OK, there's been discussion of screening, and relative crime risk of groups, and lots of misunderstanding of the statistics.

This is a goofy Seuss parable of the relative risk, on average, by race, of violent crime, tying into the perennial topic of women excluding AA's and whether that is illogical and shameful, or rational and moral.
Per Census and FBI stats-
Blacks are 12% of the population, and commit 54% of murders.
All other races combined are 88%, and commit 46% of murders.
For other crimes, the majority commits a majority of crimes, but still disproportionately low, meaning less than their overall percent of the population.  For example, Whites and Latinos together are 72% of the population, and commit 69% of the total crime (violent and white collar combined), while Blacks are 12% and commit a disproportionately high 28%.

you are using the overall murder stats, of which, is a much larger population than what you're projecting or applying the stats to. More applicable would be murders where the victim was not known or even better, sex worker murders.

I disagree on two counts.
If the topic is "is it reasonable for women to screen out AA's?" then it is reasonable to use overall murder rates as a viable proxy statistic, though imprecise in the ways you mention.
For these stats to not reasonably be applicable, you need to claim that the much harder to find stat of murder of sex workers by race would be radically different than overall murders.  If the black differential were halved, if they were only  4.4 times the murder rate of all others for this one category, not the 8.9 x for the overall murder rate, then the point stands.  Much much higher risk.  My assertion is plausible given overall trends, yours isn't and so is the one requiring documentation.

If "Racist" means "believe all members of a race are the same and better or worse than all others of another race" then no, I'm not.

that the vast majority of murders occur between a victim & perpetrator who are well known to each other, for any reasonable analysis relating to providers & hobbyists you would have to find a way to exclude all of those murders occurring among familiar perpetrators & victims from the data analyzed.  I don't even know if that is possible with the way the data you cite are presented.  But if you can't do this, then any application of global statistics to the very specific subject of provider/hobbyist relations is specious at best & can't provide any really meaningful insights.

First and foremost these are ARREST statistics...not conviction statistics, so your whole thesis is flawed from the door.

Never said they were doing statistical analysis.
I said their conclusions, drawn from their personal observations of the world, from all the local robberies of providers being black, etc., are in fact accurate and conformance with fact.
Their generalizations, whatever their source, are rational and true.
Obviously you can't refute the facts, so you resort to name calling -Doo Doo Head!
Guess that's not pseudo intellectual, that's retro kindergarten, well done!

name a statistic that is wrong or wrongly interpreted.
Cite a better source than the FBI and the US Census.
If you can't, you're just lazy or prefer to ignore the facts.

Point 1- Over 18:  yes, the rates for AA's over 18 (more like 25) will drop... but so will those for every other race.  So the point, which deals with RELATIVE risk between races still stands.  A 50 year old black guy is much less of a risk than a 22 year old black guy, but still a much higher risk than a 50 year old white or latino or Asian guy.

At the risk of kicking the hornet's nest again ... I'll just leave this here.

Yes, the overall stats about murder do not prove a pattern for murder of providers by hobbyists.
But,  murder and all other crime stats show an extremely consistent and robust pattern of AA's being an extreme outlier in terms of criminal behavior, and even more so the more violent the behavior.

Unless you are going to propose that blacks are genetically predisposed to violence, and that's just the way things are. I think most people will agree that socio economic factors are much more germane than those strictly based on race. IOW a poor black man from the ghetto is much more likely to mug you than a middle class person of any color. Can we agree on that?

If so, I would like to point out that very few thugs of any color are out hiring hookers at $300 hr. To rely on any study regarding violence against "high end" hookers by clients, you have to throw out all men without the means to be clients in the first place, which means virtually all of those black thugs you seem to be so afraid of.

Ok, feel free to go back to your racist rant now. I am sure you won't allow my little speed bump of common sense to slow you down on your quest to make people cower at the thought of black men enjoying the hobby.

So you/we engaged in a similar thread/s back in October 2014.  Now you're back again LEADING these discussions?!?!  

For your reading pleasure.

LMAO

I will offer now, as I did then, the subject website and it's author Tim Wise.  He's noted WHITE antiracist and may can help enlighten you....some! Since he's one of your "own kind" you may give more than passing consideration.

Go see the list.

Blacks commit crime at far far higher rates than all other races combined.
They worse the crime the higher the black disparity.
You don't refute this, because you can't and you know it.

A woman who uses individual screening is still using limited data to make a prediction of future behavior.  Having biographical info deters bad behavior, but is not guaranteed.  Having references from other Prostitutes provides data the is highly predictive, but not guaranteed.  Talking to the person voice to voice to get a feel for them might help but isn't guaranteed.  Charging more, to indirectly screen out poorer or lower socioeconomic class clients helps a great deal, but is not guarantee.  Its all playing the odds and trying to minimize risk.

A majority of black men don't get arrested.
A hyper majority of black men don't commit murder.
The majority of black clients don't mistreat prostitutes.
Robbery of prostitutes is rare, murder very rare.
White, Asian, and Latino men can also be a threat, rob prostitutes, commit murder.

Maybe providers should screen, based on those factors instead (income, education)?  Because I'd pass those tests with flying colors, despite my skin tone  

True, income, education, profession, SEC, criminal background check, provider references, all are or could be superior screening filters to the crude catch all of race.

I never thought of this myself because I don't mess with BP but sometimes when you area girl on BP saying NO AAs it's mainly to TRY to ward off pimps. Either because A she doesn't want one or B she already has one.  Many of their pimps will post their BP ads for them and they certainly don't want any other pimps trying to hone in on their business.  It's all sad but just something else to think about.

....and I've gotten this from the "horses mouth" that another reason they do this, inparticular the scammers, the chance that a black guy will retaliate is higher (real or stereotype) than a white guy.