Of course there is no reason to kill unarmed men, but you must agree with me that in most cases they act provocative and not doing what police tells them.

Gudris wrote:Its not about black white yellow or brown, its about how you act, if you are black but you act like white, you can be president of US, if you are white but you act like black gangsta nigga, you go to jail or get bullet in your head.

Of course there is no reason to kill unarmed men, but you must agree with me that in most cases they act provocative and not doing what police tells them.

A new contender enters the arena!

Its not about black white yellow or brown as long as you "act like white"??? Hmm.

I do not agree with you.

Gudris wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

Gudris wrote:Its not about black white yellow or brown, its about how you act, if you are black but you act like white, you can be president of US, if you are white but you act like black gangsta nigga, you go to jail or get bullet in your head.

Of course there is no reason to kill unarmed men, but you must agree with me that in most cases they act provocative and not doing what police tells them.

A new contender enters the arena!

Its not about black white yellow or brown as long as you "act like white"??? Hmm.

I do not agree with you.

I dont care, because i dont select people by color,i select them by how they act

As long as they "act like white"... right?

You don't care about logic, clearly.

meloshouldgo wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:This whole topic has gone off course. It was supposed to be where is Hillary hiding all of these months and that I didnt believe she was in the best interest of the people. I dont want to see anyone hurt from any race and it would be smart if the next President put in a police reform bill that shouldve been put ion already. I dont agree with some police actions from small to big. I like what Magic Johnson said--its time to vet our own cops

you can also set them up for success, starting with eliminating or changing laws that are execute with racial bias. I have said it before, I will say it again. Equal %s of whites and blacks use drugs in this country. However blacks go to jail, become "felons" and later on when they are shot, or the victims of police bias it gets swept away because now they have a criminal record so whatever happened it was probably their fault. The white middle class kids.. they go to rehab.

The war on drugs is a terrible failure. All it has accomplished is cost the tax payers millions and lock up poor minorities in masses. I cant think of a single set of laws more biased towards incarcerating minorities... go look up the data, its backed up.

Trump is going to toughen laws so rich white people feel safer and America is great again. Meanwhile its more of the same. Black kid from a 30k a year household gets popped with a bag of weed he's a felon. If its your kid Briggs, you hire a nice lawyer, charges are reduced to some misdemeanor and it stays off his perm record so he can go to a nice school and work for banks.

That's my point exactly. The data shows less white crimes because less number of whites get convicted. In this case the data sux. But it's being used to therein prop up arguments about black on black crime.

does the data actually show that fewer whites get convicted per capita?

DrAlphaeus wrote:

Gudris wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

Gudris wrote:Its not about black white yellow or brown, its about how you act, if you are black but you act like white, you can be president of US, if you are white but you act like black gangsta nigga, you go to jail or get bullet in your head.

Of course there is no reason to kill unarmed men, but you must agree with me that in most cases they act provocative and not doing what police tells them.

A new contender enters the arena!

Its not about black white yellow or brown as long as you "act like white"??? Hmm.

I do not agree with you.

I dont care, because i dont select people by color,i select them by how they act

As long as they "act like white"... right?

You don't care about logic, clearly.

or act jewish ... we don't kill each other with guns, we just gossip you to death.

mreinman wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

Gudris wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

Gudris wrote:Its not about black white yellow or brown, its about how you act, if you are black but you act like white, you can be president of US, if you are white but you act like black gangsta nigga, you go to jail or get bullet in your head.

Of course there is no reason to kill unarmed men, but you must agree with me that in most cases they act provocative and not doing what police tells them.

A new contender enters the arena!

Its not about black white yellow or brown as long as you "act like white"??? Hmm.

I do not agree with you.

I dont care, because i dont select people by color,i select them by how they act

As long as they "act like white"... right?

You don't care about logic, clearly.

or act jewish ... we don't kill each other with guns, we just gossip you to death.

What am I, chopped liver?

The other day as the email scandal grew bigger, 1 post made it in the top 5 and 10, at least 4 times that I saw, and they kepts removing it. Quite a few users have played around with doing the same for Trump with posts, nada. Man, she must have a pretty big budget. There is a bot brigade that downvotes posts that are anti-hillary even when there are nothing but positive posts in the thread. It is a strange thing to witness.

mreinman wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:BRIGGS if you want to say I am copping out and not interested in serious discourse, your choice. Take a look at the first two pages of this thread and my initial responses to your OP. I conceded to many of your points about Clinton there and throughout this thread. I consider myself a thoughtful and fair person.

I'm not sure you ever acknowledged my responses. Which is fine. But if you are actually interested in serious discourse, reset this thread by starting there.

Or you can do what you continue to do and say "Obama has done nothing". 50-something-frigging pages later, same crap.

"Obama has done nothing" is categorically, absolutely false. Has he done enough? is a question someone interested in serious discourse might ask. But nope, you love hyperbole.

So when you post an article of some unrelated robbery-murder and point to the race of the people involved as some sort of explanation why cops shoot black people, I'm sorry, the gloves are coming off. Sure I can put myself in the place of a cop as one human can for another. But you are saying that black people get killed because of the crime in our communities. Do you actually think I like the crime in my community or in any?

I wish we lived in a world with no cops, no military, no violence. But violence was here before I was born, and will be there after I die. This thread isn't going to solve that issue. Your train of thought is full of magical thinking and non-sequitars. Do better or just give it a rest.

Just to address this Black Crime issue, I posted this earlier to fight this MYTH that Black Crime is some kind of outsized issue in America and that Black on Black Crime is some unique Racial phenomenon.

5 Facts That Shatter the Myth of ‘Black-on-Black’ CrimeC. Robert Gibson | December 29, 2015
The next time you hear someone say “black-on-black crime”, show them this.

Whenever a tragedy like the non-indictment of 12-year-old Tamir Rice’s killers happens, the racists inevitably come out to do battle with activists posting indignant Facebook statuses, eager to deflect attention to police officers killing black children to the specter of “black-on-black crime.”

However, “black-on-black crime” is a loaded term meant to enable racists, cementing the idea in people’s heads that the real problem isn’t the judicial system and law enforcement disproportionately targeting black people for arrest/incarceration/lethal force, but black people killing each other. It affirms the erroneous viewpoint that everyone has equal opportunity in society, and that the only reason black people are so disenfranchised is due to their own behavior.

Here are 5 facts that prove white-on-white crime is actually the real problem, and that anyone trying to make “black-on-black crime” a major issue is just a racist looking for positive reinforcement of their prejudiced worldview.

1. 84 PERCENT OF WHITE MURDER VICTIMS WERE WHITE
The FBI’s homicide statistics, rallying murders for the 28 years between 1980 and 2008, don’t lie. An overwhelming majority of homicides were carried out by white people, against other white people. Even though the ratio of black homicides against black victims is greater, the number of white murderers far exceeds the number of black murderers. The fact that no media outlet will say the words “white-on-white murder” despite this statistic shows a desire to bend words to confirm racist viewpoints.

FBI homicide statistics, 2011

2. WHITES KILL MORE WHITES THAN BLACK PEOPLE KILL EACH OTHER
In 2011, the most recent year for which data is available, 2,630 white people killed 3,172 white people, according to FBI homicide statistics. When comparing that to the black population, in which 2,447 African-Americans murdered 2,695 of their own, white-on-white murder is clearly the bigger issue.

3. WHITE PEOPLE COMMIT MORE CRIMES THAN ANY OTHER RACE
White people are the largest demographic in the United States, and as a result, commit more crimes than any other race, largely against other white people. 2010 crime statistics from the FBI confirm that whites lead blacks by 2-1 in arrests, and lead all other ethnicities by 2-1 in incidents of forcible rape (66.3 percent of rapes were committed by whites, while 31 percent were committed by blacks). White people also lead black people by 2-1 in larceny-theft: 64.8 percent of thieves are white, while only 31.9 percent of thieves are black.

4. WHITE PEOPLE KILL MORE MEMBERS OF VULNERABLE POPULATIONS THAN ANY OTHER RACE
Vulnerable populations are generally defined as children and the elderly. Family members and significant others are also often targets of homicide, rather than random victims. FBI homicide statistics from 1980 to 2008 show that white people are, by the numbers, far more likely to kill children and the elderly than any other race. Additionally, white people commit more sex-related and gang-related homicides than any other race.

FBI homicide statistics, 1980-2008

5. GANG MURDERS ARE MOST COMMON AMONG WHITE GANGS
While a lot of attention has been given to the gang-related homicides in Chicago’s predominantly-black South side, very little press has been devoted to covering the epidemic of white-on-white gangland murders. As the above chart demonstrates, the majority of gang-related homicides are committed by white people (53.3 percent white, 42.2 percent black), and the majority of white gang murder victims are also white (56.5 percent white, 40 percent black). Have this fact handy the next time someone bemoans “black-on-black” gang violence.

There are charts in the original article: http://usuncut.com/black-lives-matter/black-on-black-crime/

Nix, those stats are as misleading as Briggs stats about cops killing more whites than blacks. How silly is it to compare numbers without specifying the percentages of whites vs. blacks in america?

1 out of x whites vs 1 out of x blacks, not 130 whites and 120 blacks. C'mon ... how can someone just ignore that.

I am in no way saying that blacks are worse than whites or vise versa, there are many other issues that may lead to more crime in different areas with specific races but lets not through numbers out there that are blatantly misleading.

And here we are in the weeds!
mreinman has a valid point here IMHO, sorry to say nix.

Adding skewable data to an argument based on faulty assumptions is pointless. It's BRIGGS' faulty assumptions and bad logic that I'm trying to attack... over and over. Of course I get a direct response when I drop the N word... Alinsky tactics! Maybe he'll actually finally respond to the first page of this thread.

Or we'll just get a link about a black-on-black shootout in a chicken shack somewhere and how it's Obama's fault and how it makes cops so scared!

I will say that it wasn't my best set of examples but my point still stands that most of the time people mention Black on Black crime as if it's something unique when in fact it's just normal for people of the same race to have high contact with each other and thus the majority of crimes are within their own race. So it's not inaccurate to point out that White on White Crime is no different than Black on Black crime rates. They're both higher than cross racial crime. The Black on Black thing is a ruse that racists use.

whats the % of black on black crime vs. white on white? Also, one would need to factor in that there are many more whites so of course there will be many more white victims. Again, not a judgement, just pointing out that your comment is still stating things without context.

I would say that in poor lower class (in earnings) neighborhoods there will of course be much more crime.

There are many other factors such as religion and extremism. How many jew on jew murders do you see, or muslim on muslim crime do you see in the US?

I am sure that destitute white neighborhoods have very high crime rates as well. There are many factors to consider.

The percentage of incarcerated black men are extremely high % wise and that is not because they are black obviously. Its the broken system that we have that limits the options of poor minorities.

When one of topics under discussion is unfairly skewed distribution of convictions along racial lines, is it really fair to use the conviction data (normalized or not) to settle the debate? If for the sake of argument you assume the 50℅ of white crimes don't result in convictions, then by definition the data gathering mechanism itself is corrupted. What conclusions can you draw from it?

That the data is either tainted and should be ignored or that there are too many variables to consider therefore it is all hard to quantify.

OK then e agree

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:It's going to be a blow out Clinton..You can't lose Women and Minorities and win...Not to mention conservatives who won't vote for Chump...

Well you have to factor in voter suppression, incorrect counting and disgusted voters like me not voting for prrsident. Don't be too sure of a blowout.

Why are you disgusted?

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:It's going to be a blow out Clinton..You can't lose Women and Minorities and win...Not to mention conservatives who won't vote for Chump...

Well you have to factor in voter suppression, incorrect counting and disgusted voters like me not voting for prrsident. Don't be too sure of a blowout.

Why are you disgusted?

I think both candidates are bad for America. I think Clinton will be a Wall St stooge and she will be more focused on building her legacy than on doing the right thing. I don't even want to talk about Trump, its a waste of time. Here's is one small snippet of info to consider

The last 5 years had seen stagnating wages (inflation adjusted), lower paying jobs being created and record corporate profits going through the fukking roof - the S&P has ripped itself a new record almost every other week. So business is booming and wages are down. Coming into this situation both campaigns have declared that they want to lower corporate traded rates.

This is the type of thing I find disgusting.