Foxy,

One of my degrees majors in Economics and quantitative analysis. In layman's terms it is the analysis of statistics to determine valid information and actions to take based on the information.

One of the biggest dangers with statistics is that people with preconceived ideas run the risk of presenting the data in such a way that supports their bias. The two most common methods of doing this is cherry picking data that supports their claims, or burying data that contradicts their claims in irrelevant "noise"

What you are trying to do is exactly the second method.

If you analyse the Melbourne population as a whole by origin, and compare the results, the Sudanese population is orders of magnitude more violent than anyone else.

While the obvious counter that the majority of Sudanese are not represented in these statistics, the reality is that some profiling based on race is more than justified.

Shadow Minister, thank you, thank you, thank you.
In one clear and concise entry you have not only, vindicated me, but now I have also finally found someone to confirm what I have been trying to say, and get through to, Foxy, about her bias and deflective reasoning.
Anyone who has been following the past interactions between myself and her will attest to this fact.
Another reason for my reaction is that I am not well versed at writing or communicating effectively, and so lack the ability to get a message across in the most effective/efficient manner, as you have done.
Now, maybe, just maybe, we might get a more realistic and pragmatic stance from Foxy, but I doubt it, old habits are hard to die.
Well at least now the commentors on OLO finally know the truth.
No longer can anyone say, 'it's just me and I've been picking on her'.
Hopefully your comments can go a fair way to explaining my attitude and frustration which leads to some of the more extreme rhetoric I have HAD to employ in a vain attempt at correcting their mis-guided stance and attitudes.
Again, thank you.

SM,

One of my undergraduate degrees also dealt with stats.
And as a professional researcher - analyses plays a
crucial part. You not only look at both sides of the
equation but around the edges as well.

Anyway, this is not some sort of competition of -
"Mine's bigger than yours," male/female thing. Your side
of politics prior to the Victorian election did its best
to spread the fear of"the "problem"of "Sudanese gangs"
in Melbourne. So I can understand your take on this
issue. Your side is "never wrong." And in all the times
that you've been posting here I have never known you to
argue against anything your side of politics ever said.
Or be critical of them for that matter so it's perfectly
understandable that you wouldn't do so in this instance

However, I am not disagreeing with you. That's what you don't
seem to understand. I am merely attempting to present a
bigger picture.

In the link I gave earlier - we're told that one of Victoria's
most senior judges has warned the current media reporting
and political rhetoric around crime committed by people from
South Sudanese background in Melbourne is "dangerous"and
"skewed."

Interviewed by ABC "Four Corners"as part of an investigation into
the issue, County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd said there had
been an inaccurate portrayal of how much crime is committed by
people from the community.

Kidd told reporter Sophie McNeill:

"If you are an African offender, and certainly if you're an
African youth of South Sudanese background from the western
suburbs of Melbourne, rest assured your case will be reported
upon."

The media choose to report on those cases. That creates an
impression that we, that our work, a very significant proportion
of our work is taken up with African youths from the western
suburbs of Melbourne. That's a false impression. I can say that
in general terms, most of our work, the vast, vast majority of
our work does not involve Africans."

Earlier this year, then Racial Discrimination Commissioner,
Tim Soutphommasane - made the point that while Sudanese
Australians

cont'd...

cont'd ...

SM,

to continue with the sentence from my previous post -

"that while Sudanese Australians were over-represented in
criminal offending in Victoria, they were "not the only group."

"We have Australian born and New Zealand born offenders
over-represented in crime statistics in Victoria too."

The term "over-represented" is used when the level of offending
by a particular group is greater than the group's representation
in the general population.

The statistics provided were taken from the Australian Bureau of
Statistics and the Victorian Crime Statistics Agency (CSA).
Both reputable sources. And they tell us that:

1) People born in Australia accounted for 64.90 of the Vic.
population and 72.59% unique alleged offenders.

2) People born in New Zealand accounted for 1.57% of the Victorian
population and 2.23% of unique alleged offenders.

3) People born in Sudan or South Sudanese accounted for 0.14% of
the Victorian population and 1% of unique alleged offenders.

Therefore it can be seen that while people born in Australia
and New Zealand were over represented in the alleged offender
population of Victoria. People born in Sudan were over represented to higher levels.

The CSA notes that crime "seems to be committed at different rates
at different stages of life." "If a particular group of people are
much younger or older than the general population comparisons
may not be valid."

According to Dr Mark Wood of Melbourne University - the South
Sudanese population in Victoria is "very young"with 42% of the
community under the age of 25, compared to one-thirds of the
Australian general population. The Sudanese ten to be younger
than the New Zealanders and Australians.

Therefore as you can see clarification and explanations are
necessary.

Foxy, clarifications and explanations are NOT necessary, neither are they even wanted, at all.
It is clear, every which way you look at it, the 'new' blacks are a serious problem, much more serious than previous acts of violence and assault.
Who cares about the bloody stats when we are faced with ANOTHER breed of troublemakers and miscreants.
What? are you going to start categorizing the various groups of baddies now?
To what end?
I don't think people really care about the stats when you see an escalation of attacks.
Nor do I think anyone would care about stats when they ARE BEING ATTACKED.
What has changed with this new wave of 'black attacks' is not only the quantity but apparently the quality, if I may use that word.
So if you agree with SM, just say so and leave it at that, that's all the readers want to hear, the rest is folly and fantasy.

Shadow minister yes agree, your post about Sudanese is right
Screaming and shouting can begin now
It will not change my view, while still working [very very long hours] I on visiting the office went to the corner coffee shop
It was a friendly place
Always said g'day to every one, often shouted a sandwich and coffee to a homeless person
Sudanese , plenty around there, snarled at me, the women too
Truth is SOME OF THEM NEVER EVER SHOULD HAVE come here
Truth is that district had people from all over the world, they made it a happy place, but like me never got used to the problem few