worst president in modern times

Status
Not open for further replies.

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
So you're saying there was no hate crimes against white Americans ? That's BS.

All it shows is that when there's black on white violence, no hate crime charges are usually brought up. The system is biased.

A US Marine and his friend attacked and beat up by an angry black mob right after Michael Brown shooting. No hate crime charges.

A black boy in Detroit is playing chicken with traffic and gets hit by a pickup truck. The 54 year old white pickup truck driver gets out to check on the boy, is being beaten into a coma by a mob of black men shouting racial slurs (in the presence of many witnesses), spends days in a coma and weeks in a hospital, no hate crime charges are brought up against any of the attackers (there was, however, a charge of "ethnic intimidation" that doesn't equal hate crime).

Shall I go on ? Or will this post be flagged and deleted like my other one ?

There's about 5 times as much black on white violent crime as there's white on black. Google up FBI crime stats. With black community at 13% of the population and white community at 64% (Wiki data for 2010), there's roughly 5 times more whites than blacks and yet the blacks attack whites 5 times more often. Yet, only the whites commit hate crimes ? Come on, don't insult my intelligence.

There's a strong bias in the way our government applies hate crime laws. It's unfair, and unfairness breeds contempt and resentment. As AG Holder had said many times himself. Instead of putting out the fire of racial tensions, the government pours more gasoline into it. Two wrongs don't make it right, you don't fight bias with bias. Won't you agree ?

By the way, it was a black woman that saved the Detroit driver's life. The problem is not with race or skin color. It's with mentality. The only way out of this mess is to try and change the mentality of some people. Both black and white. But for this, the laws should be applied fairly and evenly. Pandering to the hate mongers like Jesse Jackson will produce the opposite effect.

Your two examples (Marine and pickup driver), the crimes committed were not strictly motivated because of race, but rather specific events that invoked the anger. Had the MB shooting or traffic accident not happened, these crimes would not have been committed. That's not the case with hate crimes. Hate is the motivator.

Let me stress that I am in no way condoning these acts. I just don't think they meet the strict definition. IMO

Hate crimes are motivated solely based on a prejudice that occurs when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group.

In simplistic terms, a hate crime is (excuse me): "Let's go kill/beatup a n----r, or fagot, or etc etc."
 
Last edited:

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
Conservatism is the antidote to tyranny. It's the only one. It's based on thousands of years of human experience. There is nothing narrow about the conservative philosophy. It's a liberating philosophy. It is a magnificent philosophy. It is a philosophy for the ages, for all times.

Except that today's conservative is yesterday's liberal. The society changes, and many of the values that were considered liberal, even revolutionary a hundred years ago now mainstream. A person with strong religious conviction, anti-gay, anti-socialist, yet supporting voting rights for women and equal treatment of all people regardless of race or religion would be a radical liberal in the XIX century. Women ? Blacks ? Voting ?!

That's why I hate labels. I don't buy into some mass-tailored set of ideas. I am very liberal / libertarian in my views on marriage, religion or sex, conservative when it comes to defense, welfare and illegal immigration - but I do believe that the government has it's role and that left to their own devices, with no regulation, the private companies will fairly quickly turn this country into a stagnant swamp divided amongst and ruled by monopolies.

We need another Teddy Roosevelt :)
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
Your two examples (Marine and pickup driver), the crimes committed were not strictly motivated because of race, but rather specific events that invoked the anger. Had the MB shooting or traffic accident happened, these crimes would not have been committed. That's not the case with hate crimes. Hate is the motivator.

So if the white mob beats up a couple of black guys because they are angry with the specific event (driver's beating), this would not, in your opinion, be a hate crime ?

What about someone whose relative was beat up or killed by a black person ? Do they have a reason to be angry with black people ? A very specific event that invokes the anger, and there's about 300 thousands such events happening each year.

Sorry, but I can't accept your point of view.

Attacking a person based solely on their skin color, regardless of the underlying motives, is a hate crime. Period.

Let me stress that I am in know way condoning these acts. I just don't think the meet the strict definition. IMO

Hate crimes are motivated solely based on a prejudice that occurs when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group.

In simplistic terms, a hate crime is (excuse me): "Let's go kill/beatup a n----r, or fagot, or etc etc."

Or, let's go beat up / rape / rob a "cr----r". Are you telling me this does not ever happen ? Oh, sorry, in this case there's always some childhood memory of a past injustice that makes this not a hate crime, but a crime of resentment... right ?

What about people who beat up gays because they believe they are sinners against God ? What about people who attack Jews because they believe that Jews killed Christ, or caused the Great Recession of 2008 ? Here, they have a real reason to be angry (loss of their home or savings) and a belief that a certain group of people is responsible (a belief no less misguided than blaming every white person for what some other white person did).

The blacks don't get charged with hate crimes unless it's against other minorities (e.g. the homosexuals). All it shows is that there's a deliberate bias in the way the hate crime laws are applied. Even in the case of Detroit driver, they believed they had enough proof to use the state hate crime law (ethnic intimidation) but still did not invoke the Federal hate crime charge, which would screw up the DOJ statistics and carry a much more severe punishment. Had a group of white people beat up a black motorist under same exact circumstances, I can guarantee you they would be all charged with hate crimes and Jesse, Al Sharpton, AG Holder and CNN would be all over this.

In the end, this severely misguided, unfair, biased approach only serves to perpetuate the racial tension.. perhaps that's the real reason for it. Many of the middle class, educated, level headed black Americans I work or socialize with are more conservative than I am. Why make more of them ? It's far better to keep them perpetually angry, agitated, welfare dependent, and voting for the "right" politicians.
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
So unless the victim is or has the same race/gender bias/religion as the perpetrator...... its a hate crime?

No, if the race was the driving factor in the attack, it's a hate crime. As simple as that. Attacking a white person because you're angry at Ferguson is a hate crime, no matter how you spin it. Attacking a black person because you're angry at the wave of black violence is a hate crime, as well. Attacking anyone because of their skin color is a hate crime - that's what the law said, the last time I read it. If there's a proof that race was the main, or one of the main factors in the attack, it's a hate crime. That's the standard that is applied to the white-on-black crime, the same standard should be applied to the black-on-white, asian-on-hispanic, or gay-on-straight crime. Nobody should be getting a special treatment, and no group should be singled out.
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
So you're saying there was no hate crimes against white Americans ? That's BS.

Don't put words in my posts, I never said that. I asked a question.


All it shows is that when there's black on white violence, no hate crime charges are usually brought up. The system is biased.

The system by nature shouldn't be, but by history, what group has been subject of hate crime the most over the past 150+ years?


Do you remember what actually happened at Ferguson? Tensions were sky high there and still are.


A black boy in Detroit is playing chicken with traffic and gets hit by a pickup truck. The 54 year old white pickup truck driver gets out to check on the boy, is being beaten into a coma by a mob of black men shouting racial slurs (in the presence of many witnesses), spends days in a coma and weeks in a hospital, no hate crime charges are brought up against any of the attackers (there was, however, a charge of "ethnic intimidation" that doesn't equal hate crime).

Yeah, seeing someone being hit by a pickup truck will cause tempers to flare. I remember seeing the video in question, it was horrific.


The problem is not with race or skin color. It's with mentality. The only way out of this mess is to try and change the mentality of some people. Both black and white.

You said it perfectly, but you can't undo decades of hardships from an entire race, black people were brought here against their will, subjugated for a long time, segregated against, and now are being thrown in jail en masse by those very same race of people (look up jail stats). Then black people who do well in life, they are less likely to be hired despite having the me qualifications as whites, and are least likely to get a promotion. To change that you would have to have a magic spell. You can't change culture. Not one as large and divers as America's anyways.
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
No, if the race was the driving factor in the attack, it's a hate crime. As simple as that. Attacking a white person because you're angry at Ferguson is a hate crime, no matter how you spin it. Attacking a black person because you're angry at the wave of black violence is a hate crime, as well. Attacking anyone because of their skin color is a hate crime - that's what the law said, the last time I read it. If there's a proof that race was the main, or one of the main factors in the attack, it's a hate crime. That's the standard that is applied to the white-on-black crime, the same standard should be applied to the black-on-white, asian-on-hispanic, or gay-on-straight crime. Nobody should be getting a special treatment, and no group should be singled out.

If only if it were that simple.
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
Don't put words in my posts, I never said that. I asked a question.

Which is very hard to answer because there was no hate crime charges brought up.

It's like saying that there was no hate crimes against the Jews in Nazi Germany because no Germans were ever charged with them by the regime.

The system by nature shouldn't be, but by history, what group has been subject of hate crime the most over the past 150+ years?

And what group has been murdered, raped and robbed the most by what other group in the past 60+ years ? Except that bringing this fact up has been a taboo for any mainstream politician or news outlet.

And what does this have to do with people who came to the US from Poland, Yugoslavia or Russia in the last 40 years ? AFAIK these were the only groups of recent European immigrants allowed into US. Yet they are being subjected to "resentment" just the same, based only on the color of their skin.

Do you remember what actually happened at Ferguson? Tensions were sky high there and still are.

Do you remember what happened in New Orleans, when the armed gangs of inner city thugs were roaming the streets raping, robbing and murdering at will ? There was quite some tension there as well. Would you say that an unprovoked attack on a black person there would not be a hate crime ?

Yeah, seeing someone being hit by a pickup truck will cause tempers to flare. I remember seeing the video in question, it was horrific.




You said it perfectly, but you can't undo decades of hardships from an entire race, black people were brought here against their will, subjugated for a long time, segregated against, and now are being thrown in jail en masse by those very same race of people (look up jail stats). Then black people who do well in life, they are less likely to be hired despite having the me qualifications as whites, and are least likely to get a promotion. To change that you would have to have a magic spell. You can't change culture. Not one as large and divers as America's anyways.


Look up the FBI violent crime stats and they put the jail stats in a whole new light.

As to hiring bias - I am sure it exists. Having a few friends and relatives who own small businesses, I can tell you that any group of people who has a special status under the law will find it harder to get hired. If a newhire white guy doesn't perform to expectations, he'll get sacked and that's it. If a minority (racial, sexual or gender) doesn't perform and get fired, they can and often will sue for discrimination and at the very least cost you tens of thousands of dollars. As a small business owner, you have to carefully access any job applicant's potential risks vs benefits. Because even one lawsuit can put you out of business and ruin your life.

My cousin, who owns a body shop, once fired a black employee caught stealing. The guy showed up a week later with a lawyer, threatening to file a discrimination lawsuit. Even though there was an indisputable proof of theft, still cost my cousin several grand to defend himself. Had there not been the proof, he'd be out big, big money. A white, straight, male employee would not likely even be able to find a lawyer willing to take up the case. So, why on earth would he ever want to expose himself to this kind of risk again ?

As to promotions - if I were a minority my career would be far more satisfying, I worked in several large corporations and being a woman or a minority, with all other things being equal, almost guaranteed a speedy promotion. Has been that way for the last 20+ years. There's even a joking term for a white guy being passed over for promotion in favor of a woman / minority - "he got whiteballed". You know, white and with balls...
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
Which is very hard to answer because there was no hate crime charges brought up.

It's like saying that there was no hate crimes against the Jews in Nazi Germany because no Germans were ever charged with them by the regime.

That is not what I mean, you keep missing what I am saying. I said has there been any high profile black on white hate crimes?


And what group has been murdered, raped and robbed the most by what other group in the past 60+ years ? Except that bringing this fact up has been a taboo for any mainstream politician or news outlet.

You are missing my point again, what group has been subject of actual slavery, and segregation to even having black codes to stop us from having basic citizen rights?

And what does this have to do with people who came to the US from Poland, Yugoslavia or Russia in the last 40 years ? AFAIK these were the only groups of recent European immigrants allowed into US. Yet they are being subjected to "resentment" just the same, based only on the color of their skin.

The same resentment black people face all the time.



Do you remember what happened in New Orleans, when the armed gangs of inner city thugs were roaming the streets raping, robbing and murdering at will ? There was quite some tension there as well. Would you say that an unprovoked attack on a black person there would not be a hate crime ?

Two different situations, and have no clue what you are on about.




Look up the FBI violent crime stats and they put the jail stats in a whole new light.

As to hiring bias - I am sure it exists. Having a few friends and relatives who own small businesses, I can tell you that any group of people who has a special status under the law will find it harder to get hired. If a newhire white guy doesn't perform to expectations, he'll get sacked and that's it. If a minority (racial, sexual or gender) doesn't perform and get fired, they can and often will sue for discrimination and at the very least cost you tens of thousands of dollars. As a small business owner, you have to carefully access any job applicant's potential risks vs benefits. Because even one lawsuit can put you out of business and ruin your life.

My cousin, who owns a body shop, once fired a black employee caught stealing. The guy showed up a week later with a lawyer, threatening to file a discrimination lawsuit. Even though there was an indisputable proof of theft, still cost my cousin several grand to defend himself. Had there not been the proof, he'd be out big, big money. A white, straight, male employee would not likely even be able to find a lawyer willing to take up the case. So, why on earth would he ever want to expose himself to this kind of risk again ?

As to promotions - if I were a minority my career would be far more satisfying, I worked in several large corporations and being a woman or a minority, with all other things being equal, almost guaranteed a speedy promotion. Has been that way for the last 20+ years. There's even a joking term for a white guy being passed over for promotion in favor of a woman / minority - "he got whiteballed". You know, white and with balls...

A stats sheet does not put jail stats in light, and you are basically saying, black people are special under the law and shouldn't get special treatment, when 9/10 black people in reality do not get any special treatment, if they do it will be news to me. The system was and is still not fair to all races. It would be nice if it was, but it isn't.
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
As to promotions - if I were a minority my career would be far more satisfying, I worked in several large corporations and being a woman or a minority, with all other things being equal, almost guaranteed a speedy promotion. Has been that way for the last 20+ years. There's even a joking term for a white guy being passed over for promotion in favor of a woman / minority - "he got whiteballed". You know, white and with balls...

Wow 20+ years vs 300+ years of far worse.

You can't beat a dog its entire life and one day say, "Hey buddy, here's a steak for ya."

The jewish people (and rightfully so) say, "Never forget." But we want AA's to "get over it" because the past is the past.

Again, I do not condone acts of violence. But I understand the resentment. I totally get it.
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
Well, then we should try to make it better, singling out any group of people for either discrimination or special treatment is morally wrong and only serves to make the problems worse. You can't hold every white person responsible for what some other people did a 100 years ago just because they have the same skin color. Just as you can't hold every black person responsible for the black crime wave of the last three generations. People should be treated based on their personal actions, and treated equally, and it's especially unforgivable and wrong for the government to be biased, in any way.
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
Wow 20+ years vs 300+ years of far worse.

You can't beat a dog its entire life and one day say, "Hey buddy, here's a steak for ya."

The jewish people (and rightfully so) say, "Never forget." But we want AA's to "get over it" because the past is the past.

Again, I do not condone acts of violence. But I understand the resentment. I totally get it.

That 20+ (actually it's been going on for 40+) years is whole of my life, and for most of the people alive today. Besides, what moral right do you have to hold ALL white people responsible for what some groups of white people did several centuries ago ? A Pole, a Finn, a German, an Austrian arriving in the US in the XX century would have no historic connection with slavery, none whatsoever. To blame them for what French, English and Dutch descendants did, based solely on the color of their skin, is pure racism.
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
I once got into a heated discussion with a person who thought that "The United States is the land of equal opportunity." was the same thing as "The United States is the land of opportunity."

I think we can agree that the 2nd phrase is the correct one.

Children born into poverty are a 100 yards behind the starting line in the race to an education. Our society tries to make up for it way too late IMO. Make things even when the race starts, and you don't have to worry about who wins at the end because their merits speak for themselves.

Breaking the chain starts at the beginning, not at the end.
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
what moral right do you have to hold ALL white people responsible for what some groups of white people did several centuries ago ?

I don't hold all white people responsible, its not about responsibility at all ..... I understand the resentment.

But hey... this is coming from a white guy......... you can't even hurt my feelings. :)
 

Amamba

Well-known member
Mar 4, 2014
191
0
16
Visit site
I don't hold all white people responsible, its not about responsibility at all ..... I understand the resentment.

But hey... this is coming from a white guy......... you can't even hurt my feelings. :)

I am really not trying to hurt anyone's feelings.

My family, on both sides, originated from Central and Eastern Europe, they all came to the US in the XX century. I have no connection to slave trade, voting discrimination, KKK or Jim Crow laws. The countries in which my ancestors lived since medieval times had no overseas colonies, heck most didn't even exist until the end of WW1. Yet somehow a racial bias against me is justified because some other white people, from a different country, speaking different language, and as alien to my ancestors as any black person, did something bad 150 years ago ? What an utter BS.
 

kilofoxtrot

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2011
1,204
36
0
Visit site
I am really not trying to hurt anyone's feelings.

My family, on both sides, originated from Central and Eastern Europe, they all came to the US in the XX century. I have no connection to slave trade, voting discrimination, KKK or Jim Crow laws. The countries in which my ancestors lived since medieval times had no overseas colonies, heck most didn't even exist until the end of WW1. Yet somehow a racial bias against me is justified because some other white people, from a different country, speaking different language, and as alien to my ancestors as any black person, did something bad 150 years ago ? What an utter BS.

Now you know how they feel.

I understand your resentment too.
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
Well, then we should try to make it better, singling out any group of people for either discrimination or special treatment is morally wrong and only serves to make the problems worse. You can't hold every white person responsible for what some other people did a 100 years ago just because they have the same skin color. Just as you can't hold every black person responsible for the black crime wave of the last three generations. People should be treated based on their personal actions, and treated equally, and it's especially unforgivable and wrong for the government to be biased, in any way.

Yet time and again the government has been mistreating minorities for decades, yet you say we get special treatment. Just like you can't hold everyone responsible for some people looting in Ferguson, double standards I see.
 

A895

Well-known member
Jan 17, 2014
1,038
0
0
Visit site
That 20+ (actually it's been going on for 40+) years is whole of my life, and for most of the people alive today. Besides, what moral right do you have to hold ALL white people responsible for what some groups of white people did several centuries ago ? A Pole, a Finn, a German, an Austrian arriving in the US in the XX century would have no historic connection with slavery, none whatsoever. To blame them for what French, English and Dutch descendants did, based solely on the color of their skin, is pure racism.

So are you saying we should suck it up and keep it moving? Take one on the chin?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trending Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
260,002
Messages
1,765,290
Members
441,220
Latest member
waeriyadh