TF
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: The Bloods and the Crips have both murdered more African Americans than the police

Fact Check: The Bloods and the Crips have both murdered more African Americans than the police

June 12, 2025•by TruthOrFake AI
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: "The Bloods and the Crips have both murdered more African Americans than the police" ## What We Know The claim that the Bloods and the ...

Fact Check: "The Bloods and the Crips have both murdered more African Americans than the police"

What We Know

The claim that the Bloods and the Crips have murdered more African Americans than the police is a complex assertion that requires careful examination of homicide statistics and the context surrounding gang violence.

  1. Homicide Rates: Homicide is a leading cause of death among African Americans, particularly young males. According to a study analyzing homicide rates in Los Angeles County, street gangs significantly contribute to local homicide rates, with gang-related homicides accounting for as much as 45% of all homicides in certain areas during specific years (Robinson et al.).

  2. Gang Violence: The Bloods and the Crips are two of the most notorious street gangs in the United States, primarily involved in violent crime, including murder. Their conflicts have historically resulted in a high number of homicides, particularly among African American communities (Wikipedia).

  3. Police-Involved Homicides: Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that a significant portion of violent crime offenders are Black or African American, but it does not provide a direct comparison of the number of murders committed by gangs versus those committed by police (BJS).

  4. Context of Violence: The violence attributed to gangs is often a result of territorial disputes, drug trafficking, and socio-economic factors. The presence of gangs in urban areas has been linked to higher overall homicide rates, independent of other community factors (Robinson et al.).

Analysis

The assertion that the Bloods and the Crips have murdered more African Americans than the police is partially true but requires nuanced interpretation:

  • Supporting Evidence: Studies indicate that gang-related homicides constitute a significant portion of overall homicides in urban settings. For instance, in Los Angeles, gang-related homicides accounted for a substantial percentage of total homicides during certain periods (Robinson et al.). This suggests that the cumulative impact of gang violence on African American communities is considerable.

  • Contradicting Evidence: However, quantifying the exact number of murders committed by these gangs compared to police-involved shootings is challenging. While police violence against African Americans is a critical issue, comprehensive data comparing the two is scarce. The FBI's statistics indicate that a significant percentage of murder arrests involve Black or African American individuals, but this does not directly correlate to the number of murders committed by gangs versus police (FBI).

  • Source Reliability: The sources used in this analysis vary in reliability. Academic studies like those by Robinson et al. provide peer-reviewed insights into gang violence and its effects on homicide rates, while media articles and Wikipedia entries may contain biases or lack comprehensive data. Therefore, while they provide context, they should be interpreted with caution.

Conclusion

The claim that the Bloods and the Crips have murdered more African Americans than the police is partially true. While gang violence has historically resulted in a significant number of homicides within African American communities, direct comparisons to police-involved killings are complicated by a lack of comprehensive data. The impact of gang violence is profound, but the assertion requires careful contextualization to fully understand the dynamics of violence in these communities.

Sources

  1. The Effect of Urban Street Gang Densities on Small Area Homicide Incidence in a Large Metropolitan County, 1994–2002
  2. Gangs and Race: A Look at New Jersey Police
  3. Race and Ethnicity of Violent Crime Offenders and Arrestees, 2018
  4. Blood vs. Crips: Exploring the Differences Between
  5. FBI — Table 43
  6. Crips-Bloods Gang War - Wikipedia
  7. African-American Organized Crime - Wikipedia
  8. What Does It Take to Stop Crips and Bloods From Killing Each Other?

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

🔍
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Business leaders and ex bank heads throw support behind Poilievre A number of prominent business leaders formally threw their support behind Pierre Poilievre in the upcoming federal election on Saturday, arguing his Conservative Party will best handle Canada’s slowing economic growth. The group of more than 30 current and past executives includes Fairfax Financial CEO Prem Watsa, Canaccord Genuity CEO Dan Daviau, former RBC Capital Markets CEO Anthony Fell and former Scotiabank CEO Brian Porter. They published an open letter in several Canadian newspapers on Saturday saying Poilievre's plans are best to get the country's economy "back on track." "Productivity has stalled. Economic growth has slowed. Our GDP per capita is shrinking," the letter reads. "Nevertheless, this decline is not inevitable -- and it's not the Canada we know and love." To turn things around, the letter said Canada needs to eliminate barriers to productivity by streamlining permit processes and cutting outdated regulations that prevent investment and job creation. It also said the government needs to be more disciplined with its spending, impose lower taxes to make Canada more competitive and develop the country's natural resources by building pipelines, expanding mining and investing in energy. The letter, which was also signed by former RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust founder Edward Sonshine, Mattamy Homes CEO Peter Gilgan and past Toronto Blue Jays president Paul Godfrey, is one of the strongest shows of support Poilievre has seen from the business community yet. His competitor, Liberal Mark Carney, has spent much of the election campaign, which concludes on April 28 when Canadians go to the polls, touting his experience as leader of the central banks in both Canada and England. He argues that experience leaves him best equipped to address the country's economic woes and tariff threats from U.S. President Donald Trump. The Liberals did not immediately respond to request for comment on the letter. The Conservatives, however, took the missive as a sign that their platform is resonating with the business community. “Pierre Poilievre’s Canada First Economic Action Plan is being recognized as a strong plan to lower taxes and eliminate red tape to unleash our industries and bring home powerful paycheques for our people and a thriving economy," Conservative spokesman Sam Lilly said in a statement. Poilievre revealed earlier this week that his plan is designed to cut bureaucratic red tape by 25 per cent in two years through a "two-for-one" law. The law would see two regulations be repealed for every new one that's enacted and require that every dollar spent on new administrative costs trigger the cutting of two dollars in other areas. Meanwhile, Carney has said he will boost interprovincial trade by removing all exemptions under the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, develop a new fund to help link natural resource extraction sites with rail lines and roads and create new programs geared toward training workers. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said it was "no surprise" some business leaders are backing Poilievre and Carney because they're giving a tax break to the ultra-wealthy," rather than focusing on "what people actually need—health care, housing, and support when they lose a job." "Canadians are working hard but falling behind," Singh said in a statement. "Wages aren’t keeping up, housing is out of reach, and public services are stretched. The economy isn’t working for most people." This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 12, 2025. Tara Deschamps, The Canadian Press

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Business leaders and ex bank heads throw support behind Poilievre A number of prominent business le...

Apr 13, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ TH...

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ TH...

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: What We Know Plagiarism: Recent reports indicate that Mark Carney has been accused of plagiarism in his 1995 PhD thesis from Oxford University, with claims of ten instances of apparent plagiarism identified by academics reviewing the material 89. Tax Evasion and Creative Accounting: There are no credible sources that substantiate claims of tax evasion or creative accounting related to Carney. These allegations appear to be unverified assertions without supporting evidence. Abusing Tenants and Union Busting: There is currently no reliable information or credible sources that confirm these claims against Carney. These assertions seem to lack a factual basis and may require further investigation. Moving Headquarters: Carney's professional history includes significant roles in both Canada and the U.S., but specific claims about moving a headquarters are vague and not substantiated by credible evidence. Denying Insurance Claims to Coal Miners: This claim is not supported by any verified sources. Further context or evidence would be necessary to evaluate its validity. Loans from Chinese State-Owned Banks: There are no verified reports or credible sources that confirm Carney has taken loans from Chinese state-owned banks. Advisor to Justin Trudeau: Carney did serve as an informal advisor to Prime Minister Trudeau during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly on economic responses 37. Analysis The claims made against Mark Carney vary significantly in their credibility. The plagiarism allegations are backed by recent investigative journalism, notably from sources like The Independent and the National Post, which have reported on the findings of academics who reviewed Carney's thesis 89. These sources are generally considered reliable, although the National Post has been criticized for a conservative bias, which could influence the framing of the story. In contrast, the other allegations—such as tax evasion, union busting, and denying insurance claims—lack credible sources and appear to be unverified assertions. The absence of evidence or reliable reporting on these points raises questions about their validity. The claims about moving headquarters and loans from Chinese banks are particularly vague and lack any substantiation. Without specific details or credible sources, these assertions remain unverified and should be treated with skepticism. The context of these claims is also essential. Carney's recent political ascent, including his candidacy for Prime Minister, may have prompted opponents to scrutinize his past more closely, potentially leading to exaggerated or unfounded claims aimed at undermining his credibility.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: What We Know Plagiarism: Recent reports indicate that Mark Carney has been accused of plagiarism in ...

Apr 2, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: What We Know Plagiarism: Recent reports indicate that Mark Carney has been accused of plagiarism in his 1995 PhD thesis from Oxford University, with claims of ten instances of apparent plagiarism identified by academics reviewing the material 89. Tax Evasion and Creative Accounting: There are no credible sources that substantiate claims of tax evasion or creative accounting related to Carney. These allegations appear to be unverified assertions without supporting evidence. Abusing Tenants and Union Busting: There is currently no reliable information or credible sources that confirm these claims against Carney. These assertions seem to lack a factual basis and may require further investigation. Moving Headquarters: Carney's professional history includes significant roles in both Canada and the U.S., but specific claims about moving a headquarters are vague and not substantiated by credible evidence. Denying Insurance Claims to Coal Miners: This claim is not supported by any verified sources. Further context or evidence would be necessary to evaluate its validity. Loans from Chinese State-Owned Banks: There are no verified reports or credible sources that confirm Carney has taken loans from Chinese state-owned banks. Advisor to Justin Trudeau: Carney did serve as an informal advisor to Prime Minister Trudeau during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly on economic responses 37. Analysis The claims made against Mark Carney vary significantly in their credibility. The plagiarism allegations are backed by recent investigative journalism, notably from sources like The Independent and the National Post, which have reported on the findings of academics who reviewed Carney's thesis 89. These sources are generally considered reliable, although the National Post has been criticized for a conservative bias, which could influence the framing of the story. In contrast, the other allegations—such as tax evasion, union busting, and denying insurance claims—lack credible sources and appear to be unverified assertions. The absence of evidence or reliable reporting on these points raises questions about their validity. The claims about moving headquarters and loans from Chinese banks are particularly vague and lack any substantiation. Without specific details or credible sources, these assertions remain unverified and should be treated with skepticism. The context of these claims is also essential. Carney's recent political ascent, including his candidacy for Prime Minister, may have prompted opponents to scrutinize his past more closely, potentially leading to exaggerated or unfounded claims aimed at undermining his credibility.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: What We Know Plagiarism: Recent reports indicate that Mark Carney has been accused of plagiarism in ...

Apr 2, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: The USA is bigger than China and Russia and can defeat both in a war
False

Fact Check: The USA is bigger than China and Russia and can defeat both in a war

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The USA is bigger than China and Russia and can defeat both in a war

Apr 9, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks