2023 Homicide Victimization Rates
2023 Homicide Victimization Rates
Unlike the FBI, the CDC collects just homicide victimization stats and doesn't try to get homicide perpetration numbers. But also unlike the FBI, the CDC does a pretty good job at its limited task.
Here are 2023 homicide death rates by race. (Victims rather than perps.)
The top bar is the entire racial group, male and female of all ages, while the bottom bar is just males 15-34.
In general, the higher the ratio of the rate of young men dying violently to the rate of everybody dying violently, the higher the overall racial homicide rate.
The exception is Hispanics, who have a fairly high male homicide death rate and a quite low female homicide death rate. That’s part of a general pattern in which Latino culture encourages strong sexual differentiation: the men act macho and the women act feminine.
By the way, Big Noticer Is Watching You:
Sounds like the Thursday evening dinner is sold out, but tickets remain for the Friday evening speech up in Chicago’s Edgewater Beach north lakefront neighborhood.
https://passage.press/products/steve-sailer-in-chicago-public-event
A young black male has just under a one in a thousand chance of being murdered every year until age 34. When you add in deaths by car wrecks and drugs, it has to affect their life insurance premiums and marriage prospects. Who'd want to marry someone who may not be around when the kids are teenagers?
Extrapolated "lifetime chances of being murdered," based on the 2023 rates:
.
(Blacks)
2.19%: Black lifetime homicide-victimization rate
(i.e., there is a 1-in-45 chance any Black person's cause-of-death is homicide)
-- 1.97% cumulative Black males killed before reaching their 35th birthdays
-- 98.4 per 100,000 Black-male 15-34 rate
-- 16.7 per 100,000 all other Blacks (females, males ages <15, 35+), aggregate (approx.)
.
(American Indians)
0.99%: Amerind lifetime homicide-victimization rate
-- 0.62% cumulative Amerind males killed before reaching their 35th birthdays
-- 31.1 per 100,000 Amerindian-male 15-34 rate
-- 8 per 100,000 all other Amerinds (females, males ages <15, 35+), aggregate (approx.)
.
(Hispanics)
0.55%: Hispanic lifetime homicide-victimization rate
-- 0.4% cumulative Hispanic males killed before reaching their 35th birthdays
-- 19.6 per 100,000 Hispanic-male 15-34 rate
-- 4.3 per 100,000 all other Hispanics (females, males ages <15, 35+), aggregate (approx.)
.
(Whites)
0.22%: White lifetime homicide-victimization rate
-- 0.092% cumulative White males killed before reaching their 35th birthdays
-- 4.6 per 100,000 White-male 15-34 rate
-- 1.8 per 100,000 all other Whites (females, males ages <15, 35+), aggregate (approx.)
.
(Asians)
0.14%: Asian lifetime homicide-victimization rate
-- 0.046% cumulative Asian males killed before reaching their 35th birthdays
-- 2.3 per 100,000 Asian-male 15-34 rate
-- 1.2 per 100,000 all other Asian (females, males ages <15, 35+), aggregate (approx.)
.
----------
.
Comments:
.
AMERINDS: The Amerind rate is strikingly high.
.
The high Amerind rate, including outside the young-male cohorts, must come down to domestic violence and dysfunction among older Amerind men, likely alcoholics and drug-addicts. While Amerinds are likely genetically predisposed to violence at a higher rate, the numbers here are probably a proxy for well-known social dysfunction and cultural-pessimism.
In a test of genetic-determinism theory, the around-half-Amerind "Hispanic" population-pool in the USA does fall right at the midpoint between the "White" and the "Amerind" rates. The higher young-Hispanic-male rate is only slightly above the expected midpoint, and the lower Hispanic-female and older-Hispanic rates are only slightly below the expected midpoint. The Sailerian theory of "Hispanic macho culture" has a mild effect at most.
.
- - -
.
HISPANICS: The Hispanic young-male rate is circa 4.25x higher than the White young-male rate. This runs against those who love to twist data to insinuate that Hispanics, and by extension illegals, are more law-abiding than Whites.
.
In more law-abiding White regions, where the Hispanics tend to accumulate themselves to plug into the cheap-labor economy, the Hispanic Young Male homicide ratio will often be 10x+ the comparable White rate. This fact, grasped intuitively just from simple direct experience, creates major social distortions, of a kind Regime discourse is not equipped to even discuss, and so polite conversation lacks the vocabulary to do so. The social distortions are obvious enough, easily observed.
.
The dumbification and mediocritization of many areas ties to the arrival of Hispanics and others. It's not entirely tie-able to them and their arrival in and of itself. It's a systemic change, in which the good civic-core elements (which long ago learned how to avoid Blacks) see the 5x, 10x, or (in safest White areas) 15x more-dangerous aliens. The core-civic elements of Whites withdraw. Fortress-mentalities evolve. The dysfunction of Indian reservations gets re-created in thousands and thousands of local places.
.
The above is the story of the USA over the past few decades (cf. "Bowling Alone"). Things shuffle along; there is no apocalypse. But things are worse than they were x decades ago in important ways, GDP-per-capita numbers notwithstanding. This homicide-victimization data is useful as a quantification of an often-nonquantifiable phenomenon.
.
- - -
.
BLACKS: The sky-high Black homicide rate is not news to anyone. Even the 2.2% 'lifetime' implied-chance of death-by-homicide may not be shocking -- in the drug-overdose era of the past decade, directly attributable White deaths of despair are even higher, in implied 'lifetime' terms, a subject Steve Sailer has not given much attention.
But consider this: The Black homicide rate -- already so high at 2.2% 'lifetime' -- would be considerably higher still using any earlier generation's level of medical capability. The same level of violence would have meant more deaths and fewer survivals. All else held equal but medical technology and such, today's 2.2% could easily be 5% a century ago, or higher.
.
Considering these homicides do not involve formal tribal warfare, the 2.2% rate is really high, of course. As Steve Sailer wrote in a previous comment here, the most-dangerous areas will be several times the national rate. and some will approach an implied 10-15% lifetime chance of homicide for any random Black male living there, an astonishing figure.
.
The social distortions that come from this level of violence and instability are well known. No one wants to live around Blacks; if possible, non-Blacks will almost always choose a less-Black neighborhood. Those few non-Blacks who seek out Black neighborhoods are often going to be odd people, or cynical people (like the many Asians who run liquor stores and the like in all-Black areas, spreading vice and ripping off gullible, low-information shoppers).
.
If 2% of Black males are murdered before their 35th birthdays, that means several times that are actively involved in lifestyles of the worst kind. The normalization of those lifestyles obviously craters social trust.
.
But these same low-trust, institution-corroding people are also, of course, Regime clients. The Regime and the ruling ethnopolitical coalition likes Blacks very much. The Regime promotes Blacks at every level. The Regime's pro-Haitian agitation-propaganda, recently, is merely its pre-existing programming kicking in. But with these levels of violence and dysfunction, it's a little embarrassing. Or, it would be embarrassing to people who knew the concept of shame.
.
Blacks are treated by the Regime in a way that must be compared to imperial colonial-management systems and policies from the 19th-century up to the mid-20th century in places. The Regime manages Blacks as one of its major "client-state-like ethnic protectorates" (as I wrote in an essay earlier this year). "Their rambunctiousness is looked upon with motherly care, the client-populations cast as small children who have gone and accidentally broken another toy or two again, or made a playmate cry." (See: "A study of White ethnic-dispossession and ‘replacement’: Maryland’s Prince George’s County, 1970s to 1990s" https://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2024/06/27/a-study-of-white-ethnic-dispossession-and-replacement-marylands-prince-georges-county-1970s-to-1990s/)
.
- - -
.
WHITES vs ASIANS: There are a lot of people out there, now, who praise Asians as superior to Whites. OR make insinuations in that direction. I would argue there is no contest, that the best human-capital possible, which builds and maintains the best "commons" or institutions, is White NW-Europeans. Except there is the big caveat that we often do not do well "in captivity."
.
Asians, meanwhile, often DO do well in captivity, as their social institutions evolved in such conditions. They can exploit niches and 'game' institutions, but creating and maintaining them is always harder.
.
The homicide-victimization rate is a small piece of the puzzle of the "Asians vs. Whites" debate (a debate which I suppose will continue for the rest of this 21st century much as it did in the 19th and 20th centuries under different iterations but with always-consistent themes). The overall lifetime-homicide rate rounds approximately to the same rate. Yes, the national Asian rate is only half the national White rate. But both are so low as to be effectively the same, especially when compared on global scale.
.
And this despite some serious problems with Whites these days. The phenomenon of a decade- or two's-worth of declining life-expectancy ("deaths of despair") is not over.
.
It's possible the inter-racial murder rates tilt higher against Asians, meaning Asians are more likely victims than perpetrators. Even so, Asians are not necessarily on some order-of-magnitude ;lower degree of proneness to crime, all else equal, than Whites. Those boosters of Asians>Whites in the debate, including the advocates of racial blending of the two, do not have a strong leg to stand on here. The difference in disorganized violence is small and statistically insignificant. The difference in damage done to the commons, to social institutions, may be considerably higher.
.
.
(Life-expectancies used in these "implied lifetime risk" calculations: Blacks, 77; Amerinds: 73; Hispanics 82.5; Whites: 78.5; Asians: 86.5.)