Senate "Race" Relations (was "U.S. Society and Black Men")

I am no racist. You are simply trying to play the race card to suppress criticism of the likes of Al Sharpton and to avoid having to address the real threats to the lives of black people, especially via black-on-black crime, which FBI stats show is far more likely to kill an African-American than the supposedly racist cops who try to solve those killings.

Are you going to now argue the FBI statistics are racist? If you have any argument besides calling me a racist, feel free to reply. If not... well, I suppose you'll continue slandering me, since that seems to be the only argument you have left.

 

"Black-on-black crime" has been addressed approximately 400 million times in this thread already.

Smuggler, can you describe what you mean when you say "playing the race card?" I'm very curious as to what you intend to convey with that phrase.

 

Bringing up "black on black" crime is the "go clean your room first" way of distracting people from and avoiding the subject of racism. It's condescending and implies that only when blacks have cleaned things up amongst themselves will they have a right to bring up any other problems.

 

Using a false charge of racism to either avoid addressing unpleasant facts, like Al Sharpton's incitement to violent crimes, or to try to silence a dissenting opinion on an issue that one cannot refute with a rational argument. In short, someone substitutes race-baiting and slander for actually addressing points.

've had 17 years of professional involvement on Second Amendment issues, both working to protect them and covering them in a media outlet - and self-defense cases were some of what I gained knowledge of (including taking a concealed carry class - where I learned the laws of the state I was in regarding self-defense).

And yeah, I'm also angry because Sharpton and others tried to railroad two people (George Zimmerman and Officer Darren Wilson) who acted justifiably to protect themselves from violent assaults. Said knowledge, NOT racial animus, was what lead me to believe that both cases were self-defense. So, when someone tells me that I'm racist, that's not only slanderous, but it also tells me what I need to know about their character. Furthermore, when someone gets slandered like that, they will punch back hard, often because they figure there's nothing left to lose.

And what I've seen on this thread has shown me a lot about the character of people here... and quite frankly, I'm not so sure I respect many of the folks here who called me racist or who "liked" some of those same posts any more.

 

Sarah Palin was rightly demonized for her '2nd amendment solution' friendly crosshair map which she later said were 'surveying' marks. I haven't called you racist, but you do sound like a racist and you use their usual arguments. There's a difference between sounding like one and actually being one. No, I don't think you attend Klan rallies or go to Neo-Nazi parties, but I do think you use your racial biases to inform your arguments, which is a little racist. By the way, we all have our biases on race, even the most enlightened on liberal will have racial biases and I believe that's where over-compensating and profuse apologizing comes in even when it's not necessary. I even admitted my own biases about race earlier in this thread. So it's not really a left or right issue, but how you choose to overcome those biases...or not. In your case, from your posting habits, you use what could be considered a racist argument. Again, not saying you are, but you sound like it.

Anyway, hope this helps. I doubt it will. But 'eh...and quit talking about 'the left' as if it's some monolithic entity. You've seriously been watching Foxnews and reading Soldier of Fortune waaaaay too much.

 

JediSmuggler thinks his hurt feelings are more of a tragedy than the murders of black teenagers?

 

Yes I was basically referring to that situation you've posted earlier. Now I agree 100% that the cops arresting a white guy who actually threatened them with an actual gun instead of killing him is unfair considering that Crawford was minding his own business when he was shot and killed by police inside that Walmart store.

I was just pointing out to Boba Nekhbet that the citizen in the video had his gun in his car and wasn't pointing/shooting his weapon and-or threatening the cops or anyone else. That video was an example of a cop violating someone's 4th Amendment rights. It wasn't an example of "should the cops have used deadly force and if they did would such force be justified?"

Also, I believe that Darren Wilson should have at least been indicted and the whole thing should have gone to trial. The situation between him and Brown may not have been as clear as the Garner, Crawford, Rice examples but there is a strong possibility that Wilson may have freaked out/panicked/overreacted when he shot Brown. Of course that "prosecutor" clearly did everything in his power to make sure that Wilson was not indicted for anything.

 

They weren't murdered. Their deaths are tragic, but so was the fact they left those they assaulted no choice but to defend themselves.

I'll mark you down as another race-baiter.

 

Okay, but before we address that issue, I think we need to talk about male on male crime. According to fbi.gov, a source you trust, homicide offenders were overwhelmingly male (approx. 9,000 as compared to 1,000 female) and victims were also overwhelmingly male (approx. 9,000 to 2,000). I don't think you men should be worrying about what women say to you on a message board while this is going on.

With that being said, have you noticed that everyone here whom you call a "race-baiter" is also a Star Wars fan? Clearly, Star Wars fans must be more likely to be race-baiters.

No?

Then let's start here:

 

Stop race baiting, Esperanza.

 

They were murdered. There's a certain way to handle those situations that didn't involve guns and that wasn't it. George Zimmerman was looking for a fight and Darren Wilson shot at a suspect 12 times and hit him 6. That's murder in any book. Except the authority jock sniffer's.

 

It's "lies, damn lies and statistics".

 

Espy. That was beautiful. You need to share that graphic with me on my wall.

 

Okay again, you're going to have to be more specific.

1) I'll echo Merk's request for details of when Sharpton incited violent crimes.
2) What in this situation makes you think the charge of racism is "false?"
3) How do you define racism?
4) What constitutes "race-baiting" to you? This must be different than "playing the race card," right?
5) In what sense have the anti-racists failed to address any salient points in this thread?
6) At what point or in what situations is race a reasonable issue to raise rather than just an exercise in "race-baiting?" Should race be ignored altogether?

You know what's weird about this, Smuggler? It tells me you actually empathize with the rioters in Ferguson, you just don't understand enough about the context or enough about what it's like to be a minority in America to realize it.

Consider this: When someone calls you a racist on a Star Wars message board, you have a lot left to lose. You still occupy a privileged space in society as a white man and will have some degree of deference afforded to you by authority figures, people in power, juries. When a black teenager is shot in the street, and when an epidemic of excessive violence against black people in this country exists for centuries, the black community sure has a lot less to lose than you do. Do you see why they might be "punching back hard?"

Oh, please. You never had respect for any of the folks in question, and your respect or lack thereof means nothing to them anyway.

Yikes! Just want to clarify that I wasn't drawing the comparison to make the point that the cops should have used deadly force or any force. And I totally agree with you that the search was a 4th Amendment violation, based on what I know about the case. I was just pointing out the disparity in how "white guy with a gun in the trunk" and "black guy with no gun on him anywhere" were treated.

 

I agree it's important to look at sources (and if possible the data and methodology), but a point of clarification: only the last statistic bubble-thing is from the DCCPI and The Urban Institute.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics, FBI, Department of Education, and US Department of Justice are pretty credible.

Here's a WaPo article which addresses the subject of the first two bubbles and includes the relevant links to the sources. The Bureau of Justice Statistics is a mammoth site but they seem to have all their data available and talk about their methodology if anyone wants to really fact check them.

 

Don't get me wrong. I wasn't accusing you of thinking that deadly force or any force should have been used. Nobody with any amount of sensibility would advocate that the cop use any kind of force on that young man. I just wanted to point out that the video contained a completely different situation that's all. I'm glad that you have acknowledged that the whole video's situation was a 4th Amendment violation.

And yes I agree that the disparity between how a white guy with a gun in his car is treated versus how a black guy with no weapon is treated is incredibly unfair.

 

Considering there are now protests over the police shooting and killing a man pointing a gun at them... I don't think there's any salvaging this. Just disband all police forces and use only Federal troops under the direct command of the Attorney General of the United States. And don't arm them, not even mace or a taser.

 

Well then why don't we invite Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea to just go ahead and nuke us already?

 

We can keep soldiers armed overseas but at this point the idea of police or any security person using lethal force for any reason is anathema. The public perception is that all police are Batman and as such if they kill it's because they want to kill rather than the fact they are just yahoos with guns. There is no difference in an untrained civilian and a veteran police officer when it comes to using firearms.

Reform isn't going to solve this anymore. At this point the minority communities will never trust or comply with the Police, and the police as such will never stop interacting with them and causing more deaths. The institution of the Police Force has to go, it's been tainted beyond repair. Local authorities are likewise seen as racist or complicit in racism, only the Federal government is seen with any trust. Put all security forces under absolute Federal control ad remove any teeth from local or state governments.

Maybe in 50 years or so we can try going back to a police force, but as of now it's only making things worse. You can't protect people if they don't trust you. The people, or at the very least, groups of the people, no longer trust the police. As such the police can no longer function and if they can no longer serve their function they should not exist.

 

not sure if serious, part II GenAntilles.

 

I know you're intentionally being hyperbolic, but I would be behind the Justice Department (better than local governments if only because it's an outside entity) overhauling/disbanding departments that are serial offenders against civil rights, such as the NYPD, Ferguson PD, Cleveland PD, etc. Fire everyone at the top and appoint reformers in their place; fire problem officers and prosecute them if possible; rewrite department rules and procedures. Although it's obviously not going to happen, I think that leaving the institutions largely intact and entrenched makes reform much more difficult.