kiwanas Club.  

Ok, snowflake. 

"Nazis have the right to protest. Blacks do not." Gotcha.

Edited October 24, 2017 by thecoffeecake

[DevsMan84]

33 minutes ago, thecoffeecake said:

Ok, snowflake. 

"Nazis have the right to protest. Blacks do not." Gotcha.

He never said that nor even insinuated that.

[thecoffeecake]

1 hour ago, DevsMan84 said:

He never said that nor even insinuated that.

That's what his entire narrative has boiled down to, don't be dense. We disagree often, but I think you're smarter than that. 

This whole argument is about black players protesting police violence, and what you now have is an anger and resentment over those protests coming from the same people who are defending Nazis' right to organize and protest. 

Like I said, I don't think the government should censor any form of expression. Do I turn out to counter-protest Nazis (which is also protected by the same laws and principles that allow people to gather in the first place; the idea that counter-protesting somehow infringes on free speech is ludicrous, and a thinly veiled code), yes I do. Do I want the government breaking up organized demonstrations? No, the same way I believe NFL players shouldn't be punished for expressing themselves. And here I'm giving the same considerations to each group, despite the fact that one is an overt hate group that in most cases calls for genocide, and one is a group that just doesn't want to be disproportionately targeted by police. 

[Daniel]

 

1 hour ago, thecoffeecake said:

Ok, snowflake. 

"Nazis have the right to protest. Blacks do not." Gotcha.

Yeah, this is an incredibly stupid response and you’re a stupid and ignorant person.  

I said that you don’t have a right to violently attack people because you don’t like their beliefs.  The same way they don’t get to do that to you.  And if you think no platforming speakers at colleges and the like is ok because you don’t like their beliefs, other people, even Neo Nazis have the right to do that to speakers you like.

This is actually not difficult stuff to grasp, but apparently everyone who helped form your beliefs has utterly failed you. 

[thecoffeecake]

2 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Yeah, this is an incredibly stupid response and you’re a stupid and ignorant person.  

I said that you don’t have a right to violently attack people because you don’t like their beliefs.  The same way they don’t get to do that to you.  And if you think no platforming speakers at colleges and the like is ok because you don’t like their beliefs, other people, even Neo Nazis have the right to do that to speakers you like.

This is actually not difficult stuff to grasp, but apparently everyone who helped form your beliefs has utterly failed you. 

You're right, no one should have the "right" to attack others. It shouldn't be legal. But do I support violence against a group that openely calls for genocide? Yup.

This idea that violence is never justified is childish. Would you have told the New England volunteers who rushed to siege Boston that they had no right to resort to violence?

[DevsMan84]

18 minutes ago, thecoffeecake said:

That's what his entire narrative has boiled down to, don't be dense. We disagree often, but I think you're smarter than that. 

This whole argument is about black players protesting police violence, and what you now have is an anger and resentment over those protests coming from the same people who are defending Nazis' right to organize and protest. 

Like I said, I don't think the government should censor any form of expression. Do I turn out to counter-protest Nazis (which is also protected by the same laws and principles that allow people to gather in the first place; the idea that counter-protesting somehow infringes on free speech is ludicrous, and a thinly veiled code), yes I do. Do I want the government breaking up organized demonstrations? No, the same way I believe NFL players shouldn't be punished for expressing themselves. And here I'm giving the same considerations to each group, despite the fact that one is an overt hate group that in most cases calls for genocide, and one is a group that just doesn't want to be disproportionately targeted by police. 

Sorry, but BLM movement lost that narrative and moral high ground when they are engaging in protests with chants like these:

 

[Jimmy Leeds]

24 minutes ago, thecoffeecake said:

That's what his entire narrative has boiled down to, don't be dense. We disagree often, but I think you're smarter than that. 

This whole argument is about black players protesting police violence, and what you now have is an anger and resentment over those protests coming from the same people who are defending Nazis' right to organize and protest. 

Like I said, I don't think the government should censor any form of expression. Do I turn out to counter-protest Nazis (which is also protected by the same laws and principles that allow people to gather in the first place; the idea that counter-protesting somehow infringes on free speech is ludicrous, and a thinly veiled code), yes I do. Do I want the government breaking up organized demonstrations? No, the same way I believe NFL players shouldn't be punished for expressing themselves. And here I'm giving the same considerations to each group, despite the fact that one is an overt hate group that in most cases calls for genocide, and one is a group that just doesn't want to be disproportionately targeted by police. 

So you condone Antifa and BLM.  Interesting.

And that, "one is a group that just doesn't want to be disproportionately targeted by police: is a crock of sh*t..........look at Michael Bennett, that POS on the Seahawks. That douche rails against cops and claims he was the victim of "racial profiling" at an LV casino. Turns out that LV Metro was called to a casino, and what does that ignorant tool do?  He hides behind some equipment then runs when the police ask him to come out.  

That's your Dear Leader coffee

[Daniel]

30 minutes ago, thecoffeecake said:

You're right, no one should have the "right" to attack others. It shouldn't be legal. But do I support violence against a group that openely calls for genocide? Yup.

This idea that violence is never justified is childish. Would you have told the New England volunteers who rushed to siege Boston that they had no right to resort to violence?

Then I guess you support violence against BLM since some of their ranks call for genocide against whites, including that professor at Drexel and that guy who shot all those police officers in Dallas.  And the self professed founders of the movement didn’t really object to those actions.  Or did your classes on intersectionality tell you that only certain people can be racist and commit or support genocide?

Oh, and the revolutionaries at Boston knew what they were doing was considered treason and that they likely would have been hanged if they lost.   They actually had real stones to understand that.   People like you fancy yourselves revolutionaries, but then claim it’s not fair to face any consequences, or even that your precious wittle feelings be hurt when someone actually challenges the substance of your ideas without the appropriate trigger warning.

[Daniel]

32 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Sorry, but BLM movement lost that narrative and moral high ground when they are engaging in protests with chants like these:

 

While BLM has always had a narrative — mostly false — it never had any moral high ground.  Pretty much all of their claims about what’s going on are false and the people who founded the movement are intellectual non-entities.  So it offends me on an intellectual level when multimillionaire atheletes protest to support them.

[Jerzey]

I don’t think anyone is calling for the government to stop football players from kneeling. We know it’s their right to protest we just don’t like how it’s being done.  I don’t think you’ll find anyone outside of a nazi himself that will stick up for anything a nazi has to say. I love black people but think the way they’re choosing to protest is wrong. There’s nothing I like about a nazi.

BTW isn’t it disrespectful to survivors of the holocost to refer to a few rednecks wearing swastikas as nazis? How can you even compare the two?

Edited October 24, 2017 by Jerzey

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Jimmy Leeds said:

WWI has always an enigma to me.  

While the immediate origins of WWI are fairly straightforward - Austrian Archduke gets assasinated and ultimately the entangling alliance blocs go to war with each other - it’s really difficult to figure out why enough of the countries involved ultimately didn’t say no.  When Russia committed itself to war, the Tsar pretty much foresaw his own downfall, or maybe he was just being Russian.  From the book I’m reading, it’s difficult to get a sense of who was actually calling the shots for each country.  The author makes  point that decision making on foreign affairs including going to war in European countries in the early 20th century was a much, much different animal than it is under the US Constitution.

I figure that, in the end, the ultimate decision makers went to war because they thought they could win, or at least that there would be a swift resolution and that defeat wouldn’t be ruinous.  (The machine gun is probably one of the most consequential inventions in human history).  Obviously even the countries that nominally won wouldn’t have gone to war if they realized ahead of time what the costs would be.  

[thecoffeecake]

8 hours ago, Jimmy Leeds said:

So you condone Antifa and BLM.  Interesting.

And that, "one is a group that just doesn't want to be disproportionately targeted by police: is a crock of sh*t..........look at Michael Bennett, that POS on the Seahawks. That douche rails against cops and claims he was the victim of "racial profiling" at an LV casino. Turns out that LV Metro was called to a casino, and what does that ignorant tool do?  He hides behind some equipment then runs when the police ask him to come out.  

That's your Dear Leader coffee

The fact that blacks are disproportionately killed and targeted by police is backed up by numbers. So is housing discrimination, employment discrimination, the fact that blacks face stiffer sentencing for the same exact crimes. 

Your logic here falls under what's called the token fallacy. Take a token example of something and apply it to the whole of an issue. This one black guy does whatever you're claiming he did, and use it to undermine an entire movement. Literally every political party, movement, organization has people that do bad things, act in contrary to their supppsed principles, commit crimes. Blacks, whites, Republicans, Democrats, Americans, Nazis, communists, all of them. 

You know that the Ku Klux Klan is a proud American, nationalist confederation of member groups. So following your logic, the idea of being American is entirely undermined by the klansmen who famously marched by the thousands passed the White House waving American flags.

There are your dear leaders, then, Jimmy.

8 hours ago, Daniel said:

Then I guess you support violence against BLM since some of their ranks call for genocide against whites, including that professor at Drexel and that guy who shot all those police officers in Dallas.  And the self professed founders of the movement didn’t really object to those actions.  Or did your classes on intersectionality tell you that only certain people can be racist and commit or support genocide?

Oh, and the revolutionaries at Boston knew what they were doing was considered treason and that they likely would have been hanged if they lost.   They actually had real stones to understand that.   People like you fancy yourselves revolutionaries, but then claim it’s not fair to face any consequences, or even that your precious wittle feelings be hurt when someone actually challenges the substance of your ideas without the appropriate trigger warning.

See above about the token fallacy. 

BLM as an organization exists as a civil rights organization aiming to gain equal rights for Black Americans. Whether one professor at whatever school supports BLM and some other things you don't agree with, great, I don't see your point. 

Every Neo-Nazi organization, in their platform, their absolute core beliefs, calls for a return to Jim Crowe at one end, all the way up to and including complete extermination of one or several races of people. To be a Nazi, you must believe in the creation of a white, ethno-nationalist state. To compare BLM to Nazis is a very clear manipulation of the narrative to support your political agenda. 

Do you not find it ironic that you're the one set off by black athletes kneeling and whining about violence, only to turn around and talk about how I'm the triggered one? Who exactly is the one who can't handle the substance of their ideas being challenged? The hypocrisy of the American right on full display. Keep crying, snowflake. 

7 hours ago, Jerzey said:

I don’t think anyone is calling for the government to stop football players from kneeling. We know it’s their right to protest we just don’t like how it’s being done.  I don’t think you’ll find anyone outside of a nazi himself that will stick up for anything a nazi has to say. I love black people but think the way they’re choosing to protest is wrong. There’s nothing I like about a nazi.

BTW isn’t it disrespectful to survivors of the holocost to refer to a few rednecks wearing swastikas as nazis? How can you even compare the two?

 You don't have to like how it's done, you're not the one protesting for your rights. There's nothing more patronizing than a bunch of white people trying to direct the struggle for black equality. Your opinions on how blacks should or shouldn't protest is meaningless. We're lucky we haven't seen the kind of violence Ireland saw when Catholics were pursuing a very similar struggle. Our marginalized citizens are kneeling at football games, theirs set off car bombs in major cities. 

1 hour ago, Daniel said:

While the immediate origins of WWI are fairly straightforward - Austrian Archduke gets assasinated and ultimately the entangling alliance blocs go to war with each other - it’s really difficult to figure out why enough of the countries involved ultimately didn’t say no.  When Russia committed itself to war, the Tsar pretty much foresaw his own downfall, or maybe he was just being Russian.  From the book I’m reading, it’s difficult to get a sense of who was actually calling the shots for each country.  The author makes  point that decision making on foreign affairs including going to war in European countries in the early 20th century was a much, much different animal than it is under the US Constitution.

I figure that, in the end, the ultimate decision makers went to war because they thought they could win, or at least that there would be a swift resolution and that defeat wouldn’t be ruinous.  (The machine gun is probably one of the most consequential inventions in human history).  Obviously even the countries that nominally won wouldn’t have gone to war if they realized ahead of time what the costs would be.  

 This is really interesting. World War I pretty much laid the foundation for modern western geopolitics, and is almost entirely forgotten about in our education system. 

Of course warfare at that scale had never been experienced with the technology of the time, and the thought of things like block-style formations marching directly into machine gun fire through an open field is absolutely horrifying, as is so much of that war. No country could have possibly foreseen the horror of that conflict, and the war was waged at a time when governments were even less accountable to their people than the are now (but, as you mentioned, not ENTIRELY unaccountable, as the Czar discovered). The war was waged for the same reason just about every war is: control of markets. There was an obvious shift in the balance of power happening in the coming years, with or without a dead Archduke, and every state wanted a cut when Europe was redrawn. A few dead poor kids was hardly of any consideration when either controlling or having significant equity in the economic and political future of the West. 

You're right had it been known that an entire generation of European men were going to end up butchered in France, I bet fewer governments would have been so willing to commit to an indefinite war. 

[Jerzey]

I think it’s equally as patronizing to have a bunch of white people victimizing black people and making them think they’ll never be able to get anywhere in life without the assistance of the government or the heroic liberal. But you’re right, my opinion really shouldn’t matter especially since I don’t even watch boring ass football anymore. 

[Jimmy Leeds]

8 hours ago, thecoffeecake said:

The fact that blacks are disproportionately killed and targeted by police is backed up by numbers. So is housing discrimination, employment discrimination, the fact that blacks face stiffer sentencing for the same exact crimes. 

Your logic here falls under what's called the token fallacy. Take a token example of something and apply it to the whole of an issue. This one black guy does whatever you're claiming he did, and use it to undermine an entire movement. Literally every political party, movement, organization has people that do bad things, act in contrary to their supppsed principles, commit crimes. Blacks, whites, Republicans, Democrats, Americans, Nazis, communists, all of them. 

You know that the Ku Klux Klan is a proud American, nationalist confederation of member groups. So following your logic, the idea of being American is entirely undermined by the klansmen who famously marched by the thousands passed the White House waving American flags.

There are your dear leaders, then, Jimmy. 

What stat do you refer to for police "targeting" blacks disproportionately?   25 years I was a cop and the only people I "targeted" were suspects.  As far as killed by police, your numbers are wrong as whites are killed more than blacks. You don't know d*ck, except what you're told by the left.

My Bennett comment was not implying the whole is wrong, but that the most vocal of the players is just a liar.

And maybe you're too young to realize, but the last sitting member in Congress that was in the KKK, (and some sort of Imperial Wizard or something like that. How many blacks did he participate in lynching?) was a Democrat that Bill and Hillary called their mentor.

Edited October 25, 2017 by Jimmy Leeds

[thecoffeecake]

28 minutes ago, Jimmy Leeds said:

What stat do you refer to for police "targeting" blacks disproportionately?   25 years I was a cop and the only people I "targeted" were suspects.  As far as killed by police, your numbers are wrong as whites are killed more than blacks. You don't know d*ck, except what you're told by the left.

My Bennett comment was not implying the whole is wrong, but that the most vocal of the players is just a liar.

And maybe you're too young to realize, but the last sitting member in Congress that was in the KKK, (and some sort of Imperial Wizard or something like that. How many blacks did he participate in lynching?) was a Democrat that Bill and Hillary called their mentor.

Of course more whites are killed than blacks, blacks make up 13% of the American population. It's funny that you guys like to shame a college education, you probably should've stuck around long enough to take one statistics course. 

25% of those killed by police this year in this country were black; disproportional to the 13% of the population blacks comprise. Blacks are 3 times for likely to be killed by police than whites. 30% of blacks killed by police this year were unarmed as opposed to 21% of whites (which, on top of illustrating structural racism in our country, is a major indictment on American law enforcement. Clearly, as a country, our cops are largely poorly trained and incompetent. 21% of whites who were killed being unarmed is staggeringly high, forget 30%). 

I'm not suggesting every cop, or even most cops, harbor outward racial resentment, and the fact that everyone who "supports the police" (another false narrative that suggests everyone who wants to address police brutality somehow don't care about the lives of police, which is ridiculous) gets so immediately defensive that no progress can possibly be made. The idea that people have to be on one side or the other on this issue, which is how it's portrayed in the media, is absurd. Institutional racism in this country is self-perpetuating, and we're taught from a young age to discriminate against blacks, that blacks are dangerous, ignorant. Then people will say things like "I'm not racist. I'm fine with black people as long as they speak properly and don't dress like thugs". These kinds of things lead to more blacks being shot and killed by police than whites, because Americans have automatic triggers that lead them to being threatened quicker by blacks than whites. It's not the fault of any individual, but a result of 400 years of discrimination.

[DevsMan84]

Studies have also shown time and time again that blacks are the perpetrators violent crimes including murders at a disproportional rate.  This includes black on black crime.

But you conveniently left that tidbit out.

This is also where SJW's will start injecting the "racism" bit because they have no logical reply.

Edited October 25, 2017 by DevsMan84

[Jimmy Leeds]

coffee apparently harbors deep seated racism against black that he cannot shake.

I have none. But since I was a cop for 25 years, I must be fortunate to have not shot any due to my institutionalized racism.

It's funny. I shot my gun once in 25 years...........at a brown pit bull...........maybe I was harboring deep seated racist feelings when I shot the dog of color.

The handful of times I even pointed my gun at someone, I have no idea of what race they were except one, and he was white.

Nice try

[Daniel]

9 hours ago, DevsMan84 said:

Studies have also shown time and time again that blacks are the perpetrators violent crimes including murders at a disproportional rate.  This includes black on black crime.

But you conveniently left that tidbit out.

This is also where SJW's will start injecting the "racism" bit because they have no logical reply.

Exactly.  Just assume for the sake of argument that every single cop that shoots at a black suspect is a hardened racist, perhaps even a neo-Nazi.  It would pale, pale in comparison, I mean by an order of magnitude, to the devastating effect that violent crime has on a great number of black neighborhoods.  Just ask yourself how many people you knew somewhat well growing up that were murdered.  For me, the answer is zero, and I’d venture a guess the answer is the same for coffeecake.  In places like Newark, if you asked a random kid at Shabazz High School the same question, I imagine the number is probably three or four, and it wasn’t some cabal of klansmen acting secretly who were the murderers.  

If there’s one thing that BLM and the alt-right has in common is that they could absolutely care less about the problem I have described.  In fact, in their own twisted ways each group probably is happy to see the problem continue.  That’s why they’re really just two sides of the same coin.

[Jimmy Leeds]

12 hours ago, Daniel said:

  Just ask yourself how many people you knew somewhat well growing up that were murdered.  For me, the answer is zero, and I’d venture a guess the answer is the same for coffeecake. 

A friend of mine was. He was a bit younger and lived in my neighborhood. As an adult he was home invaded and murdered by 3 black men.  He was white. Sad. All locked up

[thecoffeecake]

On 10/25/2017 at 11:43 AM, DevsMan84 said:

Studies have also shown time and time again that blacks are the perpetrators violent crimes including murders at a disproportional rate.  This includes black on black crime.

But you conveniently left that tidbit out.

This is also where SJW's will start injecting the "racism" bit because they have no logical reply.

Well, actually, people in poverty are more likely to commit violent crime, and black people are far more likely to be in poverty than whites. Is it just a coincidence that 20% of whites killed by police this year were unarmed, while that number is 30% for black people? Are you going to try to tell me blacks don't receive stiffer sentencing for the exact same crimes as whites?

19 hours ago, Daniel said:

Exactly.  Just assume for the sake of argument that every single cop that shoots at a black suspect is a hardened racist, perhaps even a neo-Nazi.  It would pale, pale in comparison, I mean by an order of magnitude, to the devastating effect that violent crime has on a great number of black neighborhoods.  Just ask yourself how many people you knew somewhat well growing up that were murdered.  For me, the answer is zero, and I’d venture a guess the answer is the same for coffeecake.  In places like Newark, if you asked a random kid at Shabazz High School the same question, I imagine the number is probably three or four, and it wasn’t some cabal of klansmen acting secretly who were the murderers.  

If there’s one thing that BLM and the alt-right has in common is that they could absolutely care less about the problem I have described.  In fact, in their own twisted ways each group probably is happy to see the problem continue.  That’s why they’re really just two sides of the same coin.

Ok, so racism within our police isn't an issue because far more blacks are killed by other blacks in non law enforcement related engagements. Fair.

That being the case, Islamic extremism isn't an issue to you because far more Americans are killed by other Americans than by jihadists. 9/11 wasn't a big deal, because relatively few people died, so why should we care about it, right? 

We can agree to disagree if that's how you feel. All I'm asking is for you to follow a consistent path of reasoning. 

[Daniel]

55 minutes ago, thecoffeecake said:

Well, actually, people in poverty are more likely to commit violent crime, and black people are far more likely to be in poverty than whites. Is it just a coincidence that 20% of whites killed by police this year were unarmed, while that number is 30% for black people? Are you going to try to tell me blacks don't receive stiffer sentencing for the exact same crimes as whites?

Ok, so racism within our police isn't an issue because far more blacks are killed by other blacks in non law enforcement related engagements. Fair.

That being the case, Islamic extremism isn't an issue to you because far more Americans are killed by other Americans than by jihadists. 9/11 wasn't a big deal, because relatively few people died, so why should we care about it, right? 

We can agree to disagree if that's how you feel. All I'm asking is for you to follow a consistent path of reasoning. 

My point is that the what explains why blacks have more difficult time of things has pretty much nothing to do with racist cops, but rather black violence towards one another which dwarfs the violent crime rate of every other group in the country.  That is why places like Newark and Baltimore are the way they are, and not because of racist cops.  And you and everyone else who seems to be interested in doing something to help, are focused on something that doesn’t have anything to do with the problem, which shows that you’re either deathly afraid of even acknowledging it because it more or less destroys the factual and logical underpinnings of your entire worldview or that you’re intentionally being dishonest.

As to 9/11 it was the single biggest bloodletting on American soil in one day since Anteitam, not to mention the economic damage.  The number of people killed in the towers was actually close to ten times the annual murder rate in city and about a quarter of the murder rate nationwide.  No biggie though.  

Addendum:  As to your reduction of violent crime to poverty, please ask yourself why West Virginia, which is very poor and awash in guns, does not have a murder rate close to  much richer states like Maryland and Illinois. 

Edited October 26, 2017 by Daniel

[thecoffeecake]

On 10/26/2017 at 6:30 PM, Daniel said:

My point is that the what explains why blacks have more difficult time of things has pretty much nothing to do with racist cops, but rather black violence towards one another which dwarfs the violent crime rate of every other group in the country.  That is why places like Newark and Baltimore are the way they are, and not because of racist cops.  And you and everyone else who seems to be interested in doing something to help, are focused on something that doesn’t have anything to do with the problem, which shows that you’re either deathly afraid of even acknowledging it because it more or less destroys the factual and logical underpinnings of your entire worldview or that you’re intentionally being dishonest.

As to 9/11 it was the single biggest bloodletting on American soil in one day since Anteitam, not to mention the economic damage.  The number of people killed in the towers was actually close to ten times the annual murder rate in city and about a quarter of the murder rate nationwide.  No biggie though.  

Addendum:  As to your reduction of violent crime to poverty, please ask yourself why West Virginia, which is very poor and awash in guns, does not have a murder rate close to  much richer states like Maryland and Illinois. 

Holy sh!t, you are actually telling me you think blacks have a natural tendency to be more violent? So we're not dealing with someone unwilling or unable to grasp the concept of institutional racism, like some other posters, but someone who overtly believes blacks are genetically more violent. Interesting.

The reason places like Newark and Baltimore (less so these days) are the way they are is multidimensional, but really quite simple. Deindustrialization is the primary culprit, the thing that flooded jobs (mostly unskilled, middle class ones) out of America's traditional industrial centers (ever heard of the Rust Belt?) overseas and to the Sunbelt. Suburbanization and white flight are major factors, with the development of suburban areas outside of cities that whites flocked to after World War II. No conspiracy for you to grasp at there, blacks were either red-lined (look it up; I can't teach you all of social studies 201 right now), unable to get mortgages because of their race (which still happens, but isn't legal now as it was then), or were legally barred from moving into suburban areas (such as Levittown, the quintessential American suburb). Some cities lost half of their population, lost a lot more than that in tax revenue (as wealth is disproportionately in white hands), and took on extremely expensive problems that unused, rotting cities deal with (an underused and aging infrastructure, abandonment, crime). Those towns fell apart with nothing much left but poor blacks, and an ever growing narrative (especially since Reagan) that it was their own fault. What you also can't deny, because there's no foundation for deniability, is that black people lower property values just by existing in a neighborhood. All else equal, a house in a black neighborhood is worse significantly less than one in a white neighborhood. Racist cops absolutely had nothing to do with the decline of the American city, you're right. Racist criminal justice is an exacerbating factor.

Endemic violent crime that you're referring to is almost always the result of concentrations of extreme poverty (this is why public housing projects, especially ones designed in the middle of the last century, have such violent reputations). Illinois and Maryland have major cities with concentrated poverty (the median incomes of both Chicago and Baltimore are lower than West Virginia) that skew their numbers. Endemic violent crime isn't generally found in white or black rural areas.