posted by like_that

You're really sensitive about the Chicago thing.  It makes sense, considering you go out of your way to tell us  you live in a city.  Apparently this is your best "quality" as a person.  I meant what I said, based on your posts.  You literally called me racist, because I don't fully support everything that is going on with BLM.  That's the modern day progressive playbook.  If I have mentioned you living in Chicago turned you into a lib, it is because Chicago was the catalyst and not why I think you turned into lib.  Does that make sense or do I need to type a little slower for you? Again, are you dense on purpose?

Also, I asked for you to provide an example of me being racist. Do you think not supporting everything involved with BLM makes somebody racist?   You can support black people and not support BLM at the same time.  It's really not that hard. I view and treat everyone individually by character.  Is it that hard for you to think critically?  

Btw, you have said some pretty problematic shit on this site when it comes to race.  It's wild to me you would even try to play the race card. Probably shouldn't go full white boy hero calling others racist, while living in your predominately white neighborhood in Chicago.  Especially, (using your angle) when you live in a pretty racist city. 

Tl;dr

posted by SportsAndLady

Tl;dr

That answers one of my questions.  You’re not purposely dense.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Yeah, I agree there. But, just to assume because they raise a fist makes them commies is a stretch....

I didn’t say raised fist. I said their fist emblem is an exact copy just changed color. If they wanted to not copy a Marxist regime and use a black raised fists as a sign of solidarity then it would be REALLY easy to just draw the fist different, not copy/paste from the communist regime.  

posted by SportsAndLady

“Progressive transformation” wtf are you even talking about? You say these things like they mean anything. You’re seriously trying to argue you don’t have prejudices against black people? Lol come on

Your move to Italy has only made it that much more obvious

Eventually you will realize just calling people who have a different belief than you a racist just makes you a complete and utter moron who can’t put together a logical argument.

posted by jmog

I didn’t say raised fist. I said their fist emblem is an exact copy just changed color. If they wanted to not copy a Marxist regime and use a black raised fists as a sign of solidarity then it would be REALLY easy to just draw the fist different, not copy/paste from the communist regime.  

It’s not the “exact” copy. there are several small differences. 

posted by geeblock

There is no such thing as black on black Crime. It’s just crime. Black on black is racist propaganda. And yes black people are highly outraged and it  has been pointed out multiple times in this thread there are anti gang/ anti gun rallies every weekend. Links were even provided.

85 percent of whites people are killed by other white people. Why do we never hear about white on white crime? The simple fact is that people of similar socio economic backgrounds commit crime/murder at the exact same rate. So what you are talking about is poor people commiting crime and projecting that on other black people. Yes I know black people commit a disproportionate amount of murder, they also make up a disproportionate amount of poor people. The fact is that 94.5 percent of black people don’t commit any murder and over 96 percent of black people don’t commit any crime. 

Geeblock, you don’t really want to go down the statistical route because once you factor in number of interactions/crimes/arrests a white suspect is far more likely to be shot or killed by a police officer than a black person. 

FBI statistics bears this out, so it really shuts down the whole “we are getting shot in record numbers!” Argument.

Don’t get me wrong, there are cases like Floyd that are obvious murder. 

But when you take the anecdotes and media frenzy away, black suspects are less likely to be killed by cops than white suspects, when you factor for interactions with police. 

So someone cant site black on black crime because white people commit crimes?

The siting of black on black crimes is usually done to point out the hypocrisy of the person doing it because the outrage is usually pointed at a crime of a white person on a black person.  All the while ignoring the massive amount of crimes that blacks commit on each other.

Crime is crime......but the outrage over it isnt the same.  

posted by Spock
The siting of black on black crimes is usually done to point out the hypocrisy ...

Well, here's an "inconvenient" fact.  According to the FBI stats, blacks are more than twice as likely as whites to commit a hate crime:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2018/topic-pages/offenders

posted by jmog

Geeblock, you don’t really want to go down the statistical route because once you factor in number of interactions/crimes/arrests a white suspect is far more likely to be shot or killed by a police officer than a black person. 

FBI statistics bears this out, so it really shuts down the whole “we are getting shot in record numbers!” Argument.

Don’t get me wrong, there are cases like Floyd that are obvious murder. 

But when you take the anecdotes and media frenzy away, black suspects are less likely to be killed by cops than white suspects, when you factor for interactions with police. 

 

We have had this conversation 10 times so let’s not do it again. I believe there is a problem with the way black people are policed. You don’t and that’s fine. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Let me add in some history here. The use of federal forces/ troops has rarely been used in U.S. history. It is only used in the most extreme circumstances, think Reconstruction after the civil war. The use of federal forces has only been used recently after the 1968 riots and really after the riots in LA in 92. 

Federal forces were not really used to patrol cities. We have state and local police for that, and only in extreme cases like cities burning should we even entertain the deployment of those forces. The violence in Chicago and elsewhere does not rise to the level of those forces. Violence in Chicago and other major cities has been higher before, think the 80s and 90s and even then we did not even entertain the thought of sending in federal forces. 

If this is your thoughts, then the President of either party, can send in federal forces whenever they see something they think rises to not complying with law and order? 

I shouldn't be surprised you take this approach as anything Trump says you agree with, but this is fundamentally not an issue that people on the right would ever support. It is an expansion of federal power that contradicts the limited government philosophy. 

You mention the LA riots .......what the hell do you think is occurring every day for two months straight in Portland, and elsewhere?  Get in the game.  99% of the residents in those cities are FED UP with this bullshit.

posted by jmog

Geeblock, you don’t really want to go down the statistical route because once you factor in number of interactions/crimes/arrests a white suspect is far more likely to be shot or killed by a police officer than a black person. 

FBI statistics bears this out, so it really shuts down the whole “we are getting shot in record numbers!” Argument.

Don’t get me wrong, there are cases like Floyd that are obvious murder. 

But when you take the anecdotes and media frenzy away, black suspects are less likely to be killed by cops than white suspects, when you factor for interactions with police. 

And with 10,500,000 arrests per year, if say 50 of them go bad and end up in injury or death, that is still a success rate of 99.9995%.   I challenge any organization to have a better success rate, especially given the risky circumstances in which arrests occur.

posted by QuakerOats

And with 10,500,000 arrests per year, if say 50 of them go bad and end up in injury or death, that is still a success rate of 99.9995%.   I challenge any organization to have a better success rate, especially given the risky circumstances in which arrests occur.

Yea selling cd’s, selling cigarettes, broken tailights, fake 20$ bills, looking at a bbgun at Walmart, jaywalking  ..man dangerous

Good thread on black on black crime statistically https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1268463768285188096

posted by geeblock

 

We have had this conversation 10 times so let’s not do it again. I believe there is a problem with the way black people are policed. You don’t and that’s fine. 

The difference is that statistics back up my position, yours is backed up by anecdotes and the media. 

posted by jmog

The difference is that statistics back up my position, yours is backed up by anecdotes and the media. 

stfu

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/07/17/what-data-on-20-million-traffic-stops-can-tell-us-about-driving-while-black/%3foutputType=ampposted by 

jmog

The difference is that statistics back up my position, yours is backed up by anecdotes and the media. 

Meh those interactions are the problem. Blacks people are over policed. It’s not all about people dying. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wxii12.com/amp/article/north-carolina-traffic-stop-piedmont-triad-race-disparities/31082726

Data is skewed because blacks are over policed we’ve had this conversation.. also your data is based on arrests not convictions 

posted by jmog

The difference is that statistics back up my position, yours is backed up by anecdotes and the media. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1268463768285188096

Data 

posted by geeblock

jmog

The difference is that statistics back up my position, yours is backed up by anecdotes and the media. 

Meh those interactions are the problem. Blacks people are over policed. It’s not all about people dying. 

By your own admission poor people commit more crimes, not black people in general (I actually agree with this).

If anything is over policed it is poor neighborhoods not black people in general. 

posted by SportsAndLady

stfu

Facts don’t care about your feelings.

My friend described his current Chicago experience 

My youngest son lives in Chicago (north side) walks to work at times predawn.  Does not shit his pants while doing so.  That said I do not think we should leave those living in "concentrated" violent areas to the wolves.

posted by geeblock

Yea selling cd’s, selling cigarettes, broken tailights, fake 20$ bills, looking at a bbgun at Walmart, jaywalking  ..man dangerous

Are you recommending that there shouldn't be consequences for some of these, or people should not go to jail/be arrested for it?  I can agree with the latter, but I can't agree with the former.  

The keyword in this question for those who will get easily butthurt is "some."  Obviously looking at a bbgun or any product at Walmart is not malicious.  I actually don't give a fuck if you sell shit either (even if it is meth). Also, what is the Walmart bbgun story?  I haven't seen it. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/2787871002

Store video. 

Customer lies and says he pointed the gun at people ( video shows he did not and he later recanted) at 8:18. At 8:27 the cops shot him with no verbal warning while he was talking on his phone. 

Later officer says after being acquitted that he wouldn’t change a thing about the incident.