Argh! I had a rant about John Leo on here, and the site crashed when I tried to post it. Well, in shorter form, then:
John Leo, in his latest column for US News & World Report, trots out some spurious statistics (a pet peeve of mine). He talks about one stat (number of serial killers who are white), and then uses non-applicable stats (number of blacks who are serial killers, number of sniper killers who are non-white) to argue that it is wrong. It's in the second paragraph of his piece. If you have a situation where the majority of serial killers are white, it doesn't matter what percentage of blacks are serial killers. By Leo's own numbers 22% of serial killers are black. He doesn't give stats for other races, but I'm guessing that they don't account for 40% of serial killings in the US (the number necessary to make white serial killers 38%, or not in the majority. I'm using integers.) He also says more than half of all sniper killings are by non-whites. Since not all sniper killers are serial killers, or vice versa, and he doesn't give us any numbers on those who are, this number is fairly pointless, other than it sounds good because he's talking about a serial sniper.

I'm not even going to go into how silly he sounds further on when he trys to talk about hip-hop and Jamaica. There's a long history of any given subculture having whatever characteristics are useful for those who are talking about it, but actually know nothing about the subculture.