Sasha Johnson shot in the head?!?

Status
Not open for further replies.

fez

fez

Caporegime
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Posts
25,023
Location
Tunbridge Wells
It is interesting because people say things like your second paragraph.

Do you disagree with my second paragraph?

Some minorities do better than the 'white British' population already, it is an unwelcome stat for the perpetually outraged so they just gloss over it.

Its because some cultures have very different values that lead to a large focus on the family unit, education and community. Thos things are unsurprisingly not very present in many of the poorest communities in the UK. They aren't massively present in the richest either these days but thats not such an issue for them.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Posts
31,991
Location
Adelaide, South Australia
Makes me feel safer knowing our police can call on that level of smoke when needed

I agree. I have no problem with the police outgunning the criminals. That's how I prefer it to be.

That's mainly for armed response, surely.

Yes, it's essential weaponry for a specific purpose.

How do people propose we deal with terrorists and armed, dangerous criminals, harsh language?

I don't know, ask a Momentum groupie.

That's not the "excess military hardware" being referred to originally though, they're purchased by the police for a specific purpose. The surplus equipment supplied to US police agencies in the past has come direct from the military and includes a lot more than some semi-auto only carbines, which is how they end up with small-town rural police departments suddenly having a tactical team and MRAP.

Yes, the US situation is very different. The 2nd amendment has essentially spawned an arms race between criminals and police.
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Oct 2004
Posts
26,494
Location
....
Seeing cops carrying SMG's is quite scary (yes I've seen it in the US). Not here obviously.


I'd better get this in quick then.


See it often at UK airports. Can't say it bothers me though. America is something else though
On the streets with rifles. Nope. I'll stick to safe little Britain, thanks.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
21,946
Do you disagree with my second paragraph?
I have no idea why anyone thinks that black people are going to have as much wealth or power as the massively dominant domestic white population anyway. Wealth doesn't come out of nowhere, its a complex subject and you don't come into this life with £0 to your name. In almost any country, the people who have been in charge of the country for the past 100 years will be massively more wealthy than any small ethnic minority.
I don't want to get drawn into some long, arduous back and forth on this. I 'just' simply don't see why black people wouldn't be as prosperous as the east Asian immigrants or as poor as the central Asian contingent from the likes of Bangladesh. To skip around your point a bit, it may have something to do with your last sentence, as a lot of folk don't have a home nation that fits this description. The wealth is distinctly weighted to the East and the West, with the middle having been the target of East and West exploitation. This includes the poorer parts of Europe and the unstable middle East where the borders are still being debated at a fundamental level and corruption is ripe.

I agree you don't come into this life with anything more than £0 to your name, but you must agree that folk are significantly more advantaged if they have anything between a trust fund or something as daft as the use of their mums car to give them a head start on jobs a bit better paying/further out of town. It is a bit like the root cause of terrorism playing out where we expect to draw a line under things and make friends, but ignore the fact peoples families and livelihoods have been destroyed and there is fury and rage fuelling disenfranchised youth. We have a mini version of this but the on-set of social media has meant this upset can be unified and organised with ease over vast geographies.

As others have said, I hate the way the current critical race theory politics are playing out. I hate how woke is used as a derogatory term and how left and right wing are the 'only' viewpoints. I hate how critical thinking has been eroded and very few are employing the "slow" part of their brain to actually discuss and debate for enrichment rather than conclusion (Thinking Fast/Slow is a great read). I hate how so many of these conversations are about getting to an answer when that isn't the point of discussing such complicated things and it is almost always never that easy.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
21,946
he said "I don't agree with anything blm but you shouldn't have to die over it"

So basically he's admitting on here he doesn't think black lives matter as much as white lives
It is tricky because, as I understand it (and have very limited time to research it), BLM as an organised initiative is now someway away from what BLM as a mantra meant.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
23,975
Location
In the middle
Diane Abbott in with a hot take:


"Nobody should have to potentially pay with their life because they stood up for racial justice "

A bit premature considering she's not lost her life (hopefully she makes a recovery and yes Diane has only said "potentially") and there is nothing to suggest so far that this shooting, which occurred near a party at 3am in Peckham has anything to with her BLM activism.

Given some of the footage doing the rounds it doesn't look like she did stand up for racial justice tbh.. it looks more like she's some sort of racist/black militant type who was happy to racially abuse other black people who disagreed with her, compared the police to the KKK and allegedly seems to have some rather dodgy things to say about white people on a (now suspended) Twitter account set up using her name.
I'm sure she'll issue a fullsome apology and attack the culprits if they turn out to be some black gang bangers.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
23,975
Location
In the middle
The main aim for the BLM movement is for black lives to matter. If someone says they don't agree with anything BLM stands for, then it's really not a stretch to infer that they are saying they don't think black lives matter.
Well obviously a lot of black people don't seem to think black lives matter considering the amount of time they spend stabbing each other.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Aug 2006
Posts
4,104
Location
In a world of my own
The main aim for the BLM movement is for black lives to matter. If someone says they don't agree with anything BLM stands for, then it's really not a stretch to infer that they are saying they don't think black lives matter.

That's incredibly disingenuous and really *is* a stretch as it deliberately takes a worst-case reading of what was said when a more reasonable reading would be that he disagrees with the BLM organisation rather than the principle (a view shared by many and not considered contentious). Of course we don't know what he actually meant unless he clarifies - which wouldn't be necessary if his OP was clearer.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
14 Apr 2017
Posts
3,511
Location
London
With Boris as PM and the bunch of clowns in the current cabinet, I think your vestige of comfort over the intelligence of the average voter to not vote in people who spout utter nonsense is a little misplaced...

We’re all entitled to our opinions, and no matter what your opinion of Boris and the alleged “bunch of clowns” in his cabinet is, it’s my opinion that they are a better choice to run the country, than the shower of crypto communists that not only harbours Diane Abbot in its ranks, but until recently had the foaming at the mouth Mao Tse Tung fan John McDonnell as Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer.
I consider myself to be reasonably intelligent, although I’m certainly no candidate for University Challenge, but I like to at least hope that a sizeable chunk of the electorate are intelligent enough to not want anything to do with Labour.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
The main aim for the BLM movement is for black lives to matter. If someone says they don't agree with anything BLM stands for, then it's really not a stretch to infer that they are saying they don't think black lives matter.

Laughably nonsense of the sort only simpletons would actually believe. Next you be telling us that 'anti racists' can't be racist...

Cos its in the name innit?

BLM can mean one of two things both of which make no sense to support, unlike cancer research.

One is a violent, nasty, anti semitic, Marxist organisation that, amongst other things, wants to do away with the traditional family unit and get rid of the police.

The other is a vague sentiment following the meaning of the words in the slogan....

.... with the suggestion being that society as a whole doesn't care for black lives or cares for them less than other ethnicities.

This is demonstrable nonsense.

The single biggest cause of a violent untimely death for a black persons in the UK and the US is being killed by another black person.

It's true that most whites murdered are murdered by other whites but the rates for blacks killing blacks, on a per capita basis are massively higher than the rates for whites killing whites.

Interracially, on a per capita basis, blacks kill whites at around twelve times the rate as the other way around in the US.

As of July of 2016 African Americans were the largest racial minority, amounting to an estimated 12.7%

In the same year the FBI figures for homicides nationwide shows that, where the race of the offender was known, this was the break down for homicides involving blacks and whites as either victims or perpetrators.


White victim total = 3,499

Pepetrator White = 2,854
Perpetrator Black = 533

Black or African American victim total = 2,870

Perpetrator White =243
Pepetrator Black = 2,570

So what can we glean from these figures?

For whites just over 81.5% of murders were committed by other whites

and just over 15. 2‰ were committed by blacks

For Black's the figures were just over 8.46%
murded by whites


and over 89.5‰ for deaths at the hands of other blacks.

And let's look at the absolute figures..

Black's killed 533 whites when they made up 12.7‰ of the population

And whites killed 243 blacks when they made up 76.9‰ of the population

So not only did whites kill less blacks then the other way around in overall numbers they did so whilst having over six times as many people in the country!

So you could express the racial disparity in interracial homicides in the USA, on a per capita basis, between blacks and whites as being in the region of over a factor of twelve in favour of the blacks much more frequently being the perpetrators in interacial murders between the two groups (just over six times as many whites as blacks in total and in absolute figures blacks kill over twice as many whites as vice versa)

The police kill, arrest and stop a disproportionate amount of blacks based on their percentage of the population but these disparities are caused primarily by the disproportionate violent crime rates for blacks as reported by witnesses to crimes.

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics

Criminal Victimization, 2017

TABLE 10
Nonfatal violent incidents, by total population, victim, and offender demographic characteristics, 2017

In about three-quarters (76%) of violent incidents where perceived offender characteristics were reported the victim perceived the offender to be male.

Based on victims’ reports, there were about four-fifths as many white offenders as the percentage of whites in the population, about twice as many black offenders as the percentage of blacks in the population, and about one-sixth as many Asian offenders as the percentage.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv17.pdf

In the US whites arrested for violent crimes are significantly more likely to be killed by the police than blacks arrested for violent crimes.


The claim is often then made that blacks commit more crime either because they are poor or because of some legacy of suffering from slavery and segregation.

Neither of these make any sense when examined more closely.

There are nearly three times as many whites living in poverty in the US than blacks as an absolute number (the percentage for blacks as group is about double that of whites but there are far fewer blacks overall than whites).

From 2018 figures there were around 25, 295,122 White Americans living in poverty (as defined by the federal governments poverty threshold)

vs 9,148691 blacks living in poverty

https://www.povertyusa.org/facts
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/IPE120218

So if poverty was the main issue then the poor whites should be massively inflating the rate of overall violent crimes for whites vs the smaller number of blacks living in poverty on the US.

If a legacy of oppression was the cause of crime then we could expect one of the most consistently oppressed groups in all of history (the Jews) to top the per capita rates for violent crime but we don't see this.

Instead we see them and other minority groups who often entered the US poor like Koreans and Indians not only surpassing blacks in many metrics (including not being arrested or incarcerated) but also significantly beating the white majority in many cases.

The conclusion should be obvious.

Culture matters and not all cultures are equal.

Whites don't underperform Koreans in many metrics in the US due to racism, systemic or otherwise, they do so because large parts of white culture in the US are inferior to large parts of the culture adopted by Koreans living in the US when it comes to things like economic success and avoiding incarceration.

The same applies to other racial groups when compared to one another.

You can also look at the significant disparities within 'blacks' as a group.

Whites are one of the least likely of all racial groups to goto university in the UK.

Afro Caribbeans attend a rate close to whites but black Africans attend at a much higher rate than either whites or Afro Caribbeans.


Again the answer is in culture not racism.

People are done taking uncritical lectures by the likes of BLM supporters about things like supposed white privellege because their claims are all based on lies.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Jul 2010
Posts
4,071
Location
Worcestershire
That's incredibly disingenuous and really *is* a stretch as it deliberately takes a worst-case reading of what was said when a more reasonable reading would be that he disagrees with the BLM organisation rather than the principle (a view shared by many and not considered contentious). Of course we don't know what he actually meant unless he clarifies - which wouldn't be necessary if his OP was clearer.
You can't really argue that it's a huge stretch to draw the most literal conclusion possible while also acknowledging that the post was ambiguous.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Jun 2005
Posts
7,586
The main aim for the BLM movement is for black lives to matter. If someone says they don't agree with anything BLM stands for, then it's really not a stretch to infer that they are saying they don't think black lives matter.
BLM is about legalising black criminality. The nice-sounding name is just fool 80 IQs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom