PDA

View Full Version : Racism and Police Brutatlity in the USA or everywhere else


Dalcourt
August 12th, 2016, 11:36 PM
Since on whatever topic we are talking it so often comes back to the discussion of racism and police brutality in the US.
As I feel it's wrong to spam other topics with this stuff whoever wants to say anything about it can do it here if they like.
I don't want to limit it to the US however although I feel it wil be the main part of it.

I honestly hate this topic but as it's brought up so often I feel it should have a thread where you could dump all opinions on it.

Flapjack
August 12th, 2016, 11:38 PM
Well I think there is two major issues with the police in the USA. The systematic racism and the terrible police training.

Dalcourt
August 12th, 2016, 11:41 PM
I feel the training is even worse than the racism.

And they even mess up bad during training.
Did you read the news about this elderly lady shot in Florida during her volunteering at a police training?

For me that there are so many not really qualified people working as police officers is the main issue...

Amethyst Rose
August 12th, 2016, 11:42 PM
All I'm going to say is this: race should not affect the brutality with which anyone is treated by police, and any officer of the law who chooses to be prejudiced and abuse their authority is unworthy of working on the police force. That is my opinion.

Flapjack
August 12th, 2016, 11:42 PM
I feel the training is even worse than the racism.

And they even mess up bad during training.
Did you read the news about this elderly lady shot in Florida during her volunteering at a police training?

For me that there are so many not really qualified people working as police officers is the main issue...
Yeah I read about that!!! Me growing up in England knows you should treat every gun as if it is loaded!! They should have used a orange plastic gun. The training is so bad. They're trained to escalate the situation and to be trigger happy.

Porpoise101
August 12th, 2016, 11:48 PM
The ultimate cause of many of the problems in cities in the US were initially caused by racism. White flight removed much of the population, leaving a poor, black class. This drained money from education, law enforcement, and infrastructure. Combined with the disruption of communities, the cities turned into places where poverty and crime was rampant. And now, we are in a situation we are in today. In most cities, things are recovering. To combat this problem in the short term, we need to reinvest in the cities, bringing them up to their potential. This way, there will be less crime and therefor less brutality from crime as a whole.

Dalcourt
August 12th, 2016, 11:50 PM
Yeah I read about that!!! Me growing up in England knows you should treat every gun as if it is loaded!! They should have used a orange plastic gun. The training is so bad. They're trained to escalate the situation and to be trigger happy.

Bad training and trigger happiness that's a bad combination. I would never say that all police officers are bad. I have met also a couple of nice once but they were all either blacks or women or both;)
But it's sometimes just horrible to see what people are able to qualify themselves for becoming police officers but that goes for the army to to some extend

Paraxiom
August 13th, 2016, 07:13 AM
Here we go again, yay. Unless something comes up with drives me to respond, I won't be in this thread much. The US has a major problem with this police brutality and racism.

I'm not sure if any of you have heard of the shooting of a wife and daughter by the husband in Spain yesterday; I don't know the specifics of it, but I would not be surprised if he was a police officer. Violence toward women and anger issues within the police force are also significant problems in Spain. I don't know to what degree this is though, and to how it compares to the US in general.

PlasmaHam
August 13th, 2016, 08:01 AM
Everyone blows this way out of proportion. Police brutality and racism exists sure, but not on the rampant scale that the media likes to promote it as.

Studies have shown that less than 2% of all police incidents involve violent tactics or threats of such, be it shooting or getting hands on. Of those, less than 1% devolve into violence and mainly at the provoking of the suspect. Of that less than 1%, only 15% ever file a complaint against the police. If the police like beating people up just because, then why isn't this a bigger number? And why aren't more complaints coming out?

Nearly every single occasion of this "police racism" is eventually shown to have just reasons a few weeks or months afterwards. There are those cases where the police make mistakes, or the certain police officer does have a prejudice, but those are certainly not the majority. If you actually ever look into the cases yourself, instead of just eating what the media wants you to hear, you will actually see good reasons in a good amount of police shootings for the violence.

Flapjack There is a pretty big difference between a real gun and a fake gun. Should they have probably used blanks while training, sure, but there is a totally different mentality when you have a toy, and you have something that could potentially kill someone. But you can't really understand that unless you've actually shot real guns before.

They are trained to defend themselves, you can't really blame them for shooting people when their lives are being threatened.

phuckphace
August 13th, 2016, 08:44 AM
out of blacks killed per annum the cops are responsible for about ~1%. the overwhelming majority of blacks killed are killed by other blacks.

the Left exploits the issue of police brutality the same way the GOP exploits gay marriage and abortion in order to pander to its base, as part of their general platform of "ugh white people, amirite?!" for white leftists complaining about racist cops is a good way to signal that you care deeply about black people, while in all likelihood the same cops are the ones preventing these skinny-jeans-wearing hipsters from getting mugged and robbed of their iPad at the hands of Qwantavius.

Flapjack
August 13th, 2016, 09:23 AM
@Flapjack (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/member.php?u=122060) There is a pretty big difference between a real gun and a fake gun. Should they have probably used blanks while training, sure, but there is a totally different mentality when you have a toy, and you have something that could potentially kill someone. But you can't really understand that unless you've actually shot real guns before.


6IPEDCqL3BI You treat every gun as if it is loaded with real ammo. Isn't that the firearm safety the NRA is always saying people need to know... The majority of my family are members of the armed forces and my cousin just became an officer in the Canadian army. They're trained how to use guns. Guns aren't toys and you should never aim one at something you do not mean to kill.

The point of that exercise was to show the community when to use lethal force. They did not need to use lethal force. I know there is a different mentality but that was not necessary here.

mattsmith48
August 13th, 2016, 11:42 AM
From an outside point of view it certainly look bad when cops get away with murdering unarmed black people. I think it as more to do with the US guns laws, everytime a cop stop someone he knows he could be shot because guns are so easy to get legally even for criminals cops are allways ready to get their gun and shoot first, but some look suspiciously like the cop was racist and just wanted to kill black people.

Dalcourt
August 13th, 2016, 04:58 PM
The media blows the racism thing out of proportion...most media isn't in the hands of black people...so who blows it out of proportion the Whites? And why?
Because one part can react with the typical "oh those poor blacks" shit and the other part with the "fuckin niggahs always have to complain" shit. And what good does this to the black people or anyone? Nothing...so I'll get it.

PlasmaHam phuckphace have you ever experienced what it means to be black in our society?

Question is why aren't there more complaints against our police if they are randomly beating up and shooting black people. Maybe cuz you learn from an early age on to keep your mouth shut if you don't want things to get worse?

People always make it sound like black people complain about every black criminal shot by the cops. A black kid hardly older
than myself was shot by the cops in my home town not long ago...no uproar, no protests cuz the kid was a criminal and had it coming if he aimed a gun at a cop while being caught at a crime scene. So there are just complaints if the circumstances are fishy.

White people just have to get over the prejudice that all blacks are scary and criminals. I mean I'm sure there'sb an equal or even larger amount of white psychos and criminals...but neither would whites be afraid of their fellow whites nor would blacks be afraid of whites in general due to that fact.

phuckphace
August 13th, 2016, 06:23 PM
White people just have to get over the prejudice that all blacks are scary and criminals.

the total number of white criminals in the US is indeed higher because there are a lot more whites than blacks. but it's also true that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of the violent crimes (~50%) despite being only ~13% of the population. police, and white people in general have this mindset because it is mostly true.

anytime someone asks me rhetorically if I've ever experienced being black in America, I like to ask if they've ever experienced being black in Africa. if you think white American cops are bad, and if you think Stormweenies saying "nigger" on the Internet are bad, you should try living in a country that is 100% black and run 100% by blacks - you'd be dead of AIDS or starvation or a burning tire necklace, to say nothing of the staggeringly high corruption that makes doing literally anything impossible unless you grease some warlord's palms. after about an hour you'd be pining for Ward Cleaver to set up a "Whites only" restaurant in your town

PlasmaHam
August 13th, 2016, 06:30 PM
The media blows the racism thing out of proportion...most media isn't in the hands of black people...so who blows it out of proportion the Whites? And why?
Because one part can react with the typical "oh those poor blacks" shit and the other part with the "fuckin niggahs always have to complain" shit. And what good does this to the black people or anyone? Nothing...so I'll get it.

PlasmaHam phuckphace have you ever experienced what it means to be black in our society?

Just because someone isn't black doesn't mean they don't care. Pandering to minority groups is the normal way of advancement for the Democratic Party. We tell blacks that their lives are awful, and then we tell them they we are the only ones who could fix it. Thus we get the black votes to fix the problem that we started. Goes all the way back to Reconstruction, its politics.

Have you ever experienced what it means to be white in our society? How are you so sure that blacks are so oppressed and whites get off scot free? You aren't a white guy, so you wouldn't know.

Question is why aren't there more complaints against our police if they are randomly beating up and shooting black people. Maybe cuz you learn from an early age on to keep your mouth shut if you don't want things to get worse?

People always make it sound like black people complain about every black criminal shot by the cops. A black kid hardly older
than myself was shot by the cops in my home town not long ago...no uproar, no protests cuz the kid was a criminal and had it coming if he aimed a gun at a cop while being caught at a crime scene. So there are just complaints if the circumstances are fishy.


There are nationwide complaints over police racism after a black mother threatens police with a shotgun while using her infant as a human shield. They promptly shot her, for pretty just reasons, yet people start yelling that it was just police racism. If you ever look back at these cases after a few weeks, you will see that most have just reasons for the use of police violence.

White people just have to get over the prejudice that all blacks are scary and criminals. I mean I'm sure there'sb an equal or even larger amount of white psychos and criminals...but neither would whites be afraid of their fellow whites nor would blacks be afraid of whites in general due to that fact.
Maybe if black people would stop committing more crimes than any other group of people that prejudice would be gone.

Drewboyy
August 13th, 2016, 06:34 PM
Maybe if black people would stop committing more crimes than any other group of people that prejudice would be gone.

It's not really prejudice, it's more statistics. They happen to look being discriminated against, but it's just that they are in those situation more often

Vlerchan
August 13th, 2016, 06:38 PM
but it's also true that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of the violent crimes (~50%) despite being only ~13% of the population.
I am still curious as to what extend this is predicated on the impoverished, and demasculinated, statues.

if you think white American cops are bad, and if you think Stormweenies saying "nigger" on the Internet are bad, you should try living in a country that is 100% black and run 100% by blacks - you'd be dead of AIDS or starvation or a burning tire necklace, to say nothing of the staggeringly high corruption that makes doing literally anything impossible unless you grease some warlord's palms.
Predicated on a number of factors, including poor inherited-institutions, poor starting bio-geography and the manner in which this affected human capital transference, considerable ethnolinguistic diversity. In the present, much less internationalised markets, underdeveloped capital markets, under-developed private-property rights, and a host of other issues relating to the aforementioned poor inherited institutions, which were designed to be recourse-extracting.

How are you so sure that blacks are so oppressed and whites get off scot free?
For the most part, where it occurs, statistical data.

PlasmaHam
August 13th, 2016, 06:41 PM
I am still curious as to what extend this is predicated on the impoverished, and demasculinated, statues.
Yet it is still true, is it not?


For the most part, where it occurs, statistical data.
I use data, but I'm always told that "you don't see it through our eyes, you can't have an opinion."

Dalcourt
August 13th, 2016, 06:41 PM
the total number of white criminals in the US is indeed higher because there are a lot more whites than blacks. but it's also true that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of the violent crimes (~50%) despite being only ~13% of the population. police, and white people in general have this mindset because it is mostly true.

anytime someone asks me rhetorically if I've ever experienced being black in America, I like to ask if they've ever experienced being black in Africa. if you think white American cops are bad, and if you think Stormweenies saying "nigger" on the Internet are bad, you should try living in a country that is 100% black and run 100% by blacks - you'd be dead of AIDS or starvation or a burning tire necklace, to say nothing of the staggeringly high corruption that makes doing literally anything impossible unless you grease some warlord's palms. after about an hour you'd be pining for Ward Cleaver to set up a "Whites only" restaurant in your town

Do you think you'd stand a chance in your glorified 50s America or Nazi Deutschland you always find so hilarious? I guess I have far better chances in Africa which is described rather well...it's a lot of different countries and the way you'd live there differs greatly from country to country. I've been to Côte d’Ivoire survived and came back to tell the tale....so yeah kinda experienced it I could say.

Second what do you think are the reasons for this crime statistics? Is it genetically programmed into blacks go commit crimes?

Vlerchan
August 13th, 2016, 06:50 PM
Yet it is still true, is it not?
Of course it's true.

But unless we're just looking to dump on blacks in this thread, then figuring out the roots is important from a policy-perspective.

I use data, but I'm always told that "you don't see it through our eyes, you can't have an opinion."
In that case it is more than reasonable to ban the study of history.

Your eyes, are also beholden to a host of cognitive biases. Which is why we collect bulk data.

Dalcourt
August 13th, 2016, 06:57 PM
Just because someone isn't black doesn't mean they don't care. Pandering to minority groups is the normal way of advancement for the Democratic Party. We tell blacks that their lives are awful, and then we tell them they we are the only ones who could fix it. Thus we get the black votes to fix the problem that we started. Goes all the way back to Reconstruction, its politics.

Have you ever experienced what it means to be white in our society? How are you so sure that blacks are so oppressed and whites get off scot free? You aren't a white guy, so you wouldn't know.



There are nationwide complaints over police racism after a black mother threatens police with a shotgun while using her infant as a human shield. They promptly shot her, for pretty just reasons, yet people start yelling that it was just police racism. If you ever look back at these cases after a few weeks, you will see that most have just reasons for the use of police violence.

Maybe if black people would stop committing more crimes than any other group of people that prejudice would be gone.

Just quickly cuz I have to go out sell some drugs and rob someone...

I'm not a white guy but I'm not a black guy either...my ancestry is black, white and native American...I'm a mix between a Creole family on one side and a mainly Cajun on the other...so basically I'm mainly French...and more white than black just cuz the "looks" are more obvious I'm considered black...but bloodwise I'd be more white...so mindwise I'm white enough to understand both sides...

it's not right to use a child as a human shield but shooting someone with an infant so close is highly risky and the innocent kid could easily die through police hand...so no matter what skin colors involved shooting in such a case is a stupid move...

As I asked phuckphace why do you think do black people commit more crimes?

phuckphace
August 13th, 2016, 07:20 PM
Do you think you'd stand a chance in your glorified 50s America or Nazi Deutschland you always find so hilarious?

in 1950s America, yes. and so would you, as a matter of fact.

Second what do you think are the reasons for this crime statistics? Is it genetically programmed into blacks go commit crimes?

every majority black country without exception suffers extremely high rates of violent crime and corruption. naturally this leads one to assume that the inhabitants are to blame. I could be wrong though - it's also possible that the geography is embued with some dank voodoo curse that keeps blacks in the Neolithic but apparently has no effect on Boers.

I don't believe there's a rob-the-liquor-store or kill-cops gene, but it's fairly obvious that something is different under the hood, so to speak.

Predicated on a number of factors, including poor inherited-institutions, poor starting bio-geography and the manner in which this affected human capital transference, considerable ethnolinguistic diversity. In the present, much less internationalised markets, underdeveloped capital markets, under-developed private-property rights, and a host of other issues relating to the aforementioned poor inherited institutions, which were designed to be recourse-extracting.

I missed this. one of the main reasons I believe Africa to be a lost cause as far as developing modern living standards is the inability of the Westerners who run the NGOs to understand that Africans don't think like we do. if a Boer acquires a tractor he immediately begins using it to farm and grow food, but if Mbeke gets one, he parks it outside his mud hut and shows off his newly acquired bling to his neighbors until it rusts into a pile or is commandeered by his warlord for the same purpose.

on a larger scale the leaders of African countries are said to be "corrupt" by Western standards because the very concept of corruption as a vice is a white thing. President Mbeke might wear a $3000 Armani suit paid for by Western donations, but underneath it he's still a loincloth-wearing warlord lounging on a throne made of elephant tusks and cheetah hides.

Posts merged ~Mars

Vlerchan
August 13th, 2016, 07:24 PM
I could be wrong though - it's also possible that the geography is embued with some dank voodoo curse that keeps blacks in the Neolithic but apparently has no effect on Boers.
The Boers brought human-capital, and a government-system that they were the systematic beneficiaries of.

Though, it is starting differences that matter the most. Europe has held a technological advancement since roughly 10,000 BC. Present advantage feeding future advantage became even more prominent following 1500, or so.

This is born out of geographical factors, the Euroasian continent had more domesticable plants and animals (i.e. less opportunity cost to innovation), as well as the continent itself being wider - i.e. there was more people living within the same environment, meant there was a higher chance of innovation that suited your recourse-opportunities and -needs. Europe is also host to much less ethnoreligious fragmentation, that Africa, but much more than the likes of Americas, which it seems contributed to the level of innovation.

The biogeographical factors also contributed to the spread of wealth, when Europeans started leaving Europe. Africa is more recourse-rich that the Northern Americas, and that encouraged colonial governments to set-up institutions that allowed them to maximise the amount of wealth that could be extracted from the states that were colonised. Northern America, on the other hand, was relatively impoverished, and that's the reason most native settlement was South. When African elites displaced European elites, there was no incentive for them to alter the institutions, and as such these institutions persist to today.

Biogeographical factors also affected settlement patterns of Europeans, and a most important dispersion of human-capital.

Just referring to the statues of a white overclass, whose position is a legacy of whites installing themselves as a white overclass - and why the hell wouldn't they?, leads to quite a distorted imagining of history, nonetheless.

if a Boer acquires a tractor he immediately begins using it to farm and grow food, but if Mbeke gets one, he parks it outside his mud hut and shows off his newly acquired bling to his neighbors until it rusts into a pile or is commandeered by his warlord for the same purpose.
Like I said in another thread, the last decade, the greatest returns on investment have been in Africa (countries like Rwanda, Tanzania, etc.)

Porpoise101
August 13th, 2016, 09:47 PM
I could be wrong though - it's also possible that the geography is embued with some dank voodoo curse that keeps blacks in the Neolithic but apparently has no effect on Boers.
Africa got screwed over by geography. The most screwed up area is Sub Saharan Africa. Unlike Europe and other temperate areas, sub saharan Africa has to deal with the diseases and insects that come out of the jungle. These make settling and developing areas difficult. Africa was stunted even more by the tse-tse fly, which essentially turns oxen and horses into lethargic pieces of flesh. So unlike other tropical areas like India, areas like the Congo didn't have the advantage of animals to help build things. The lack of development isolated it as well. This means new ideas couldn't really spread. In areas with more outside contact like North and East Africa, things were/are better. On top of the creepy-crawlies, Africa suffered from colonialism. This left the African states with broken social systems, ethnic tensions, and inexperienced governance. Today that means there are lots of disenfranchised fighting-age males, terrorist groups (Al-Shabaab, ISIS, Boko Haram, LRA, many more), and corrupt leadership. They are so bogged down and disadvantaged, I am surprised that things aren't worse.

tl;dr: It wasn't voodoo magic it was ebola and flies and terrorists

Dalcourt
August 14th, 2016, 09:10 AM
in 1950s America, yes. and so would you, as a matter of fact.



every majority black country without exception suffers extremely high rates of violent crime and corruption. naturally this leads one to assume that the inhabitants are to blame. I could be wrong though - it's also possible that the geography is embued with some dank voodoo curse that keeps blacks in the Neolithic but apparently has no effect on Boers.

I don't believe there's a rob-the-liquor-store or kill-cops gene, but it's fairly obvious that something is different under the hood, so to speak.[/QUOTE]

Well for African countries there might be several reasons...like climate, the after effects of exploitation of resources during colonial years...that colonial powers sometimes just put different groups of people together to form a country they wanted...etc.

For the US blacks it's harder to say...lot's of people believe in this "violent" or "criminal" gene thing...I remember having read a good deal about it. Not really sure what to make of it, though.
Black people are seen as more violent. Child and domestic abuse rates are higher obviously according to statistics and also cases of sexual violence in relationships and so on...Reasons? Somewhere I read that as one reason the brutalising of blacks during slavery is seen as a factor for this...Do I believe that? Not really...doesn't make sense to me.
Is it linked to the fact that more blacks have a lower social status? I never found any realistic data on in what way (domestic) violence and social status are linked cuz statistis are sometimes very contradictorary there.

So I never really found any satisfactory reasons for higher black crime and violence rates...If you are inside the "hood" it doesn't look so much different then society as a whole to be honest. It's like everywhere: the dull herd going about there business and a few black sheep or would it be white sheep in this case of a herd of blacks??
I also never found that there is more solidarity or anything amongst blacks than any other peoples...groups like BLM are just the same like any other number of butthurt people who are out to piss you off same as militant vegans and so on.

For me this is the real interesting matter here not whether a cop shoots more blacks or whites and whether it is justified or not.

phuckphace
August 18th, 2016, 09:10 AM
Vlerchan

geographical factors is another way of saying "evolutionary divergence", and of course I'm happily agreeing. it's been quite a while since proto-humans shuffled out of Africa and split up, and I'm guessing even 10,000 years is long enough for some very interesting characteristics to appear/disappear. Africa is in perma-Neolithic mode because its inhabitants were molded by their environment to some approximation of the Stone Age.

Rwanda is an interesting example of how the race narrative is written and by whom. the European Holocaust was amateur hour compared to many prior historical holocausts at the hands of non-whites, but grimly funny is the contrast in tone - references to Rwanda are noticeably subdued and in no hurry to weigh blame almost as if the machetes and burning tires took on a life of their own...........and then you've got Nazi Germany. wew lad.

Vlerchan
August 18th, 2016, 10:31 AM
geographical factors is another way of saying "evolutionary divergence", and of course I'm happily agreeing.
No. Sometimes geographical factors just mean geographical factors. These alter the incentive structure and the behaviour of humans in turn. This had consequences going into the future - as the world became smaller and globalisation began - as I described.

There could at the same time be a genetix component to this: complimenting - or contradicting it - but so far I have seen naught more than guess work.

the European Holocaust was amateur hour compared to many prior historical holocausts at the hands of non-whites,
The industrialisation of murder was a prpdounding shift from previous genocides.

There was also several times the number of Jews killed than Tutsis.

ThisBougieLife
August 18th, 2016, 10:32 AM
It is interesting to me that the conversation in this thread has come nigh on suggesting that black people are somehow genetically predisposed to become impoverished, violent losers. The fact is, when black people are in a similar socio-economic echelon as their counterparts from other races, there's almost no discernible difference in their performance (the black middle class in this U.S. has actually seen significant improvements recently, but the black poor has seen, if anything, a worsening of their situation). We want to claim that racism is no longer a factor, yet if people really do have a "violent gene", then even successful black people should still be violent and drawn to a life of crime. Upward mobility wouldn't be able to combat the natural urges that come from this genetic factor. But the fact is that crime rates are always higher in poorer areas, and we cannot simply ignore the fact that black people are still the poorest demographic in the U.S.

Black people in the United States present an interesting case. Is there any other race in the U.S. that was enslaved for half its history? And then treated like absolute garbage in many parts of the country for the next half century or more? No? Then there's not really a fair comparison. This isn't meant to say "racism made black people violent", but more this legacy of being second-class citizens led to black people being separated from the rest of society and, in tandem, impoverished (which presents itself as a cycle that is hard to break out of).

If you look at poor white communities, like those in Appalachia and the Rust Belt, you find similar rates of domestic violence and drug abuse (an interesting book on this subject is "Hillbilly Elegy" by J.D. Vance). As well as other problems shared with poor black people, like absent fathers. This indicates that these social problems go hand in hand with poverty and it doesn't seem to matter the race of the people involved. They succumb to it anyway, just in different ways. Now, where do we find the most problems with violence among black Americans? In the cities. It's the urban poor that cause the most trouble.

Urban areas present their own unique situation. Here you have poor black people living within very close quarters, you have increased and easier access to drugs, weapons, and ways of making money illegally. You have terrible ineffective public schools. You have a situation that people see no way of getting out of, so they give up and give in to the life of violence and crime. Crime often presents the only feasible way of making a living in the poor parts of the city. Meanwhile, unlike in the rural areas where you may go miles and miles without seeing people that are different from you (there are plenty of rural black people in the South that we never see in the news when it comes to violence and crime coverage), in the urban areas, you may have black areas policed by white people who don't necessarily relate well to the area they're policing. There are naturally tensions between the police and the inhabitants. When these riots happen, it's not as if a group of happy content people are provoked to mania by one small incident, this is a boiling over of years of what the inhabitants see as unfair treatment...and the police, meanwhile, are so used to this cycle of poverty and violence that they often end up treating people in an inhumane way.

Anyway, I just wanted to add my own thoughts to this thread. There are a lot of reasons why there is so much violence and crime among black communities in the U.S. (particularly the urban ones) and I don't think any of it has anything to do with genetic predisposition to violence, an outrageous claim on its own. Poor white Americans show similar rates of drug abuse and violence, but they are more likely to be rural, and this is a categorically different environment from the urban areas that contain the most black violence.

Africa is a completely different situation, not even going to get into that now, but I might later.

Thanks for putting up with me.

PlasmaHam
August 20th, 2016, 06:01 PM
It is interesting to me that the conversation in this thread has come nigh on suggesting that black people are somehow genetically predisposed to become impoverished, violent losers. The fact is, when black people are in a similar socio-economic echelon as their counterparts from other races, there's almost no discernible difference in their performance (the black middle class in this U.S. has actually seen significant improvements recently, but the black poor has seen, if anything, a worsening of their situation). We want to claim that racism is no longer a factor, yet if people really do have a "violent gene", then even successful black people should still be violent and drawn to a life of crime. Upward mobility wouldn't be able to combat the natural urges that come from this genetic factor. But the fact is that crime rates are always higher in poorer areas, and we cannot simply ignore the fact that black people are still the poorest demographic in the U.S.

I would first like to clarify that I never said that blacks are more predestined to violence than other races. I was simply stating the fact that blacks committed over 50% of the violent crimes in America, a fact which some people seem to think is racist. I was simply stating that fact to show that a large number of arrests of blacks, and police confrontation of blacks, should not be unexpected.

Black people in the United States present an interesting case. Is there any other race in the U.S. that was enslaved for half its history? And then treated like absolute garbage in many parts of the country for the next half century or more? No? Then there's not really a fair comparison. This isn't meant to say "racism made black people violent", but more this legacy of being second-class citizens led to black people being separated from the rest of society and, in tandem, impoverished (which presents itself as a cycle that is hard to break out of).

People love to blame everything on the white man. When you make opinionated claims about white people being wrong, people love it. When you state facts about black people being wrong, people want to kill you. We could argue about how black people were treated, but that is irrelevant for now. You are basically saying that black behavior is justified because of slavery, something no black person alive in America has ever endured. Saying black violence is justified because of acts against their ancestors is foolhardy.

And the perpetual poverty, that is just funny. I guess black people are just too lazy to get themselves out of poverty.(to all who are too caught up in themselves to realize, that sentence was meant as a joke, but that is basically what I get out when people talk about perpetual black poverty.

Urban areas present their own unique situation. Here you have poor black people living within very close quarters, you have increased and easier access to drugs, weapons, and ways of making money illegally. You have terrible ineffective public schools. You have a situation that people see no way of getting out of, so they give up and give in to the life of violence and crime. Crime often presents the only feasible way of making a living in the poor parts of the city. Meanwhile, unlike in the rural areas where you may go miles and miles without seeing people that are different from you (there are plenty of rural black people in the South that we never see in the news when it comes to violence and crime coverage), in the urban areas, you may have black areas policed by white people who don't necessarily relate well to the area they're policing. There are naturally tensions between the police and the inhabitants. When these riots happen, it's not as if a group of happy content people are provoked to mania by one small incident, this is a boiling over of years of what the inhabitants see as unfair treatment...and the police, meanwhile, are so used to this cycle of poverty and violence that they often end up treating people in an inhumane way.
The police are the ones who risk their lives to patrol those poor black neighborhoods. If they didn't care about the citizens there, why do they even patrol there? You seem like all you want to do is justify violence by black people, blaming the white guy for all the black guy's problems. I guess you would think Milwaukee was just some black people protesting an unfair system, even though one of the leaders of those riots is advocating said protesters to burn down the primarily white suburbs. But white people deserve it, don't they?

Porpoise101
August 20th, 2016, 07:12 PM
why do they even patrol there?
Ummm it's their job?

ThisBougieLife
August 20th, 2016, 07:47 PM
PlasmaHam, some of what you have "accused" me of saying, I didn't say at all. Let's be clear about what I did and didn't say.

Yes, black people do commit an inordinate amount of violent crime in the U.S., that's why I wanted to address this fact in my post. I wouldn't deny that this is the case. It isn't racist to point out a fact.

But I did not say that black violence is justified because they're oppressed. I said that violence often coincides with poverty and that black people are the poorest demographic in the U.S. I then said that this poverty (in general) was the direct result of the way black people were treated; they essentially were not permitted to advance in society. No, I do not think black people are always doomed to be poor, but escaping poverty is very difficult, especially when you're caught in what is essentially a vicious cycle of poverty, violence, and a lack of social movement. This is why these urban poor areas rarely get any better. I was simply offering an explanation for why there might be so much black poverty and violence in the U.S.

Yes, the police risk their lives and I am not anti-police in any way, however, it is possible that police may become jaded with the violence and crime they experience day to day, especially in urban areas. They may profile and come to assume that black people are more likely to be violent and may come to have a disregard for black lives (and this applies to black police officers as well). This is at least the issue as many in black communities see it.

And no, I am not making excuses for violent extremists who want revenge on white people; I have no sympathy for them. They are not solving any problems. But that shouldn't need a disclaimer.

Paraxiom
August 20th, 2016, 08:10 PM
A large proportion of this thread is engaged in arguing over this:

image (https://www.glentham.com/static/media/structures/large/8049-97-6.png)

Because I still am trying to figure out how to fully show the image, I'll say that what you are seeing is the chemical structure of melanin.

Dalcourt
August 20th, 2016, 11:06 PM
http://i63.tinypic.com/241m2s3.png

you mean like that?

Flapjack
August 20th, 2016, 11:10 PM
A large proportion of this thread is engaged in arguing over this:

image (https://www.glentham.com/static/media/structures/large/8049-97-6.png)

Because I still am trying to figure out how to fully show the image, I'll say that what you are seeing is the chemical structure of melanin.
image (http://i63.tinypic.com/241m2s3.png)

you mean like that?
Yep how much of that someone has in their skin, some people think determines so much about that person. So sad :(

I hope by showing the skeletal formula it wakes people up to the reality!! :)