Erase a select few inner cities and the rest of the US has the crime of Iceland.
________________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people. Leftists always lie.
Wokeness is Weakness.
It’s almost as if the same party that fought to continue slavery, and founded the KKK, and opposed the civil rights act of 1964, has been running and keeping the inner city shit holes for a century.
LMFAO...fake news. The prisons are literally run by blacks and Latinos. Whoever controls the prisons, controls the streets. Mexican Mafia (La eMe) and Black Guerrilla Family are the most powerful prison gangs in the US. You only gain power in prison through numbers...it's all about the numbers. You're an idiot.
I have never in my life walked through a neighborhood thinking...oh uh better watch out for all those skinheads and whites who might rob or shoot me. I can't even count the number of times I locked the doors and rolled up the windows while driving through neighborhoods that weren't white.
You're a joke and this proves you're a troll and an instigator. The only Nazis I've seen in my entire life are the ones fighting in the Ukraine army.
Au contraire, since obviously the states wouldn't be safe with all the white criminals committing crime with their AR-15s. BTW, your cult leader Trump and his family are a crime wave.
keelai like to pretend she is so high and mighty. she think she better than you.
it does not matter to this retard that she wrong. she so arrogant that her feeble mind will not accept anything other than being right.
you can show keelai facts. you can show statistic that prove point. it does not matter. in keelai the hutt's mind she is right and can not be wrong ever hahahahahahahahah
i think they have medical phrase for keelai's condition but i think woketard is fine.
Said the woman pretending to be too stupid to understand that whites have written thousands of anti-black laws and policies discriminating against blacks for centuries creating systemic poverty among black people which is the #1 factor in most crime along with the racist GOP "war on drugs" which was used to disproportionately arrest and give harsher sentences to black people for low level drug offenses while ignoring white men who committed the same offense!
Furthermore, you conveniently support crimes committed by whites against black and Native peoples including rape, genocide, slavery, land theft, lynchings, germ warfare, terrorism. If white people paid for centuries of free labor and stolen land, then the BIPOC economic situation would be more equitable.
Btw, fascists and white supremacists create the dire situation of a marginalized group through oppression, discrimination and other tactics, then complain when the marginalized group doesn't do well which you are doing now. When a marginalized group does well, the dominant group attacks them out of jealousy like the KKK emergence, Jim Crow laws, Holocaust, Trial of Tears, Tulsa Massacre, war on drugs, etc..
You can't even bother to refute a claim that's a fact. Poverty leads to more crime this is a fact. Yet you claim you are arguing in good faith? No bud you are not.
I never said illegitimacy does not cause or play any part in crime I said poverty leads to crime also. You want to say poverty plays no part in driving up crime and it simply is not true. What you just talked about in the parent not being around can have a lot to do with having to work so much.
End the drug war, better career opportunities, more positive representation in the entertainment industry. Good role models to look up to. No Trump does not count as a good role model. He cheated on his wife and paid hush money to a porn star.
I gave you the reasons. So anyway this counts as another concession from you. That is the last time I provide reasons as you acted like a complete prick. Scoreboard me 88 you 0.
Notice how you bypassed weed? So since you did that I will do the same. You think people should be locked up for simply smoking weed?
We agree for once.
When I said good role models I meant it. This is not a left vs right deal. If you aren't a good person you shouldn't be idealized as a role model period!
So then you like me believe the drug war should be retooled. If it becomes legal there is less reason to deal it or buy it from a dealer. If someone can buy it legally it's obviously safer. Legalize it and you take away the dealers power.
That means punishing corporations who hire illegal immigrants for a cheap price. People blame the immigrants but who gladly provides the job? Plenty of immigrants legal or illegal are willing to work jobs Americans would not.
I'm not playing this game. You know what my words mean. Don't play dumb.
I don't believe people are in jail for smoking pot. I note that you are now avoiding any discussion of crack or meth or heroin.
It means all of it. If we actually want to help black men become providers and attractive potential partners for their baby mommas.
No game. I'm asking for reassurance that this is not just a trick, to get me to tear down strong conservative leaders while you snicker at how stupid I am and don't do the same. You know, like the last... oh as long as I can remember, at least back to before Sen. Packwood.
Plenty of people have been incarcerated for smoking weed. Also no you bypassed weed and immediately jumped to other things without addressing weed. So don't do it to me if you are actively doing it. Sound good? I don't even think dealing it is bad so long as it's not to minors. Victimless crime at that point. It's not our job to tell an adult what they can do with their body.
Ok so long as it's consistent. You don't just get to demonize immigrants while letting corporations skate on like nothing they do is a problem.
I gave you the reassurance. This applies to everyone! I snicker because you only care about tearing down liberals. If you actually held conservatives to a standard I would not mock you. I called Biden trash from the jump. You think Trump is some savior.
People DIE when they go hiking and stumble on a grow plot. So, it is NOT a victimless crime. And I do not believe that people go to jail for just smoking pot. I believe that people get FINED and it is a hardship.
In reality we have a sitaution where we spend all of our time discussing what to do, and actually do NOTHING.
If you were serious abou that, you would acknowledge that lefties as a group, generally DO NOT do that, that they are happy to tear down conservatives, while giving their own a pass.
People also die off of prescription drugs. Stupid to assume that this will always happen. People do go to jail for smoking weed you can look up the stats. Even so a hardship simply for smoking weed shouldn't be. If someone gets drunk and kills someone who's fault is that? The person who gave hem the alcohol or the person who drove drunk?
Yeah and we also demonize immigrants while not caring that corporations are the ones who gladly hire them. Also yeah I did not support building a wall. I think that's a waste of money.
Republicans do this also. Covering up for a base is not limited to liberals. So no we are not playing this game. I don't deny liberals cover for their team but so do conservatives. My point stands if you aren't a good person you shouldn't be idealized period! This is proven by the fact that foxnews is having to pay out a huge lawsuit for the lies they spread about voter fraud.
"Assume always happen"? What a strange thing to say. You know, blacks could just OBEY THE LAW. That would solve the problem nicely.
And there we go. So, nothing to be done. YOu say we agree, but then you don't want to DO anything. YOu always want to do SOMETHING ELSE. That is the sily game we have been playing for decades and thus blacks are screwed competing against the ENTIRE THIRD WORLD LABOR FORCE.
Look up Sen Bob Packwood. Republicans sacked him because supposedly sexual harassment. Then a few years later Bill Clinton comes along and they try to apply the same rules to him and they get FUCKED.
Yeah and Rosa Parks also could have just obeyed the law as well. You are ignorant if you think money does not get you out of legal issues. Tons of people smoke weed. It is a victimless crime. Does law come before morality? You realize just because something is a law does not automatically make it just correct? Lots of folks just do not have the money to make the judicial system look the other way. How about we just remove that completely and have cops catch people who are real criminals that hurt people? Nah lets keep focusing on a person smoking weed...
I said as long as you hold corporations accountable. I do not like how you want to demonize immigrants and let the corporations slide on by for hiring them. Consistency is key.
Bravo you sacked one person. What about the others? You trying to get me to believe he was the only one involved in a scandal? Try again I am not that ignorant.
Democratically enacted laws. Society as a whole, does not approve. Is pot and crack really that important to blacks?
Got it. Plenty of excuses to not do anything. This is the status quo. Like I said, No discussions, and no actions. Problems continue forever.
The republicans did what you wanted, they held their own accountable. Then Bill Clinton. That is the reality of the situation. You want to hold people accountable, you have to go first and for quite a while to make up for the massive fucking the gop got for trying to play by the rules you wanted.
Nope you ignored what I said. Your ignorance is dismissed. Way to ignore what I said about consistency. I am giving solutions you simply just disagree with them.
Nope not the way it works. Just because they held a person accountable does it mean they don't cover up for their team. Just because they targeted one does it mean they held all of them accountable. Nice try though. It is why Foxnews is facing a major lawsuit right now.
There is a process for changing it then. Do that. Until then don't smoke pot. Or at least be discrete about it.
I did not ignore what you said. I didn't even disagree with what you said. I just pointed out what happens when people like you say that, ie, nothing happens. We have spent DECADES squabbling about what to do, while the labor market is flooded with cheap third world labor, making life much harder for blacks, specifcally black males.
You want to get there, you have to push YOUR side, because we have been burned GOOD, on thhat one. Get back to me when you lose a President because of it.
"States"? If your people can't be bothered to use your votes to go though the process, that's not the "states", that's you. I will refrain from making obvious joke about pot heads lacking motivation.
So, you really want to allow crack, meth, heroin and the like to be sold legally in this country. Incredible. No, I can't support that, nor would the majority of the country. OBEY THE LAW, and stay out of jail.
Would you like to hear MY top three ways of addressing black crime?
Funny then why in places like California or Seattle has things changed? Could it be that some states religions have power to influence certain laws also? I thought places like that did nothing to try and help out minorities and were a bunch of liberal lazy hippies?
Do you need the law to stop you from using drugs? I myself do not. I avoid prescription drugs even though they are legal. I only use them if it's totally necessary.
1. Because pot heads EVENTUALLY, SOMETIMES can get shit done? Not really something to brag about there.
2. I will not support selling meth to people. Ditto crack, heroin and other similar drugs. You might have a reason to accept the harm done to people, I do not share it.
3. a. Stop celebrating and supporting single motherhood and instead celebrate and support two traditional, two parent families.
b. Pro-job trade and immigration laws, to increase ability of men to be providers, ideally leading to resurgence of single income families.
c and actually, really, just those TWO big ones, plenty of other ideas, but those are the core. Give me those and anything else would be bonus level.
________________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people. Leftists always lie.
Wokeness is Weakness.
I said, that the nation reached a bi-partisan consense in favor of equality for blacks, and you spun it as "racism ended" or some such bullshit strawman.
You lied, because you lost. The bit where you claim you won? Just gaslghting troll boi games.
But the affects of past racism didn't magically disappear because of that. You acting as if it was a light switch scenario is you being deceptive. That's like saying a battered wife has no scarring or mental issues the second her husband stops abusing her. Yep that agreement was reached but the affects are still going on even today. That's not something which gets fixed over night.
Nope I won the debate and you know it. Your behavior is quite telling honestly. You showcase how fake patriotism works. Yet you claim to be a man of God? Give me a break you scumbag!
Yep that is what I said. You act as if because of that happening all racism ended. I was referring to it's affects also. You were just too dumb to realize it.
Notice how you can't challenge this point? This is because you know you are wrong.
I made a very clear statement. You choose to not address my statement or the point I made with it.
Now that it is not right here, you are lying about it.
HEre it is again.
Since the mid 1960s, this country has had a bi-partisan consensus in favor of equality for blacks, democratically reached, and enacted by generations of national policy and law and cultural practicies.
Nothing in there, says anything that you just claimed it said. You are a lying whore.
So then answer the question then. So because of that does that mean all the affects of racism also disappeared in the 60's? If the answer is no which it is that point is irrelevant. You literally made no point at all by saying that. The affects are still going on even today.
And again you don't explain why you LIED about what I said, and then you move on to a false choice logical fallacy.
Past injustices do NOT cause the high rate of illegitimacy in the black demographic. "Addressing" shit that happened long ago, will do NOTHING to reduce that problem.
Nope you just were too dense to understand what I was saying.
Yep they do. It's not all of it but it plays a part. Pretending like they don't is complete deceit. Addressing history and trying to change how it still affects people today is positive not negative.
Poverty leads to more crime this is proven time and time again. White people has more opportunities before the 60's. Such as being able to vote and other things. Ok now it ends in the 60's right? Well now lots of people have had a head start in businesses, money opportunities etc. Therefore much less chances of poverty. Some money is inherited. Not everyone who got rich did it by hard work. Not everyone who is in poverty is lazy.
Watch you will prove my point and dismiss my rebuttal. You don't know how debating works.
AND, you are wrong. Poverty doesn't lead to crime, broken families lead to crime.
AND, note that in your timeline, you just ignore that during the 60s, and 70s, and 80s, and 90s, and 00s, and 10s, we have massive, and constant polices of Affirmative Action and Diversity in many forms.
Broken families lead to higher chance of poverty. Single parent households means what? Less income because you only have one person supporting the family. So no it ties together. And you think Trump encourages strong family values lmao! The guy who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and the same guy who cheats on his wife pays hush money and says grab them by the pussy? Yeah real strong values he has there especially for family stuff.
Just because of those things does it magically make the affects of the racism in the past disappear. Even with affirmative action white people have more starring roles in Hollywood. You are conveniently ignoring that. Those actions still have an affect on today. You can deny it all you want to.
I never said that Trump encourages strong familiy values.
If your position is that this black issue is caused by the lingering effects of racism, then pointing out the massive efforts already made to "address" it, is relevant for many reasons, not the least is, it calls into question what impact it will have, if any.
Tons of things lead to crime and poverty is a big contributing factor. You are proving my point by pointing to broken families which often poverty accompanies them. Keep going you are helping me out. Denying poverty leads to more crime is nothing other than sheer deceit from you.
What did I make up about Trump? Go ahead tell me what I made up.
You are not interested. If you had it your way no affirmative action or any other thing would be done. You think everything was perfect after the 60's.
This goes against the narrative you push. My point stands charging people for smoking weed is stupid. That's a failed right wing policy.
So by locking people up that is better? You do know some drug addiction starts from an injury? Why not help people with drug addiction as opposed to charging them with crimes?
The issue is sometimes single parent households are more stable than two parent households. If the relationship is abusive what's better? Ideally yes two parent household that is stable keyword stable then it is better. However by shaming a single parent or discouraging divorce and encouraging staying in a toxic relationship is bad. That was done a lot. Also no I disagree with you about immigration sorry. You won't give me the drug war so I'm not giving you immigration.
1. Narrative? I was just making fun of you for supposedly having the votes but not being able translate support into law. You are welcome to explain this failure of yours.
2. IMO, very much yes. Lock them up. And actually I would totally support the death penalty for large scale traffickers.
3. a. Rebuilding the black family will massively lower crime. Thousands of lives would be saved, each year.
b. YOu don't think that increasing the supply of labor, lowers the cost, ie wages? Well, that's nice. You are completely wrong of course.
To which you said society didn't support that. You were wrong with that statement. I was able to prove it by showing the majority wants the legalization of weed. Of course you won't own up to being wrong because that is what a level headed mature person would do.
This is ignorant. It creates a legal record for someone who has an addiction. Which then makes it difficult to get a job. Which makes it most likely they will resort back to it. Tell me what if people got charged or locked up for porn addiction? Would you support that? Addictions come in many forms. You need a way to rehabilitate someone who hasn't committed a violent crime. Sad you feel this way. Yet you claim to be religious or care about your fellow man? Pathetic.
Ending the drug war or even retooling it would save millions of lives per year. Yet you oppose that. You should congratulate drugs for winning the war on drugs. Apparently you are too dumb to not do them unless the law tells you not to.
Never said that. I disagree with you about immigration. Your strawman is dismissed. If you held corporations to a standard and did not allow them to hire illegal people for cheap labor it would decrease immigration.
1. But you don't want legalization fo weed, you want it all legalized.
2. All policies have pros and cons. Legal sale and use of meth and crack is a con I do not support.
3. Your attempt to personalize this is noted. I disagree with you. I think the cost of normalizing use of hard drugs would be worse than what we have now.
4. So, let's clarify, do you agree that increasing the supply of labor, reduces the cost, ie wages?
Don't deflect from your statement. You even fought me on weed. Notice how you don't want a middle ground. So then you agree people should not be charged for weed? So then wow that means a right wing ideology is flawed correct?
Lol that's your defense? Okay well since all policies have pros and cons I will stick with mine. Why do you want to control what people do with their own body? Like I said do you need the law to protect you from drugs? I myself know better and don't need the legal system to protect me from doing drugs. I am an adult I do not need the law to step in to educate me, I will educate myself on drugs. Answer my question should people be locked up for looking at porn?
Disagree completely. Other countries have less of a drug problem because they don't use the legal system. They actually care about helping people as opposed to loving them up. They focus on rehabilitation as opposed to incarceration.
Answer my question about porn addiction first. So then that also means that forcing corporations to out of pocket more money would allow for workers to have better wages right?
1. No, you miss m point. YOU don't want a middle ground. And people like you. America reduced to a bunch of potheads, isn't enough for you. You want the hard shit. Maybe that's why pot isn't legal.
2. Depends on the porn. Child porn? Certainly. Snuff porn? Hell yes.
3. How do you define "less of a drug problem"?
4. Already done loser. NOw, Do you agree that increasing the supply of labor reduces cost, ie wages?
1. That's not so much a point, as your position/opinion. So, thanks for sharing.
2. you asked, I answered.
3. i doubt that, and I also don't know that even if true, if it would translate to our situation.
4. In the real world, everyone knows that increased supply leads to decreased cost. You are just playing troll boi games, because you don't actually give a fuck about black men or black families.
See you can't refute the position or the point. Weed shouldn't be illegal to smoke. Charging people for smoking weed created more problems than it solves. That's a fact. Your concession is noted.
Nope you knew what I meant. You did that deliberately as a way to side step the question. Should regular porn be illegal yes or no?
Look it up. The facts are out there for you to see my friend.
Once you answer my question honestly i will address this.
1. It's not a fact, it is your opinion. And you are being dishonest because you want crack, meth and heroin equally available.
2. I've not given it any real thought. It seems completely off topic here.
3. You saying that, does not change my response.
4. Reducing the free flow of third world labor, is needed if we are ever to see wages rise for the "working class", which is disproportionately black as per the topic.
2. I gave you my answer. You seem to be arguing against someone who made a statement of principle against the very concept of addiction. Which has nothing to do with me.
3. You are being an ass.
4. By reducing immigration we can increase wages. This would enable more and more black males to fill the role of provider in black families, thus rebuilding the black familiy and improving the black communities. This is of no interest to you of course. Especially since third world immigrations tend to vote for your side. So, you don't care about helping blacks.
Nope fact. You talk about wanting to help the black community and don't realize that charging people for weed hurts more than helps. I'm even willing to go ok stop at weed but you won't budge.
Nope it's a yes or no. Should looking at regular porn be a crime?
Yeah because you literally said that wouldn't change your response. This shows you don't care about facts.
If you wanted to help blacks you wouldn't support charging people for smoking weed.
Are you really willing to stop at weed? I doubt that.
I have not given it any thought. What is your point?
You are being a lying ass.
We talk about helping blacks, you want to help them get drugs, I want to get them better jobs and wages. Want to call me wacist some more, troll boi? lol!!!!!
But you won't stop there. And indeed, it is not your real passion. You want the hard stuff on the streets for some reason.
I never claimed that you did. Sooooooo.... why are you sharing this with me?
You seem to be unable to read complete sentences. Do you think this is from twitter reducing your attention span?
We have managed to actually discuss issues for a few posts now. (Good for you). AND we see where we are coming from, re "helping blacks". I really want better jobs and wages and you really want to get them drugs, the harder the better.
This has been a very pleasent and productive discussion. We should stop here while we are ahead.
Nope I said I would stop there. I would rather stop there and have weed legalized than make no progress at all. See I am wiling to reach a middle ground you are not. So because we disagree lets do nothing at all. That is your mentality. Typical from people like you. You do not want to reach middle ground you want your way. It is your way or the highway.
Then why will you not answer a simple question? Notice how you dodged it? This is because you know you are wrong.
Nice gaslighting and deflection. You ignore facts. You openly admitted it. You said even if I looked it up it would not change my response. Your words.
Nope you are now running away because you were proven wrong. I want to stop charging blacks for smoking weed. You are okay with them getting charged for smoking weed. Blacks could get better jobs if they were not charged for smoking weed and developing a criminal record. So no it is you who does not want them to get better jobs.
Nice attempt to retreat I will count that as a concession. Scoreboard me 88 you 0.
This is not about me. Lefty states, you lefties can do what you want. This is where you want to whip out all the great progress blacks have made in lefty states that have legalized pot, adn are not being arrested for pot now. if you can. Show the results.
It is because in right wing states they do lots in their power to stop weed from being legalized. The majority of people also support free health care yet it stays the same. Sometimes the people do vote on it to be legalized and yet they get overruled. What are you supposed to do when that happens?
Nope you did not. Yes or no should regular porn be illegal? That is what I asked and you know it.
Lol nope I quoted you verbatim.
My focus is on not charging people for weed so they can get jobs. Not simply drugs but the repercussions of charging people for weed. Which ties into getting better jobs.
Nah I just call it like it is. When someone is stupid like you they deserve to be mocked.
1. Strange how you seem to not want to talk about the results of your desired policies.
2. And I said I have not given it any thought. That's my answer. So, now it is your turn to say something.
3. I wonder how many words you can read in a row, before you stop seeing them? Clearly no more than one simple sentence.
4. No, MY focus in on them getting better jobs an d wages so that they can improve the black community and thus make America as a whole better. YOU seem more about the drugs. You've barely commented on the supposedly desired results. How many of the harder drugs have you tried and liked?
5. And like I said, we should have quit while we were ahead. NOw you are back to normal.
Of not charging people for smoking weed? The results showcase way more positive than charging people for smoking it.
Nope it is a yes or no answer. You do not get to bail out of a question. You are doing that because you know I am right.
Your deflection is dismissed.
I have never tried a hard drug in my life. I do not even smoke weed myself. Again lets simply talk about weed. The results of legalizing that are far more positive than negative. You can tax it, it creates jobs and it makes people's lives not get ruined for smoking it. Which in turn makes it to where they can get better jobs and be a productive member of society.
We made no progress at all. Oh since I disagree with you about the drug war now lets do nothing at all. How is that progress? I was willing to even meet halfway. You will not. If you do not get your way you completely dig your heels in. Typical though from closed minded folks.
Dude. You've had your lefties in various places implementing your ideas, ie helping blacks by NOT arresting blacks that break the law, in states and cities for sevearl years now.
What I have NOT heard is any good results coming out of these places. What I HAVE heard, is that these places are becoming even worse shit holes.
And when I say "shit holes", i mean that literally, as there seems to be a correlation between your ideas and the decline of our civilization to the point that we can't seem to remember to not shit in teh streets.
Do you have any information showing that the actions you want in order to help blacks, actually helped blacks, as a group?
And where did I support anybody getting away with breaking laws which are reasonable? Such as violence, rioting and looting? You should be charged for those but not smoking weed. A world of difference between those two. I don't stand behind any group if they are wrong. This is the difference between us. So since you are right wing that means you supported the January 6th ordeal right? I have many issues with both sides. Don't tie me to something simply because I might lean left. You do this because you can't debate honestly.
Notice how you dodged the question again. You did this because you know you are wrong.
Yeah I do actually. By not charging people for smoking weed it helps them he able to get jobs.
And it helps out when those policies are done. Are you denying that decriminalizing pot is positive? Do you think pot should be illegal? You look and go see leftists places suck therefore all their policies suck! I could do that easily with right wing policies but I don't. I don't agree with all right wing policies but some are good same goes for left wing.
The drug war is a right wing policy and it's been nothing but a failure. The positive result is people bring able to work jobs and not go back to it. Also the tax revenue pot brings to the states.
TAX REVENUE? The question was helping blacks, specifically with regards to black crime.
TAX REVENUE for the state, is pretty weak shit. If your policies were correct, you would think that we would be seeing young black men, who don't have records, because of decriminlization, getting better jobs and thus being providers to their black families and slowing starting to heal their communities.
Making some money off of selling drugs? LOL. That is the best you've got?
Lol taxes also helps blacks smart one. Also it does help with black crime. Blacks get arrested for it more often than whites. Less legal records which helps them get better jobs.
The policy isn't worldwide and many blacks still have records only off of weed. You sct as if every single place has adopted this policy and suddenly all smokers suddenly had all charges dropped. That didn't happen...
The pint stands tax revenue helps out everybody. You wanted proof I gave it to you.
That is weak ass shit. That is a weak PRO to balance out the negatives.
AND my other point stands. The way you lied about what I said? That shows that you know it is weak shit, because you are desperate to distract from the results of your policy.
Your concession about the tax revenue is noted. Another point for me. Nope you act as if that policy hit implemented everywhere and it did not. Also did people's record suddenly disappear who were charged for smoking weed only? Nope so you are being deceptive. Take your loss like a man.
I laugh at conservatives like you. I hope Trump doesn't get in just because of people like you. The more miserable you are the better. If you were actually a fair person I wouldn't feel that way. You only care about your people. You are a damn joke.
Except a second ago, you were gloating that I "admitted" that tax revenue was postive.
Dude. You are shit talking to avoid the truth.
The truth is, that our respective positions boiled down to you wanting drugs for blacks, and me wanting jobs and raises.
i asked you for evidence that over a decade of your desired policy in place should have produced, in context of the thread. You cited "tax revenue". That's not very impressive. You claimed that it would let them get better jobs and ect. ect. ect. You could not support that.
Me? I wanted jobs and raises. You claimed to agree but then brought up reasons to not actually do it. I discussed that. I did NOT ask you if better jobs would be "positive" because that would have been retarded to do. I pointed out that you opposed doing it, because you did.
You are talking shit now, because eyou don't like how your position looked after a serious discussion of the issue.
Wrong pointing to tax revenue isn't weak. You just call it that because you can't dispute it. Also by legalizing pot it does create jobs and allows people who smoke it to get better jobs. These are facts. Which is why you couldn't dispute it. So tell me do you think pot should be illegal to smoke? Watch you will dodge again.
You put forth a desired policy, and made claims it would improve teh situation for blacks, specifically in teh context of high black crime.
I pointed out that you had several dem controlled areas that had been running with this policy for quite some time and asked you to look at them and tell me if or how they supported your claims.
Your respond was TAX REVENUE. Which, while potentially useful, thus a PRO to your policy, does not directly address the issue ie black crime or even more generally black interests.
You touch on that in your post, adn then make ANOTHER CLAIM, ie JOBS, with a supporting argument.
AND THEN, you demand my personal position on pot, a completely off topic non sequitor.
That is a lot of spam, all designed to distract from the fact that when you went looking at the areas that have implemented your policy of POT LEGALIZATION, that it did not produce any noticiable improvements in the black community for you to point to.
This is why lefties like you troll, because the policies and positions your support are BAD, and you know it, but you don't want to change, becuase you are not motivated by a desire to have good policy to benefit your fellow Americans.
Depends what the idiots politicians spend it on. Most of the time, imo, they spend it on what they think will buy them votes. Quite often, imo, it is NOT a benefit to "everyone".
BUT, even if it was, a benefit, that does not mean that the policy was a good policy or that the overall impact was more good than bad.
You clearly don't understand the concept of cost benefti analysis.
Mulple states and/or cities have been playing your game of decrimilizing various crimes to benefit people, often specifically blacks as per the topic.
Yet, you DON'T seem to be able to point to any success stories.
So that counts as a yes. Also Trump wasting money a wall you had no issue with. Your method of making pot illegal has no tax revenue perks. All it does is poison society. Your method has been a failure. Explain how criminalizing pot has helped society. I proved how it's more beneficial to legalize it than criminalize it. Your turn.
I clearly said no. And you just agreed with me in principle, with your example of the Wall. (ps don't be retarded pretending that that means I agree with you on teh wall)
So, your post is mostly just shit talk to distract from teh fact that the cities and states that have embraced your policy of decrimilization to "help" blacks,
have been turning more and more into LITERAL SHIT HOLES were civilization has declined to the point that they are forgetting how to NOT shit in the streets.
Nope you couldn't refute it. More tax revenue is a plus the point stands. Also lots of that tax money goes to schools which is a positive. So no you actually defeated yourself. Think before speaking.
Your drug war destroyed a lot of this country. You also can't refute that. Tons of other right wing policies are toxic as well. Your guy's healthcare system is s joke also. It's lead to the decay of society.
It's not stonewalling. Some of that tax revenue goes to schools. Also dispensaries do create more jobs. It also makes the pot you do buy more safe. Facts. I love it you have nothing to refute this. It also allows people who smoke to not have records. Boom checkmate.
Now comes the part where you kick and scream like a child. A normal mature person would own up to being wrong. Unfortunately we both know you are not the type of person to admit to being proven wrong. You want respect? Be a man and own up to being proven wrong for once in your life.
But education success is primarily a result of PARENTAL INVOLVMENT, so dumping money on the schools, is mostly just a benefit to school administrators. Thus, wasted.
And exspecially as we are now talking after a decade of actual RECORD, we are past teh point of speculation.
SHOW ME IMPROVED SCHOOL RESULTS FOR BLACKS IN THESE AREAS.
That you act like you are winning this, when everyone reading this knows that the places you are talking about, are....utter shitholes, is just you revealing what a dishonest person you are.
But we can all agree that money going into education is a good thing. So because we have a lack of parental involvement we should not put anymore money into schools? Two things can help so no you are wrong again. Legalizing weed and adding better parental involvement would both help better the education. The point stands.
And we have more than a decade of record of the results of the drug war. And guess what it is disastrous.
Show me improved results and positives that come from charging people for smoking weed.
I won this a while ago. You are just a brain dead idiot who thinks every right wing policy works.
And there is good results in legalizing weed. It isn't just revenue for the schools it provides more jobs and allows people who smoke to not have records which allows them more jobs. Also you assume it goes to no good I am not taking your word on that. Sorry assumptions from your idiotic brain are not facts.
Provide me positive results for charging people for weed. I'm not letting you dodge that. I will wait.
I already proved my case it provides more jobs and allows other jobs for black people to get because they won't get legal records. Also dispensaries provide jobs.
Your up provide positives criminalizing weed has done. I am waiting.
I didn't just make that claim. I made the claim it benefits society as a whole. Which includes jobs and not racking up legal records so you can get jobs easier. I did say tax revenue is a positive you can't deny that either. You did not address that broad claim I made and instead are trying to hone in on a single claim. I am not letting you get away with that.
So no wrong. Anyways how does criminalizing weed help society? I'm waiting.
We are past the "claiming" portion of the debate, it is time for you to show results.
And you can't, because the areas in question seem to be getting WORSE, not better.
That you insist on ignoring that, shows that your true goal is not improving things for anyone, but that you are emotionally invested in making drugs, including hard drugs more available.
The fact that you keep making points that don't align with your other points, is in fact making an entirely different point, but hey, if your aim was to show off your racial prejudice, mission accomplished.
U.S. Population Demographic / Prisoner Demographic (2016):
White: 62% / 32%
Black: 12% / 34%
Hispanic: 17% / 21%
Other: 9% / 13% (I combined this from remaining categories)
Statistics for 2023 don’t include the “two-or-more races” category, increasing the share of the remaining categories, Hispanic is renamed to Latino, and Native is now combined. Why the breakdown is different I’m not sure, but the overall effect is the same:
Adjusting to find per capita population-to-incarceration ratios produces the following:
White: .63
Black: 2.92
Latino: 1.16
Native: 2
Calculating this to rounded percents produces:
White: 9%
Black: 44%
Latino: 17%
Native: 30%
Whites are underrepresented in prison, Latinos are at pretty close to a 1:1 ratio, and Blacks and Natives are overrepresented. That’s a massive difference comparing the proportions of racial makeup between citizenry and prison inmates. But the reason for the mismatch between population and prisoner demographics isn't (at least entirely) racism. It’s about who’s committing crimes. For example…
Homicide Victims per Race of Offender (2021):
-------------White-----Black-------Other----Unknown
White-------2,594----566---------56-------83
Black-------246-------2,574-------23-------63
Other-------57--------40----------138------12
Unknown---51--------38----------8---------29
Total--------2,948----3,218------225------187
Let's break down the numbers between Whites and Blacks:
2,594 Whites were killed by other Whites.
566 Whites were killed by Blacks.
246 Blacks were killed by Whites.
2,574 Blacks were killed by other Blacks.
So out of a total of 6,578 homicides in 2021, Blacks killed a total of 3,218 people (80% of whom were also black) even though they comprise only 12% of the population. That's 49% of all homicides in 2021 committed by 12% of the population (and being realistic, the vast majority of those would have been men, so really about 6% committed nearly 50% of all homicides in the U.S. in 2021).
Black men are quite literally running around offing each other and very few people seem to care.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
Hmm. You don't see something fishy with the stats you sourced for prisoners, i.e. the notable lack of Latino/Hispanic numbers, which clearly have been lumped into "White"? In fact, subtract 21% from 57.5% and it becomes:
2023 prison population:
Asian 1.4% Black 38.5%
Native 2.6% White 36.7%
Latino 21%
Look familiar? Hint: refer to the stats in my post derived from a source that actually separates Latino from White. I should note that I specifically avoided that bop.gov website expressly because it didn’t have a Hispanic/Latino category.
Interlude: there’s a trend of lumping Hispanic/Latino into a White category of late, skewing results. In my view “white” and “black” shouldn’t even be categories. U.S. citizenry should be broken down by ancestry, not skin color, which is irrelevant. America is a melting pot of outside and native ancestry, so that’s what should be tracked, e.g. Native American, Irish, German, Norwegian, African, Polynesian, Nigerian, Mongolian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Aborigine, etc. We’ve been conditioned to think of “white” and “black” as indicative of race, but they’re not. There’s a racial spectrum consisting of individuals with diverse genetic backgrounds. One usually stands out more prominently than the rest, but we’re all a mix. Ancestry is what matters, not skin color. But we’re constrained to utilizing the data and categories presented to us, so I’ll begrudgingly proceed that way…
So of course, "Whites" have greater numbers of crimes committed if including all forms of crime irrespective of demographic proportions. Whites comprise 60% of the population to 13% Blacks. Raw numbers have no meaning. It must be broken down into proportional ratios, per capita demographically, to have genuine value when trying to identify true statistical variance.
Let's look at the 2019 arrest statistics you posted; except this time, we’ll adjust the numbers so we can ascertain the proper demographically-based ratio. The U.S. population demographic between white:black is a 60:13 ratio, or about 4.6:1. So the arrest stats you pulled for 2019 must be adjusted by this ratio by dividing the "white" number by 4.6, which becomes:
whites: 1,028,106
blacks: 1,815,144
Which means the actual white:black all-crime ratio is 1:1.7. In other words, black U.S. residents are 1.7 times more likely to commit all forms of crime, minor and serious. If taking a few stats from the FBI database you sourced, below is what it looks like (which, it should be noted, also doesn’t separate Latino/Hispanic, but includes it as an all-race “ethnicity”, almost all of which would actually reduce the number for the white category, but let’s run with this even without accommodating that flaw):
Violent Crime: 45,619:129,346, or 1:2.8, i.e. black violent crime is 2.8 times more likely than white
Aggravated Assault: 1:2.5
Vehicle Theft: 1:1.9
Property Crime: 1:2
Rape: 1:1.8
Drug Violation: 1:1.7
Every single statistic is similar, even with Latino still lumped in with White. The pattern is obvious and irrefutable.
I focused on homicides for two reasons: 1) the OP specifically refers to "safest', meaning violent crime, e.g. homicides, not "all crime". And 2) because the stat of blacks committing 50% of all homicides is so stunning, and more so for me personally because I frequently deal with the fallout of this phenomenon with my side work doing videography for KC Freedom Project. So many young black men trapped in practical war zones conjoined with a far too frequent degree of shoddy and/or corrupt policing produces preventable black incarcerations (the aspect of this I do videography work for). But no one wants to address the actual culture-based problem at the core of it. They want to spout meaningless numbers to try to prove a misguided and groundless political or ideological point while remaining perfectly content to let young black men exterminate each other.
For shame.
Having said all that, I don’t endorse the OP’s assertion, which I deem a likely overstatement. The only way to know if removing all black crime would make the U.S. the “safest place on Earth” would be to crunch the numbers compared to other countries, which he did not do. Yet again, this very thread is a prime example of two opposing ideologies prompting exaggerated proclamations to support their dichotomous belief-based narratives, both of which have kernels of merit but are widely missing the mark.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
Irrelevant. OP suggests there would be no crime if there were no black people. Crime would continue since most crime is still committed by whites and most prisoners are white.
That is not what I said you lying sack of shit. I said America would be one of the safest places on Earth. White-collar crime isn't violent you ignoramus troll.
Also...I never said if there were no black people. I said if black crime had disappeared. Your wording however insinuates that all black people commit crimes. Who is the real racist here?
Over all though whites commit the most crimes. Even with all the crimes by whites, blacks still come out on top when it comes to murder aka homicide and theft. This is why you see it common on CCTV (theft) because those are the most easily captured.
IDK sorry...the video didn't come with context. But the lack of respect for life is very alarming. When he went back to rob him...I started looking into carry conceal classes.
yes that is what is strikings about this video is lack of respect for lifes. he just shoot like second nature!
this killer, he is so relax i thought he was pro hitman! but it looks like he rob him!
look how cool this murderer is! most peoples be shitting themselfs if they kill other person but this guy is like he out for moonlight stroll and he is like "woops just murder this man"
And how they become so cold and callus at such a young age too. Taking a life, and race, color, sexual orientation, gender, or political affiliations, don't matter to these murdering sociopaths.
Don't tell the libs, they'll brand an R on your face and ostracize you. Then they'll slink off to their all-white, walled compounds and pretend like they actually give a shit about black people.
That is why no one takes you seriously on this site. You jump in the middle of a conversation without getting the full context of the story. Typical idiot moves right there. You speak without knowing the facts. You get your witty bitty feelers hurt because of trigger words. You're such a joke that they even made a movie about your kind.
Idiocracy...you're totally Dax Shepard in that movie.
I KNOW HOW TO READ,SHITSTICK...I READ THE THREAD...YOU SOUNDED FOOLISH...I TOLD YOU SO...FURTHERMORE...MY INTENT IS NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY...THAT IS THE INTENT OF DICKHEADS AND POSERS...I AM HERE TO HAVE A GOOD TIME AND CHAT FLICKS...YOU HAVE BROKEN THOUGHTS ON MOVIECHAT.
They've done well. Instead of literal plantations, they have figurative ones in many of their cities, with their unofficial "slaves" living in crappy neighborhoods and chained using lies, free gifts, and empty promises. What better way to enslave people than to manipulate their minds into thinking they're better off voting for the very people they used to call "Masta?"
Gang violence and drive-by shootings are equivalent to school shootings. Little girls getting killed by stray bullets happens way more often than loner nerd who gets bullied and shoots up a school.
I didn't say women weren't violent in nature or didn't commit violent crimes. I said most violent crimes are undertaken by men. Also that's not an answer to my question.
I believe in an eye for an eye. If you get caught taking a life...and it wasn't self-defense...you deserve the death penalty. If you get caught raping or touching little children...I think your pecker should get cut off and a giant tattoo should be placed on your forehead that brands you a sex offender. If you get caught stealing...your hands should be taken from you. Do you get where I'm going with this?
But I appreciate your underlying point. It's absurd to stigmatise an entire group, the majority of whom are innocent and law-abiding, because of the actions of a minority who share their identity, which is what the OP and likeminded people are doing with respect to Black people.
I don't think discussing an issue is ever the wrong thing, it's about the way the OP was phrased that makes me think they're not here for an actual discussion.
There is no simple solution, you can't take back centuries of racism and the aftermath of that with a one-sentence solution. It's multiple systemic issues working in tandem, racism aside, and trying to fix even one of those isn't possible unless all of the things that are wrong are also being fixed. Also, I'm not American, so my understanding is experiential and that experience is limited, whereas it seems to me that many Americans don't want a solution that precludes racism, so I guess start there.
Saying "racism" is why we can't even try to address the problem.
Hell, we aren't even at the admitting we have a problem stage yet, becuase nearly all discussion(s) of hte issue is derailed and shut down by people saying "racism".
Thus, bringing up the problem, to insist, "HEY EVERYONE, HUGE PROBLEM HERE THAT NEEDS ADDRESSED",
is a hugely important thing to do, because until we take the first step of admitting the problem exists, we cannot even start discussion of solututions.
The OP is... speaking Truth. He is trying to take the first step to addressing an issue that is killing people by the tens of thousands a year, if not more.
Hey, remember when you said "DIscussing a problem a group has, does not imply that everyone in the group shares that problem or embodies that problem"? So yes we can say racism, it's a real thing and it's also a fact of history. It's not a conversation stopper. Things are often intertwined. You don't think racism and slavery have had any impact on the people of America today, least of all the African-American community and many of it's problems?
Like I said, you can't begin to fix one big problem unless you work on the others at the same time. Actually acknowledging racism exists shouldn't be one of them, but here we are.
Admitting that racism exists, and then looking at how it hugely contributes to black crime, is not avoiding the problem of black crime. I don't understand how anyone could think that.
Actually, what's stopping the conversation is that you're uncomfortable talking about racism. Why else would bringing up racism stop a conversation, when it's pertinent to the conversation? I'm comfortable talking about it. I'm not denying that there are disproportionate levels of crime being committed by minorities, which is why prisons are filled with black and latinx people. I'm saying we can't ignore the major things that contribute to why this is if we're actually going to talk at length on the topic.
For example, if we were talking about disproportionate crimes committed by people in the white community, we can't ignore that mental illness is a huge problem that goes hand in hand with a lot of those crimes, like mass shootings. So we can talk about the race of the people in that community, and the things that majorly affect why that community specifically commits those crimes, such as mental health and loneliness, and then go into a discussion about overhauling the mental health care system at the same time as addressing, idk, the effect of online interactions on in-person interactions and the rise of hate groups, etc.
You see how topics are nuanced? If you end the conversation because you can't talk about racism, maybe don't enter into conversations where a person's race is mentioned in the title.
You haven't pointed it out. I mentioned racism and you were like, oh no, now the conversation is over. That's not proof and, and again, look who is taking the action of ending the conversation. Always look at who is ending the conversation. That's the person who isn't comfortable talking about racism, not the person who brought it up.
I'm not calling you racist, otherwise I would just bluntly say so. Being uncomfortable with discussing a topic doesn't make you the subject of that topic; loads of people can't discuss sexual assault and are not the assaulters.
But I will say you're being disingenuous, and the fact you wrote "wacist" in a baby voice tells me you can't respond civilly and therefore cannot handle big conversations, so good day.
You implied that she did. You said your typical wacism when discussing racism with him. Why did you do that? Is it possible you are incapable of discussing that topic seriously unless it has to do with whites?
No read what you wrote you idiot. You immediately shut down and clam up the minute racism is mentioned. Unless it is racism against whites then you are all ears.
No actually you proved you are incapable of having a good faith debate. Also proof read your stuff please it will help you.
2. How does sayihng a word, prevent you people on teh other side, from making a point? You make an actual point, I will address it (if it is not buried in shit)
You made a claim. That I was the one shutting down.
How does me saying "wacist", prevent you people on teh other side, from making a point? You make an actual point, I will address it (if it is not buried in shit)
You ignore my point like that and I will repeat it. as you just saw. No side stepping.
You are shutting down. Notice you will not address things about racism unless it has to do with white people.
I asked if because racism ended in the 60's that the affects of it are gone as well? Or did some of the affects carry on after it ended? Notice how you retreated from that? That is you shutting down.
Thanks for the warning. People can really only pretend to be civil for so long, but the minute they can't make a decent point, they flip. It is predictable but it's still annoying.
Oh no problem. See I do not like either Trump or Biden, quite Frankly I think both are garbage. However watch. If you are any form of liberal and do not see things as republican=good and democrat=bad he will turn on you. I have had several run ins with this guy and all he does is gaslight.
Black people can not say a word about racism because it is in the past. Therefore since it does not exist anymore according to him any form of it can be dismissed. Funny thing is he will claim left and right how whites experience racism. See how it works? He can claim racism against whites but blacks can't say a word. I like how just because of the 60's that means all racism suddenly vanished completely. Oh boy if only it were that simple right? We are still feeling the affects of those actions even currently. He refuses to acknowledge that. Notice how he mockingly says wacism? I called him on that yet he claims he is talking in good faith... Yeah that goes out the window when you type things like that in a baby voice.
Interesting. I've not seen these posts, but I've heard this kind of rhetoric so much I'm practically numb to it now. But I agree, I don't think Biden or Trump are good, but I do think there is always lesser of two evils and that has to be the one you pick when you have the option. And yeah I addressed the "wacism" ugh.
That you can acknowledge that there's racism against white people, but consider racism against black people a false accusation (against whom btw, coz black people can be racist to black people), is preposterous. And somehow mentioning racism against whites doesn't stop a conversation, right?
Like I said, disingenuous, and that you could only mock me instead of actually respond to me speaks a lot about the points you hold.
1. Please do not put words in my mouth. Read what I say, and don't assume addtional.
2. I've never said anything that even hinted that ALL racism against black people are false accusations.
3. And note how well the conversation about "black crime" is going since you mentioned race. This is where you should admit that I am right, ie that mention race is a conversation stopper. LOL!
Like I said, the conversation didn't stop because I mentioned racism, it diverted away from the main topic because you intentionally diverted it, so you could later make this claim. Maybe you should read what you said and you'll reach the same conclusion. Also you mocked me for apparently making false accusations of racism, but you don't think all claims of racism against black people are false - so which claims did I make that deserved your mockery? Like please figure your own opinion out.
There is a lesser of two evils I agree. Thing is people like him can't handle anyone with an opposing view. Oh this isn't the only thing he's stupid about. He is one of those idiots that gets upset if a typical white role is swapped. However doesn't care if s black role is swapped. He complained at nauseam about Zoe Kravitz bring casted as Catwoman in the Batman. Which when you think is dumb because the race isn't even essential to the character.
Also Earth's Kitt played her in the past and she wasn't white in the Year one comic book. Anyways yet he said nothing about Tiger Lily being played by a white actress in the movie Pan. See the double standard? He's allowed to get upset but but black people are not. The onlytime he cares about racism or injustice is when it is done against him or his race. He did the same thing with George Floyd. You will see him defend Rittenhouse constantly. Yet refuses to comment on the Floyd scenario. He will not call out the cop's wrongdoing. I have no patience for individuals like him.
I don't really support segregation, but thank you for understanding my point. I thought it was pretty obvious, but it seems like people often miss the point on purpose around here sometimes.
All of you MORONS arguing about which race is the most violent are fundamentally anti-liberal and fundamenally lacking in empathy and compassion.
Crime is a response to circumstances, including economic hardship and oppression. It stands to reason that those people who have suffered the most oppression, and as a consequence been marginalised and thus not been fully socialised, by society, will pro rata, commit the most violent and non-white-collar crime, particularly burglary and robbery. That doesn't simply apply to people who've been racially oppressed, but POOR and ECONOMICALLY-oppressed people of ALL races.
The narratives being pushed by the various wingnuts here, whether they represent the white supremacist GOP, or Keelai, is fundamentally cruel and draconian. It implies that criminals are born 'evil', or are a product of systemic advantage, when the reality is that crime is often a *response* to systemic *disadvantage*.
I expect the political right to be pro-death penalty and anti-rehabilitation, but it's an absolute crying shame to see fellow 'progressives' (or, more accurately, people who *identify* as 'progressives') pushing a narrative that *logically* argues in favour of tougher sentences (including the death penalty), rather than recognising the external factors (including abuse, poverty, mental health, poor socialisation, marginalisation etc) which creates a criminal.
NONE OF YOU, including Keelai, are true liberals, and you're all arguing over the WRONG thing.
Instead of asking WHO commits all the crime, we should be asking the question WHY do people commit crime.
Instead of asking WHO commits all the crime, we should be asking the question WHY do people commit crime.
Exactly. I'm not liberal or conservative and I don't care which race commits the most crime. Having said that, if someone gives out false information or information that requires context (like Keelai did above), it should always be corrected and pointed out.
reply share