The War on Whiteness

[Rob's House]

54 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I accept the existence of racism, I believe this push regarding "white priviledge" is more about blame and punishment than "awareness," and I reject the foundational premise behind the slogan, "Black Lives Matter."

 

I can't really say that "racism" exists because the word no longer has a definable meaning, but going by the traditional definition, there will always be racists of all different colors. That doesn't mean that racism is a powerful force in the country today

 

Like "microaggressions", the concept of "white privilege" is itself evidence that there is no longer any significant level of anti-black racism in America. If there was we wouldn't need these nebulous concepts to justify our continued acknowledgement of a societal ill that is so scarce that we are constantly having to redefine it to claim its existence.

 

The only racism today that is publicly accepted, institutionally implemented, and even encouraged is anti-white racism. It is growing at a rapid rate and a generation of black kids who have never known the kind of racism they bemoan are being radicalized and taught to believe an entire race of people, most of whom have no ill will toward them, are their oppressors.

 

This obvious truth is summarily dismissed by reference to conditions of times past, or trivialized as the perceived privileged class claiming victim status. These deflections simply deny the reality rather than refute it. More importantly, they evade the real issue, which is not how the world exists today, but how it will exist tomorrow.

 

The victim is not you or me, but the happy 5 year old boy who has no concept of any of this. He sees the world as a playground and a black boy as a playmate. But his innocence and happiness are not to last. He will soon be held responsible for beliefs he never had, crimes he never committed, and debts he never incurred. He will be required to atone for the sin of his existence lest he face the persecution of heretics.

 

It will be of little comfort to him to know that in a time before his, people who looked like him were generally better off than those to whom he must now be subservient.

 

Black Lives Matter, as a means to its political ends, is about condemning that little boy to a life of grief and servitude because of the color of his skin. And they pursue this goal in the name of combating racism.

[wppete]

Animals!

 

 

[Rob's House]

I hate to repost a lot of tweets unless it's for a video, but he's exactly right and too many people are in denial about it.

 

 

This one too

 

 

[3rdnlng]

40 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

 

I can't really say that "racism" exists because the word no longer has a definable meaning, but going by the traditional definition, there will always be racists of all different colors. That doesn't mean that racism is a powerful force in the country today

 

Like "microaggressions", the concept of "white privilege" is itself evidence that there is no longer any significant level of anti-black racism in America. If there was we wouldn't need these nebulous concepts to justify our continued acknowledgement of a societal ill that is so scarce that we are constantly having to redefine it to claim its existence.

 

The only racism today that is publicly accepted, institutionally implemented, and even encouraged is anti-white racism. It is growing at a rapid rate and a generation of black kids who have never known the kind of racism they bemoan are being radicalized and taught to believe an entire race of people, most of whom have no ill will toward them, are their oppressors.

 

This obvious truth is summarily dismissed by reference to conditions of times past, or trivialized as the perceived privileged class claiming victim status. These deflections simply deny the reality rather than refute it. More importantly, they evade the real issue, which is not how the world exists today, but how it will exist tomorrow.

 

The victim is not you or me, but the happy 5 year old boy who has no concept of any of this. He sees the world as a playground and a black boy as a playmate. But his innocence and happiness are not to last. He will soon be held responsible for beliefs he never had, crimes he never committed, and debts he never incurred. He will be required to atone for the sin of his existence lest he face the persecution of heretics.

 

It will be of little comfort to him to know that in a time before his, people who looked like him were generally better off than those to whom he must now be subservient.

 

Black Lives Matter, as a means to its political ends, is about condemning that little boy to a life of grief and servitude because of the color of his skin. And they pursue this goal in the name of combating racism.

Excellent post.

[wppete]

Thought I would leave this here ... again.. 

 

 

[Rob's House]

Nick Cannon Update.

 

To my surprise, he has been let go by Viacom. But here's the kicker:

 

He was released specifically for "anti-Semitism." They couldn't bring themselves to even mention his blatant and overt racism against white people.

 

 

“ViacomCBS condemns bigotry of any kind and we categorically denounce all forms of anti-Semitism. We have spoken with Nick Cannon about an episode of his podcast ‘Cannon’s Class’ on YouTube, which promoted hateful speech and spread anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. 

 

https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/nick-cannon-dropped-viacomcbs-anti-semitic-comments-podcast-1234706748/

 

 

[TtownBillsFan]

8 hours ago, Rob's House said:

 

Again, can we get a WOW or WTF 'thumbs-up' response, PLEASE?!

[HamSandwhich]

8 hours ago, The Guy In Pants said:

Before they run off and hide; they call you names. 

It’s all about attacking the character rather than the tenants of the argument. 

[Teddy KGB]

Why are they labeling Cannon as anti Semitic instead of racist ? 
 

I didn’t hear any Jew talk in his rant.   

[LB3]

1 hour ago, Teddy KGB said:

Why are they labeling Cannon as anti Semitic instead of racist ? 
 

I didn’t hear any Jew talk in his rant.   

I think it was because he essentially said there's no anti-semitism against white people because white people aren't Jewish.

 

“In order for me to be anti-Semitic, I’d have to be anti-black man, anti-black woman, anti-black people, anti-Africa, anti-all other people,” Griff said.

“Because the Semitic people are black people,” Cannon added.

Edited July 15, 2020 by LB3

[All_Pro_Bills]

9 hours ago, Rob's House said:

 

I can't really say that "racism" exists because the word no longer has a definable meaning, but going by the traditional definition, there will always be racists of all different colors. That doesn't mean that racism is a powerful force in the country today

 

Like "microaggressions", the concept of "white privilege" is itself evidence that there is no longer any significant level of anti-black racism in America. If there was we wouldn't need these nebulous concepts to justify our continued acknowledgement of a societal ill that is so scarce that we are constantly having to redefine it to claim its existence.

 

The only racism today that is publicly accepted, institutionally implemented, and even encouraged is anti-white racism. It is growing at a rapid rate and a generation of black kids who have never known the kind of racism they bemoan are being radicalized and taught to believe an entire race of people, most of whom have no ill will toward them, are their oppressors.

 

This obvious truth is summarily dismissed by reference to conditions of times past, or trivialized as the perceived privileged class claiming victim status. These deflections simply deny the reality rather than refute it. More importantly, they evade the real issue, which is not how the world exists today, but how it will exist tomorrow.

 

The victim is not you or me, but the happy 5 year old boy who has no concept of any of this. He sees the world as a playground and a black boy as a playmate. But his innocence and happiness are not to last. He will soon be held responsible for beliefs he never had, crimes he never committed, and debts he never incurred. He will be required to atone for the sin of his existence lest he face the persecution of heretics.

 

It will be of little comfort to him to know that in a time before his, people who looked like him were generally better off than those to whom he must now be subservient.

 

Black Lives Matter, as a means to its political ends, is about condemning that little boy to a life of grief and servitude because of the color of his skin. And they pursue this goal in the name of combating racism.

Its really necessary for people to define was they mean by certain terms.  Like "systemic racism".  What does that mean?  Are they saying the official public policy of America is to discriminate against African-Americans?  But there are no laws on the books at the federal, state, or local levels legalizing this behavior.  Contrary, there are laws like affirmative action and elements of civil rights legislation that grant privileges to minorities.   The idea is to make up for mistreatment in the past.  So the legal system is not "systemically racist".  Or am I missing something?

So then it must imply something about the behavior of private citizens.  So what they must mean is white people are "systemically racist" in their interactions and associations with black people.  This belief itself seems racist.  Suggesting all white people collectively act in the same manner as a group.  No doubt there are white people that are biased and hold stereotypes about blacks but to suggest they all act in some organized and coordinated fashion through some overt or covert mechanism is absurd.  After all, just recently a majority of whites voted for President Obama and helped elect him President twice.  If whites were systemically racist and colluding with each other to discriminate against blacks why would a majority of them vote for a black man instead of the white guy?  In the seclusion of the voting booth who would know?  So logically the majority of whites are not racist.  White people frequent black businesses and attend sporting events where the majority of the players are black.  Would racists spend they hard earned money to attend such an event if they were racist?  

What it comes down to is "systemic racism" is myth used to sell a narrative.  And while there are a small percentage of white people that are racist it is no different than the biases held by other races.  The other angle if I may be blunt is to continue to blame somebody else for all the problems.  In this case liberal politicians that enacted programs to "help" blacks but ended up hurting them in many ways along with these communities blaming white people for their troubles.  From a historical perspective after slavery, social conditions settled into a "separate but equal" society where legalized segregation was the order.  As wrong as this set up was blacks developed their own support and social systems that were quite efficient and effective.  The programs that started in the 1960's destroyed these support systems.  And left those that could not or would not assimilate into the "common culture" in poverty and dependent on social support and other "help".  And here we are now.  When I pose the question to liberals why other minorities that come to America seem to thrive and excel while black communities don't they say because the echos of slavery are embedded in the minds and behaviors of white people.  I suggest while their argument might have merit the main reason is because many blacks refuse to adopt or conform to the cultural norms of the dominant culture which is necessary for success.  The alt-left and their politicians would rather stick their finger in a 240V socket and chop of their left hand than engage in any heart-to-heart conversations about this. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by All_Pro_Bills

[Tiberius]

RACE AND RECKONING

Analysis

In a pair of interviews, Trump highlights white victimhood

President Trump waved away concern about the rate at which black people die at the hands of police by saying, essentially, that white lives matter, too.

• By Philip Bump

• Asked about police brutality against black Americans, Trump says ‘more white people’ are being killed

4 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Its really necessary for people to define was they mean by certain terms.  Like "systemic racism".  What does that mean?  Are they saying the official public policy of America is to discriminate against African-Americans?  But there are no laws on the books at the federal, state, or local levels legalizing this behavior.  Contrary, there are laws like affirmative action and elements of civil rights legislation that grant privileges to minorities.   The idea is to make up for mistreatment in the past.  So the legal system is not "systemically racist".  Or am I missing something?

So then it must imply something about the behavior of private citizens.  So what they must mean is white people are "systemically racist" in their interactions and associations with black people.  This belief itself seems racist.  Suggesting all white people collectively act in the same manner as a group.  No doubt there are white people that are biased and hold stereotypes about blacks but to suggest they all act in some organized and coordinated fashion through some overt or covert mechanism is absurd.  After all, just recently a majority of whites voted for President Obama and helped elect him President twice.  If whites were systemically racist and colluding with each other to discriminate against blacks why would a majority of them vote for a black man instead of the white guy?  In the seclusion of the voting booth who would know?  So logically the majority of whites are not racist.  White people frequent black businesses and attend sporting events where the majority of the players are black.  Would racists spend they hard earned money to attend such an event if they were racist?  

What it comes down to is "systemic racism" is myth used to sell a narrative.  And while there are a small percentage of white people that are racist it is no different than the biases held by other races.  The other angle if I may be blunt is to continue to blame somebody else for all the problems.  In this case liberal politicians that enacted programs to "help" blacks but ended up hurting them in many ways along with these communities blaming white people for their troubles.  From a historical perspective after slavery, social conditions settled into a "separate but equal" society where legalized segregation was the order.  As wrong as this set up was blacks developed their own support and social systems that were quite efficient and effective.  The programs that started in the 1960's destroyed these support systems.  And left those that could not or would not assimilate into the "common culture" in poverty and dependent on social support and other "help".  And here we are now.  When I pose the question to liberals why other minorities that come to America seem to thrive and excel while black communities don't they say because the echos of slavery are embedded in the minds and behaviors of white people.  I suggest while their argument might have merit the main reason is because many blacks refuse to adopt or conform to the cultural norms of the dominant culture which is necessary for success. 

 

It means there’s bigots in positions to make decisions that are racist and treat different people differently. 

 

The war on drugs is a perfect example. All groups of people do drugs, but blacks get busted, searched and jailed at much higher rates than whites 

[billsfan1959]

20 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

RACE AND RECKONING

Analysis

In a pair of interviews, Trump highlights white victimhood

President Trump waved away concern about the rate at which black people die at the hands of police by saying, essentially, that white lives matter, too.

• By Philip Bump

• Asked about police brutality against black Americans, Trump says ‘more white people’ are being killed

It means there’s bigots in positions to make decisions that are racist and treat different people differently. 

 

The war on drugs is a perfect example. All groups of people do drugs, but blacks get busted, searched and jailed at much higher rates than whites 

 

1. Drugs are at the root of the highest crime areas in virtually every city. Those areas also happen to be disproportionately black and draw a disproportionate amount of law enforcement response. You cannot attack violent crime in those areas without attacking the drug problem. So, no, they are not arrested and jailed at a higher rate of actual law enforcement response. 65% of all violent crime in this country, and 75% of all murders, occur in African American and Hispanic/Latino communities - and drugs are at the center of most of it.

 

2. The greatest disproportion regarding black incarceration stemmed from sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine. The reason behind those guidelines was to do something to stop the complete destruction of black communities from crack cocaine. Unfortunately, good intentions swung the pendulum too far. In 2010, those guidelines were repealed. Since that time, the incarceration of blacks has dropped by 40%, greater then any other group.

 

3. Blacks do not die at the hands of the police at a greater rate, given the disproportionate level of law enforcement response in black communities.

 

Why don't you do a little research before you post?

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by billsfan1959

[All_Pro_Bills]

9 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

RACE AND RECKONING

Analysis

In a pair of interviews, Trump highlights white victimhood

President Trump waved away concern about the rate at which black people die at the hands of police by saying, essentially, that white lives matter, too.

• By Philip Bump

• Asked about police brutality against black Americans, Trump says ‘more white people’ are being killed

It means there’s bigots in positions to make decisions that are racist and treat different people differently. 

 

The war on drugs is a perfect example. All groups of people do drugs, but blacks get busted, searched and jailed at much higher rates than whites 

The argument I keep hearing is  America is systemically racist.  Your response does provides nothing to dispute that the huge majority of whites are not racist and Americans society is not systemically racist.  

 

 

 

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 hours ago, TtownBillsFan said:

Again, can we get a WOW or WTF 'thumbs-up' response, PLEASE?!

 

"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools."

 

1 hour ago, LB3 said:

I think it was because he essentially said there's no anti-semitism against white people because white people are Jewish.

 

“In order for me to be anti-Semitic, I’d have to be anti-black man, anti-black woman, anti-black people, anti-Africa, anti-all other people,” Griff said.

“Because the Semitic people are black people,” Cannon added.

 

Actually, no, Nick. "Black" people are Hamitic.

 

 

[The Guy In Pants]

4 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

1. Drugs are at the root of the highest crime areas in virtually every city. Those areas also happen to be disproportionately black and draw a disproportionate amount of law enforcement response. You cannot attack violent crime in those areas without attacking the drug problem. So, no, they are not arrested and jailed at a higher rate of actual law enforcement response. 65% of all violent crime in this country, and 75% of all murders, occur in African American and Hispanic/Latino communities - and drugs are at the center of most of it.

 

2. The greatest disproportion regarding black incarceration stemmed from sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine. The reason behind those guidelines was to do something to stop the complete destruction of black communities from crack cocaine. Unfortunately, good intentions swung the pendulum too far. In 2010, those guidelines were repealed. Since that time, the incarceration of blacks has dropped by 40%, greater then any other group.

 

3. Blacks do not die at the hands of the police at a greater rate, given the disproportionate level of law enforcement response in black communities.

 

Why don't you do a little research before you post?

 

Nothing that you’ve just posted aligns with the narrative. Nothing. 

[Tiberius]

14 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

1. Drugs are at the root of the highest crime areas in virtually every city.  

 

Drugs are not just in cities. They are everywhere, but they stop and search city people more. Drugs are flooding rural areas but the mass arrests are not at all. 

16 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

 

 

2. The greatest disproportion regarding black incarceration stemmed from sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine. The reason behind those guidelines was to do something to stop the complete destruction of black communities from crack cocaine. Unfortunately, good intentions swung the pendulum too far. In 2010, those guidelines were repealed. Since that time, the incarceration of blacks has dropped by 40%, greater then any other group.

 

 

 

Good intentions! Ha! They literally criminalized something blacks do more than whites. Where are the arrests for opiiods? 

 

You didn't know they were setting different sentencings for crack vs cocain? 

[SoCal Deek]

It always come back to the same principles. 
 

If you don’t want to get arrested, don’t commit a crime.

 

If you want to reduce police presence in your community, don’t call them.

 

If you don’t want to live in poverty, pay attention in school, don’t get pregnant out of wedlock, and stay together as a family.
 

And if you’ve managed to stay on the right side of all of the above don’t do drugs, smoke, or consume mass quantities of alcohol.

 

Pretty simple really....regardless of your skin color.

[Tiberius]

18 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

 

3. Blacks do not die at the hands of the police at a greater rate, given the disproportionate level of law enforcement response in black communities.

 

 

Do. or don't? 

 

A racist cop would have a tougher problem trying to deal with a tense situation. They just would. 

[billsfan1959]

Just now, Tiberius said:

Drugs are not just in cities. They are everywhere, but they stop and search city people more. Drugs are flooding rural areas but the mass arrests are not at all. 

 

Go back and read what I wrote. I didn't say drugs were not everywhere. I said the greatest law enforcement presence regarding drugs is in the highest crime areas. 

 

Does your neighborhood have shootings at all hours of the night? Are people being robbed at gunpoint? Is the violence so bad that your neighbors don't want to let their children out in the yard to play? If it was, you would see a much greater law enforcement presence and a much greater rate of arrests for drugs, because that is how they get to the violent criminals any many cases.

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Go back and read what I wrote. I didn't say drugs were not everywhere. I said the greatest law enforcement presence regarding drugs is in the highest crime areas. 

 

Does your neighborhood have shootings at all hours of the night? Are people being robbed at gunpoint? Is the violence so bad that your neighbors don't want to let their children out in the yard to play? If it was, you would see a much greater law enforcement presence and a much greater rate of arrests for drugs, because that is how they get to the violent criminals any many cases.

You are admitting that the war on drugs falls more on the black community than a white community. Thanks 

[LeviF]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

It always come back to the same principles. 
 

If you don’t want to get arrested, don’t commit a crime.

 

If you want to reduce police presence in your community, don’t call them.

 

If you don’t want to live in poverty, pay attention in school, don’t get pregnant out of wedlock, and stay together as a family.
 

And if you’ve managed to stay on the right side of all of the above don’t do drugs, smoke, or consume mass quantities of alcohol.

 

Pretty simple really....regardless of your skin color.

 

It's like I've said, I've heard people yell "police need more training my black son's gonna die."  Well you had 18 years to train your kid not to be a thug ass criminal so why don't we start there

Just now, Tiberius said:

You are admitting that the war on drugs falls more on the black community than a white community. Thanks 

 

That's your argument?  That blacks commit more crime?  Ok bruh

[Tiberius]

Just now, LeviF91 said:

 

It's like I've said, I've heard people yell "police need more training my black son's gonna die."  Well you had 18 years to train your kid not to be a thug ass criminal so why don't we start there

 

That's your argument?  That blacks commit more crime?  Ok bruh

No, they just have the law enforced on them more. Rural America is awash in drugs and crime. Blacks are not the ones ODing like crazy on opioids. 

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, LeviF91 said:

 

It's like I've said, I've heard people yell "police need more training my black son's gonna die."  Well you had 18 years to train your kid not to be a thug ass criminal so why don't we start there

 

Believe me when I say that I’m not trying to sound like I’m preaching. But the rules of society are REALLY simple and rather consistent all over the planet. Being poor is not a predictable recipe for crime! There are millions and millions of poor people of all colors all over the world who live without rampant crime and violence. They do however follow the societal rules I spelled out above. The breakdown starts when there’s no father in the home to keep adolescent boys in check. Every other problem stems from that. Fix that and you fix them all! 

[billsfan1959]

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Good intentions! Ha! They literally criminalized something blacks do more than whites. 

You didn't know they were setting different sentencings for crack vs cocain? 

 

Yes, good intentions, and the sentencing guidelines were pushed hardest during the Clinton years and spearheaded by people like Biden. However, they actually were good intentions. Crack cocaine and the associated dependency and violent crime were decimating black communities. 

 

I did know there were sentencing guidelines because I worked violent crime in those communities during that period. I can tell you, first hand, the devastation that everything associated with crack cocaine brought on those communities. I didn't agree with the guidelines and I literally withheld information from the courts to lessen sentences. I was a big proponent of getting rid of the sentencing guidelines. However, it doesn't diminish the fact that they were created as a means of trying to help black communities.

 

As usual, you have no clue what you are talking about. 

 

You should say less.

[LeviF]

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

No, they just have the law enforced on them more. Rural America is awash in drugs and crime. Blacks are not the ones ODing like crazy on opioids. 

 

Yeah bro all those murders that go without the enforcement of law in rural America sure explain the racial disparity in the homicide rate.

[Tiberius]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

 

Yes, good intentions, and the sentencing guidelines were pushed hardest during the Clinton years and spearheaded by people like Biden. However, they actually were good intentions. Crack cocaine and the associated dependency and violent crime were decimating black communities. 

 

I did know there were sentencing guidelines because I worked violent crime in those communities during that period. I can tell you, first hand, the devastation that everything associated with crack cocaine brought on those communities. I didn't agree with the guidelines and I literally withheld information from the courts to lessen sentences. I was a big proponent of getting rid of the sentencing guidelines. However, it doesn't diminish the fact that they were created as a means of trying to help black communities.

 

As usual, you have no clue what you are talking about. 

 

You should say less.

Good intentions to punish one group more than another? Wow. 

 

That's telling 

Just now, LeviF91 said:

 

Yeah bro all those murders that go without the enforcement of law in rural America sure explain the racial disparity in the homicide rate.

What? You made no point 

[billsfan1959]

9 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You are admitting that the war on drugs falls more on the black community than a white community. Thanks 

 

Welcome to the real world where the war on drugs exists every where; however, the greatest concentration of law enforcement regarding drugs falls within the areas that have the highest rates of violent crime. Why? because you cannot separate the two.

 

This just in. The highest violent crime rates in this country are in African American and Hispanic/Lation communities.

 

That isn't racist. That is a fact.

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Good intentions to punish one group more than another? Wow. 

 

You just might be the most ignorant poster on this board, and that is quite an accomplishment with posters like BillZStime and Warren.

[SoCal Deek]

Go back and read my post on societal rules. Everything else is total deflection! 

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Welcome to the real world where the war on drugs exists every where; however, the greatest concentration of law enforcement regarding drugs falls within the areas that have the highest rates of violent crime. Why? because you cannot separate the two.

 

This just in. The highest violent crime rates in this country are in African American and Hispanic/Lation communities.

 

That isn't racist. That is a fact.

If it can't be enforced evenly then its racist.The war if hurting the people more than the drugs are, which leads to other problems. People with records early in life, imprionsment, and no job prospects because of it. And then the laws are even different, like crack, so put more pain on these people and you can gloat, "Its all for your own good!" Slam goes the jail cell. 

 

You are saying stronger punishments for blacks are good for them. 

[billsfan1959]

4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

If it can't be enforced evenly then its racist.The war if hurting the people more than the drugs are, which leads to other problems. People with records early in life, imprionsment, and no job prospects because of it. And then the laws are even different, like crack, so put more pain on these people and you can gloat, "Its all for your own good!" Slam goes the jail cell. 

 

You are saying stronger punishments for blacks are good for them. 

 

I didn't say those things and you know it, so quit being a d**k and engage in honest dialogue, like an adult.

 

If you were the Police Chief and 75% of all of the violent crime in your jurisdiction existed in a 10 block area, and most of that violent crime revolved around control of drugs:

 

1) How would you allocate your resources?

2) Would steps would you take to reduce the problem?

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

7 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I didn't say those things and you know it, so quit being a d**k and engage in honest dialogue, like an adult.

 

If you were the Police Chief and 75% of all of the violent crime in your jurisdiction existed in a 10 block area, and most of that violent crime revolved around control of drugs:

 

1) How would you allocate your resources?

2) Would steps would you take to reduce the problem?

 

 

Lost in all of this is the FACT that the police don’t call themselves! Someone calls the police to report a possible crime! Don’t get sucked down the rabbit hole that there’s a secret plot to oppress people of color. Most of the folks that run these cities are....Yep....people of color!!!!!

Edited July 15, 2020 by SoCal Deek

[Niagara]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

You are admitting that the war on drugs falls more on the black community than a white community. Thanks 

The poor sell the drugs to the rich who can afford them. Generally attack a problem at its source.

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

I didn't say those things and you know it, so quit being a d**k and engage in honest dialogue, like an adult.

 

If you were the Police Chief and 75% of all of the violent crime in your jurisdiction existed in a 10 block area, and most of that violent crime revolved around control of drugs:

 

1) How would you allocate your resources?

2) Would steps would you take to reduce the problem?

 

 

You are arguing with someone who thought it was hilarious that we had 4 people killed in Benghazi. There's a reason he is sometimes known as HAHA Gator or Gleeful Gator. He is bereft of any principles and lacking in cognitive ability. Your responses to him fall on deaf ears and a dumb mind. I use him to keep my mocking skills up to date. He serves the purpose of the target ship the Navy uses for practice.

 

[Rob's House]

 

[billsfan1959]

5 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

 

 

Family Unit: "Wife is...subordinate to the husband."

 

Somebody needs to tell my wife....

[LeviF]

[keepthefaith]

4 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Yes, good intentions, and the sentencing guidelines were pushed hardest during the Clinton years and spearheaded by people like Biden. However, they actually were good intentions. Crack cocaine and the associated dependency and violent crime were decimating black communities. 

 

I did know there were sentencing guidelines because I worked violent crime in those communities during that period. I can tell you, first hand, the devastation that everything associated with crack cocaine brought on those communities. I didn't agree with the guidelines and I literally withheld information from the courts to lessen sentences. I was a big proponent of getting rid of the sentencing guidelines. However, it doesn't diminish the fact that they were created as a means of trying to help black communities.

 

As usual, you have no clue what you are talking about. 

 

You should say less.

 

I've held an opinion for many years that jail sentences should be shorter in general, particularly for first time offenders of non-violent crimes.  However, incarceration should be in 2 phases.  Phase 1, very harsh punishment.  Very few privileges, physically demanding, it should really suck.  Phase 2, rehabilitation.  Training, significant education, even job placement upon release as much as possible.  Set expectations for re-entry into society.  I've employed a few ex-cons over the years.  One was lucky enough to get a job in the prison distribution center for much of his time.  He learned a lot there.  The others could never say that jail was anything more than confinement with a few comforts. 

[billsfan1959]

2 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

I've held an opinion for many years that jail sentences should be shorter in general, particularly for first time offenders of non-violent crimes.  However, incarceration should be in 2 phases.  Phase 1, very harsh punishment.  Very few privileges, physically demanding, it should really suck.  Phase 2, rehabilitation.  Training, significant education, even job placement upon release as much as possible.  Set expectations for re-entry into society.  I've employed a few ex-cons over the years.  One was lucky enough to get a job in the prison distribution center for much of his time.  He learned a lot there.  The others could never say that jail was anything more than confinement with a few comforts. 

 

I am not a fan of long sentences for first time, non-violent offenders. I am also a big proponent of prison reform. I believe there should be a complete overhaul in this country in regard to how prisoners are housed, prisoner safety, punishment issues, rehabilitation issues, loss of certain rights as citizens, etc.

[keepthefaith]

39 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

 

 

I wonder if they've published the aspects of blackness?