International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   The behaviour of US police officers (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=323251)

quadraginta 7th October 2020 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13250348)
I'm prejudiced, not racist. If you think pointing out obvious cultural differences in the way people interact with police is "racist", and specifically in videos popularized by the media, then you're irrational, and possibly unable to discern patterns in human behavior.

I'm not particularly concerned with the "racist" label, though, as that is inevitable in our toxic PC culture that denies objective reality.


Interesting.

Can you slip a matchbook cover between the two?

Dave Rogers 7th October 2020 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 13250417)
Interesting.

Can you slip a matchbook cover between the two?

In general, I think, racism is used to describe acts of discrimination that serve to maintain the privilege and dominance of an ethnic group, rather than those carried out by a group that lacks a position of power. From that I can only conclude that Tippit considers him/herself to be a member of a group that lacks power and privilege, and that therefore this lacks the power imbalance aspect that nowadays is commonly required in the definition of racism. I think it would be illuminating to find out whether that's the case, and if so, which underprivileged ethnic group Tippit perceives him/herself as a member of.

Dave

quadraginta 7th October 2020 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers (Post 13250430)
In general, I think, racism is used to describe acts of discrimination that serve to maintain the privilege and dominance of an ethnic group, rather than those carried out by a group that lacks a position of power. From that I can only conclude that Tippit considers him/herself to be a member of a group that lacks power and privilege, and that therefore this lacks the power imbalance aspect that nowadays is commonly required in the definition of racism. I think it would be illuminating to find out whether that's the case, and if so, which underprivileged ethnic group Tippit perceives him/herself as a member of.

Dave


My guess was that he was using semantics to make the claim that he wasn't a 'real' racist, just a garden variety bigot.

Still a distinction without a great deal of difference, but I guess if it makes him feel better then it's okay.

Matthew Best 7th October 2020 08:20 AM

I think he's saying that he's prejudiced against people who do "X", rather than prejudiced against X-people.

johnny karate 7th October 2020 08:28 AM

I think the important thing here is that we give people who say things like “This seems to be a recurring theme among black people” every possible benefit of the doubt.

After all, it would be unseemly to make judgements about someone who is in the process of making judgements about an entire ethnic group.

bruto 7th October 2020 08:39 AM

What comes through for me is the upside-down logic of racism. Of course, if racial discrimination occurs in the form of police unfairly targeting black people and abusing them, then the corresponding confusion, reaction, indignation and (yes, even) irrational response that occurs in the face of racial discrimination will be prevalent among the black people so targeted.

Tippit would like to think he is not victim blaming, and maybe in his heart he is not, but it's an inevitable result if the victimization is what causes the behavior. It ends up being pretty much the same old same old, that it is unseemly for the victims of bias to behave as if they should not be.

quadraginta 7th October 2020 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Best (Post 13250464)
I think he's saying that he's prejudiced against people who do "X", rather than prejudiced against X-people.


Sure. That's the customary understanding when someone uses the word "prejudiced".

Dave Rogers 7th October 2020 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 13250491)
Sure. That's the customary understanding when someone uses the word "prejudiced".

It's one of those irregular nouns. "I take note of demographics, you are prejudiced, he is a racist."

Dave

Tippit 7th October 2020 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 13250417)
Interesting.

Can you slip a matchbook cover between the two?

Certainly. I would characterize racists as hating people for some immutable thing that they cannot control, and having the ability to materially affect people's lives as a direct result, which is unfair.

I, on the other hand, recognize patterns in certain types of people (not at all limited to race). Besides cultural patterns which are easy to recognize, if you're honest, there are others. For instance, while I am not prejudiced towards all black people, I do avoid almost everyone I meet who has face tattoos. Most people who have face tattoos, in my experience, are either violent, or attempting to signal to others how violent they are. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I'm not really interested in finding out who they are. Perhaps I'm a bigot for avoiding people with face tattoos. It doesn't really matter. I will continue to do so as long as its prudent.

I accept the signals that other people send me at face value, and many of them, are not constructive.

Tippit 7th October 2020 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny karate (Post 13250471)
I think the important thing here is that we give people who say things like “This seems to be a recurring theme among black people” every possible benefit of the doubt.

After all, it would be unseemly to make judgements about someone who is in the process of making judgements about an entire ethnic group.

It's not so much a judgement, as an observation. Part of abstract thought, is the ability to form rules and hypotheses from data and observation. I'm not condemning black people as a group, but they almost always choose to identify primarily as being "with a group", so I indulge them. I also acknowledge that the media has a role in how people, and groups of people are portrayed, which seems to be a big part of the problem these days.

I'm sure there are plenty of black and white people alike who react rationally to police violence and threats, they just don't show up on youtube or the news very much.

JoeMorgue 7th October 2020 10:27 AM

Ah yet another "I'm not racist I just expect black people to be able to deal with hundreds of years of ingrained prejudice and massive systematic racism with 100%" types.

Tippit 7th October 2020 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruto (Post 13250486)
What comes through for me is the upside-down logic of racism. Of course, if racial discrimination occurs in the form of police unfairly targeting black people and abusing them, then the corresponding confusion, reaction, indignation and (yes, even) irrational response that occurs in the face of racial discrimination will be prevalent among the black people so targeted.

I think there is actual racism in policework, and in the judicial system at large. I do not, however, believe that systemic racism (racism everywhere, all the time) exists, or even close to exists. I think there are other root causes for the social unrest that is going on.

I also support police reform. Even radical police reform, but probably not so far as defunding. De-militarizing them, and holding them personally accountable for the crimes they commit would be a good start.

Quote:


Tippit would like to think he is not victim blaming, and maybe in his heart he is not, but it's an inevitable result if the victimization is what causes the behavior. It ends up being pretty much the same old same old, that it is unseemly for the victims of bias to behave as if they should not be.
I'm definitely not victim-blaming. How could those two men possibly be blamed for that cop pulling a gun on them as they walked out of the building? I am commenting on the fact that it's very unwise to react the way they did.

johnny karate 7th October 2020 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13250610)
It's not so much a judgement, as an observation. Part of abstract thought, is the ability to form rules and hypotheses from data and observation. I'm not condemning black people as a group, but they almost always choose to identify primarily as being "with a group", so I indulge them. I also acknowledge that the media has a role in how people, and groups of people are portrayed, which seems to be a big part of the problem these days.

I'm sure there are plenty of black and white people alike who react rationally to police violence and threats, they just don't show up on youtube or the news very much.

That’s a bunch of racist horse****.

Not a judgement, just an observation.

erlando 7th October 2020 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13250345)
Police work is a dangerous job.

No, it's not. It has 13.7 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (2018). More than "Mining machine operators" (11.0) but less than "Grounds maintenance workers" (18.6), "Farmers" (24.7), "Roofers" (51.5), "Fishers" (77.4), and "Logging workers" (97.6).

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...is-police-work

And they can quit. Noone is forcing them to work as police officers. Maybe they would like to try farming instead?

Shadowdweller 7th October 2020 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erlando (Post 13251310)
No, it's not. It has 13.7 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (2018). More than "Mining machine operators" (11.0) but less than "Grounds maintenance workers" (18.6), "Farmers" (24.7), "Roofers" (51.5), "Fishers" (77.4), and "Logging workers" (97.6).

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...is-police-work

And they can quit. Noone is forcing them to work as police officers. Maybe they would like to try farming instead?

Considering that the source you cite gives the average fatality rate as 3.5 per 100k amongst the American workforce, I'm not sure your statistic is implying what you imagine it's implying (nearly 4x the national average). Depending on what arbitrary threshold you set as "dangerous".

Dave Rogers 8th October 2020 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erlando (Post 13251310)
And they can quit. Noone is forcing them to work as police officers. Maybe they would like to try farming instead?

I live in an area where there's a lot of farming, and I'm not aware of any incidents where farm workers have accidentally shot tractors because they feared for their lives.

Dave

Wudang 8th October 2020 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers (Post 13251354)
I live in an area where there's a lot of farming, and I'm not aware of any incidents where farm workers have accidentally shot tractors because they feared for their lives.

Dave


So (rule of) what you're saying is that farm workers need to be given funding to buy weapons capable of taking out tractors.

Dave Rogers 8th October 2020 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wudang (Post 13251371)
So (rule of) what you're saying is that farm workers need to be given funding to buy weapons capable of taking out tractors.

And intensive courses on tractology.

Dave

erlando 8th October 2020 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller (Post 13251315)
Considering that the source you cite gives the average fatality rate as 3.5 per 100k amongst the American workforce, I'm not sure your statistic is implying what you imagine it's implying (nearly 4x the national average). Depending on what arbitrary threshold you set as "dangerous".

My point was that police work is not as dangerous as some would have it. Is it more dangerous than many other professions? Yes. Is it so dangerous that it warrants shooting people with impunity? No, absolutely not. It's about half as dangerous as being a farmer.

Fun related fact: There are around 2.1 million farms in the US. There are around 800,000 police officers.

SuburbanTurkey 8th October 2020 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erlando (Post 13251427)
My point was that police work is not as dangerous as some would have it. Is it more dangerous than many other professions? Yes. Is it so dangerous that it warrants shooting people with impunity? No, absolutely not. It's about half as dangerous than being a farmer.

Fun related fact: There are around 2.1 million farms in the US. There are around 800,000 police officers.

It's more dangerous to deliver pizza. The Thin Bread Crust Line is the only flag I salute.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...61/511/db9.jpg

Mumbles 8th October 2020 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13249075)
This cop is clearly an agitated *******, but what also strikes me is the non-compliant reactions from both of the black guys who were unlucky enough to encounter him. This seems to be a recurring theme among black people.

Metal Gear Solid Alert sound

It's not just black people, and the group most likely to be harmed per person are Native Americans.

I'll add another thing - when MLK Jr. practiced nonviolence back in the day, he wasn't actually practicing nonviolence. Rather , he knew that the concept of Jim Crow in the minds of the average white American - the thought of happy Negros who loved their white benefactors - was a lie. Nowadays, far too many people - and your quote is a perfect example - have chosen instead to embrace racial violence. If too many people embrace this, then MLK Jr's plan will no longer work.

Wanna know why I don't sob when I hear about riots hitting major retailers, or police stations? It's posts like yours. "I mean, you blacks always wanna argue instead of doing exactly what the police have in mind when they're panicking and waving guns - never mind whether or not each cop on the scene has something entirely different in mind. Why haven't you developed superpowers yet like in Marvel movies?" If cops embrace random violence, don't act shocked when the community violently casts them out.

(And why haven't I embraced it? Because I don't see it as a sustainable idea. But as much as you want to talk slick about black people, the truth is that the American white community is going to continue to see violent fits until they get their act together and push for sustained change. And that's not every white person - but it very clearly means a majority of US white men at the very least - who are fully ready to either sit on their hands, or vote for a protofascist who is currently running concentration camps for brown people.)

Quote:

Instead of shutting up and defusing the situation and following instructions, he argued with the cop and then alluded to how he didn’t want to be the next police shooting victim! I can assure you that is NOT the time and place for that conversation. You tell the officer that you work here, then keep your hands up and don’t move, following instructions.
Ah, you mean like Levar Jones. Or Philando Castile. Or Charles Kinsey. And never mind that cops are the ones introducing the weapons into situations like these, and are doing so voluntarily.

When BLM started, I asked a simple question: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do? And in all these years, no member of our White Supremacy Squad has even tried to answer it - and it's because they knew that in the end, there simply was no answer at all. When these angry, terrified, well-armed white supremacist goons decide they're going to ruin a black person's life, that's it. And yes, you are directly saying that this is fine, like a cartoon dog in a burning building.

Wanna know why Eric Garner was yelling about how the police were constantly harassing him for nothing right before a cop choked him out? It's because the police were constantly harassing him for nothing - including on that day when a lieutenant saw him just being black and outside, and got angry and demanded that he be removed.

Quote:

Regardless of the description, the cop doesn’t know what kind of situation he is walking into and how many perpetrators he could be dealing with, so he is essentially a scared and dangerous animal at that point.
And that's exactly the problem. He can be as scared as he wants - he's not cornered, he's the aggressor. He's free to leave, turn in his badge, and find another line of work. There are plenty of lines of work that I'm unsuited for as well, there's no shame in saying "This looks like a job for someone else".

Quote:

This is not a defense of the cop’s fearful actions at all, its just common sense.
You are clearly defending his actions, regardless of what you may want.

Tippit 8th October 2020 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erlando (Post 13251427)
My point was that police work is not as dangerous as some would have it. Is it more dangerous than many other professions? Yes. Is it so dangerous that it warrants shooting people with impunity? No, absolutely not. It's about half as dangerous as being a farmer.

Fun related fact: There are around 2.1 million farms in the US. There are around 800,000 police officers.

I am pro-police reform. I dislike police. I dislike what they (and legislators) are doing to our civil liberties. I dislike how they throw non-violent drug users/dealers in jail. Police have done nothing to ever help me, and all they have ever done is harass me, or tax me with fines and tickets. As far as protecting me, they won't. In a home invasion when seconds count, police are only minutes away. I rely on being heavily armed to protect myself. Police are around to tag the deceased and fill out reports. Police work IS dangerous, and I agree it is not near the most dangerous jobs. If you read my previous posts, I think policework should be made MORE dangerous, by holding them accountable for their shoot first, get off unaccountable rules of engagement that are putting the general public at great risk.

I don't, however, think this is racism issue, but a police brutality issue.

Babbylonian 8th October 2020 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13251731)

I don't, however, think this is racism issue, but a police brutality issue.

Your dichotomy couldn't be more false.

The Great Zaganza 8th October 2020 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13251731)
...

I don't, however, think this is racism issue, but a police brutality issue.

why can't it be both?

cops acting violently in the assumption that there won't be any legal repercussions to do so.
Conviction rates suggests that this is more true if the victim belongs to a minority than if they are white.

Tippit 8th October 2020 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babbylonian (Post 13251761)
Your dichotomy couldn't be more false.

Really? Tell that to Daniel Shaver, and Tony Timpa. Shall we say their names?

Mumbles 8th October 2020 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13251800)
Really? Tell that to Daniel Shaver, and Tony Timpa. Shall we say their names?

Feel free to join BLM protestors in doing so. Might want to buy a TARDIS though, or perhaps a Delorean, since you're years late.

I find it remarkable how anti-BLM folks only bring up cases of police killing nonviolent white people when it's time to distract from the systemic bias in the US criminal justice system though. When these incidents actually happen, it's crickets. But some folks see black people rallying against racism and all of a sudden it's "But what about Daniel Shaver?"

Well? What about him? Black folks have been saying that this impacts white people as well. Where've you been?

jimbob 8th October 2020 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babbylonian (Post 13251761)
Your dichotomy couldn't be more false.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza (Post 13251763)
why can't it be both?

Cops acting violently in the assumption that there won't be any legal repercussions to do so.
Conviction rates suggests that this is more true if the victim belongs to a minority than if they are white.


It's not rocket science. Many violent racists don't *just* hate blacks. They'd also attack any whites that offends them - it's just that when they come across whites, merely existing isn't one of the reasons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mumbles (Post 13252045)
Feel free to join BLM protestors in doing so. Might want to buy a TARDIS though, or perhaps a Delorean, since you're years late.

I find it remarkable how anti-BLM folks only bring up cases of police killing nonviolent white people when it's time to distract from the systemic bias in the US criminal justice system though. When these incidents actually happen, it's crickets. But some folks see black people rallying against racism and all of a sudden it's "But what about Daniel Shaver?"

Well? What about him? Black folks have been saying that this impacts white people as well. Where've you been?

Yup - indeed even in this thread by multiple people. Including you.

Tippit 8th October 2020 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mumbles (Post 13252045)
Feel free to join BLM protestors in doing so. Might want to buy a TARDIS though, or perhaps a Delorean, since you're years late.

I find it remarkable how anti-BLM folks only bring up cases of police killing nonviolent white people when it's time to distract from the systemic bias in the US criminal justice system though. When these incidents actually happen, it's crickets. But some folks see black people rallying against racism and all of a sudden it's "But what about Daniel Shaver?"

Well? What about him? Black folks have been saying that this impacts white people as well. Where've you been?

First of all, "black lives matter" is two separate things. One is a universal truth, and the other is a political organization with a Marxist agenda, that is openly anti-family. I don't oppose Black Lives Matter because they want police reform, I oppose them because they're trying to overturn the United States of America in a communist color revolution, funded by elites like Soros, et al.

Second, I don't believe systemic racism exists. The recent civil unrest isn't about the death of George Floyd, it's because of a combination of the fact that people are broke and desperate, partly due to Covid, and mostly due to the Federal Reserve System causing massive wealth disparity by subsidizing asset holders at the great expense of savers and workers, a concept that barely 0.000001% of the population understands. The polarizing media is also party to whipping people up into a frenzy, and deflecting the blame which should squarely be placed upon financial elites on "racist white people" instead.

Third, white people are killed by police at almost 2:1, and black males, which make up roughly 6% of the US population are responsible for about 50% of homicides!

The murder of George Floyd was just a catalyst for a color revolution sponsored by elites (all of the banks and corporations are on the side of Black Lives Matter, despite their open and avowed Marxism and communist revolutionary agenda).

The fact that I can sit here and post non-stop about how negatively I feel about the nascent police state, and yet, I'm still viewed as the enemy, is strong evidence for how successful this propaganda has been, and how utterly divided and polarized we are. I want police reform, but not at the cost of overthrowing the US in a communist revolution, and I will resist violently if the BLM agenda progresses towards this, or if BLM shows up in my neighborhood, setting fires and causing chaos.

Shadowdweller 8th October 2020 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13252136)
First of all, "black lives matter" is two separate things. One is a universal truth, and the other is a political organization with a Marxist agenda, that is openly anti-family. I don't oppose Black Lives Matter because they want police reform, I oppose them because they're trying to overturn the United States of America in a communist color revolution, funded by elites like Soros, et al.

Nope. https://www.politifact.com/article/2...xist-movement/

Tippit 8th October 2020 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller (Post 13252179)

Yep. It's well documented that all of the founders of BLM are communists, with communist propaganda and an open agenda to "disrupt" the nuclear family. They actually removed the part about disrupting the family from their website very recently, but I saw it for myself. I agree that the vast majority of BLM supporters are not communists, and want police and judicial reforms, but the problem is that the banks and corporations are funding the founders and the political organization itself.

This is a communist color revolution which is attempting to cloak itself in a civil rights movement, by which any criticism can simply be dismissed as racism, and Americans are seeing through it.

Anyone who wants real police reform and real justice had better call this out, or there will probably be a civil war.

johnny karate 8th October 2020 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13252188)
Yep. It's well documented that all of the founders of BLM are communists, with communist propaganda and an open agenda to "disrupt" the nuclear family. They actually removed the part about disrupting the family from their website very recently, but I saw it for myself. I agree that the vast majority of BLM supporters are not communists, and want police and judicial reforms, but the problem is that the banks and corporations are funding the founders and the political organization itself.

This is a communist color revolution which is attempting to cloak itself in a civil rights movement, by which any criticism can simply be dismissed as racism, and Americans are seeing through it.

Anyone who wants real police reform and real justice had better call this out, or there will probably be a civil war.

I like how in your conspiracy theory you allege that our corporate overlords are in league with Marxist revolutionaries attempting to overthrow them.

Now, I don’t expect internal logical consistency in a conspiracy theory, but come on... you’re not even trying.

quadraginta 8th October 2020 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13252188)
Yep. It's well documented that all of the founders of BLM are communists, with communist propaganda and an open agenda to "disrupt" the nuclear family. They actually removed the part about disrupting the family from their website very recently, but I saw it for myself. I agree that the vast majority of BLM supporters are not communists, and want police and judicial reforms, but the problem is that the banks and corporations are funding the founders and the political organization itself.

This is a communist color revolution which is attempting to cloak itself in a civil rights movement, by which any criticism can simply be dismissed as racism, and Americans are seeing through it.

Anyone who wants real police reform and real justice had better call this out, or there will probably be a civil war.


Good thing for you that ol' "Tail-gunner Joe" is dead, or he'd be suing you for plagiarism.

Didn't you get the memo? Red-baiting is chump level populism, except for the True Believers™. And that's just preaching to the choir anyway.

sackett 8th October 2020 07:37 PM

I'm sure sad that a 76% white country is in danger of being overthrown by a medley of variously-colored commie bandar-log without the law who don't much like each other and who don't agree on anything any more than The Wight Men do with each other.

But heavily armed Wide Men down in Florida will keep us safe. And healthy with zinc & vitamin see.

Tippit 8th October 2020 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny karate (Post 13252195)
I like how in your conspiracy theory you allege that our corporate overlords are in league with Marxist revolutionaries attempting to overthrow them.

That's correct. Communism has always been a movement of banking elites looking to consolidate economic power, and through the power of fiat money and fractional reserve banking they have come to own and control the corporations that dominate us.

Quote:


Now, I don’t expect internal logical consistency in a conspiracy theory, but come on... you’re not even trying.
It's entirely consistent. You're just ignorant of history. What cannot be denied, is the banking and corporate support of communist BLM. So ask yourself, why?

Tippit 8th October 2020 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sackett (Post 13252247)
I'm sure sad that a 76% white country is in danger of being overthrown by a medley of variously-colored commie bandar-log without the law who don't much like each other and who don't agree on anything any more than The Wight Men do with each other.

But heavily armed Wide Men down in Florida will keep us safe. And healthy with zinc & vitamin see.

Most of BLM are white liberal snowflake ANTIFA freaks, not that race has anything to do with communism vs. freedom. But it's a communist tactic to paint their opponents as bigots. If you support ANTIFA in a color revolution, who is going to keep you safe from us?

Mumbles 8th October 2020 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13252281)
Most of BLM are white liberal snowflake ANTIFA freaks, not that race has anything to do with communism vs. freedom. But it's a communist tactic to paint their opponents as bigots. If you support ANTIFA in a color revolution, who is going to keep you safe from us?

Or...

Most of the rioters are white people (it's a recurring theme among white people - sports teams play, pumpkins are set out, and they start getting violent), who want to support but lack direction (seriously, where are the white fathers? These kids are just running wild.) but most of the actual discussion, the rallies, and so on, are primarily local black people, not just holding protests, but holding voting drives and the like as well.

erlando 8th October 2020 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13252136)
Third, white people are killed by police at almost 2:1, and black males, which make up roughly 6% of the US population are responsible for about 50% of homicides!

72% of the US population is white. 13% is black. That's a ratio of roughly 6:1. You don't find it problematic that blacks are 3 times as likely to be killed by police than whites?

Also "color revolution"? Dude, your racism is showing and your "I'm not racist" tirades aren't helping.

Captain_Swoop 9th October 2020 03:25 AM

Conspiracy forum os over there >

Tippit 9th October 2020 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erlando (Post 13252398)
72% of the US population is white. 13% is black. That's a ratio of roughly 6:1. You don't find it problematic that blacks are 3 times as likely to be killed by police than whites?

Also "color revolution"? Dude, your racism is showing and your "I'm not racist" tirades aren't helping.


I find it problematic that blacks commit most of the crimes, and especially the most homicides, and that guarantees more negative interaction from police. Whether or not the response has been fair and proportionate is debatable.

Your abject ignorance is showing, if you think “color revolution” is a racial slur. And, I’m well past worrying about whether anyone is falsely accusing me and half the population of being racist. I don’t care anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Distracted1 9th October 2020 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tippit (Post 13252650)
I find it problematic that blacks commit most of the crimes, and especially the most homicides, and that guarantees more negative interaction from police. Whether or not the response has been fair and proportionate is debatable.

Your abject ignorance is showing, if you think “color revolution” is a racial slur. And, I’m well past worrying about whether anyone is falsely accusing me and half the population of being racist. I don’t care anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No need to care.
"Racist" has been determined to have so little actual meaning that it cannot even be cited as defamation.

https://www.vondranlegal.com/can-cal...famation-claim

from link:

(“the allegation that a person is a ‘racist' . . . is not actionable because the term ‘racist' has no factually-verifiable meaning”); Edelman v. Croonquist, 2010 WL 1816180, at *6 (D.N.J. May 4, 2010)


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-20, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.