(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: Sarcasm, or not, joking, or not, serious, or not, it was still inappropriate to suggest that any person of one color should be shot by the police to make things equal to people of another color.

And yet your first instinct wasn't to say that it was inappropriate, but rather to go for a non-sequitur suggestion, that I don't like white people and not even mention women, until you were called out on it.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: I caught the sarcasm in the first place. It was revealing of your disdain for white people.

Bullsh*t. The sarcasm has nothing to do with how I feel about white people, Great White Hope.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: Nope. I didn't leave out the women from your sarcastic suggestion, pages 2 & 3

Again - that wasn't your first response. Your first instinct was to stand up for white males, as if what I was suggesting was serious.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: See. I included them too.

I see, that you didn't conclude I hated women. Why is that?

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: I think Wild Bill rather than Buffalo Bill would be more in line of the portrait you're trying to paint. 

just on the news:

Three people shot dead in a Michigan court room. Two of the dead are court bailiffs, and the shooter is the third. Details still coming in.

(July 11, 2016 at 3:23 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote:

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: Sarcasm, or not, joking, or not, serious, or not, it was still inappropriate to suggest that any person of one color should be shot by the police to make things equal to people of another color.

And yet your first instinct wasn't to say that it was inappropriate, but rather to go for a non-sequitur suggestion, that I don't like white people and not even mention women, until you were called out on it.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: I caught the sarcasm in the first place. It was revealing of your disdain for white people.

Bullsh*t. The sarcasm has nothing to do with how I feel about white people, Great White Hope.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: Nope. I didn't leave out the women from your sarcastic suggestion, pages 2 & 3

Again - that wasn't your first response. Your first instinct was to stand up for white males, as if what I was suggesting was serious.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: See. I included them too.

I see, that you didn't conclude I hated women. Why is that?

(July 11, 2016 at 8:32 am)A Theist Wrote: I think Wild Bill rather than Buffalo Bill would be more in line of the portrait you're trying to paint. 

Your sarcasm was the hateful sort. To even suggest in that manner that maybe the police should shoot a couple of white guys, and a woman or two, I'm assuming you meant white women, is very telling to me that you don't like white people, even if your own skin may be white. Your sarcasm had everything to do with way you feel about white people.

(July 11, 2016 at 2:41 pm)A Theist Wrote: Newly posted video by Paul Joseph Watson...The Truth About The Dallas Sniper Attack

Dude talked about race for 6 minutes then says "but this isn't about race, no one wants a race war" really?

(July 11, 2016 at 4:57 pm)A Theist Wrote: Your sarcasm was the hateful sort. To even suggest in that manner that maybe the police should shoot a couple of white guys, and a woman or two, I'm assuming you meant white women,[...]

LOL... You're assuming? On the basis of what? Seems to me - you are a racist, so you assume everyone else is one too. Hey - whatever helps you sleep at night, Kramer.

What has that all to do with BLM? Might be a case of selective awarness, since the protestors are on record to say, please stop killing each others after the Dallas killings. Not that I would expect A Theist to peruse anything other than rightwing sources. But let's keep it real.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:48 am)paulpablo Wrote: I imagine unarmed black people have more contact with the police than unarmed black people, A theist didn't show his source that Yeaux was replying to but say if it's just talking about unarmed black men vs unarmed white men and the rates they are killed by police.

If black men are committing more crime and being arrested more then they're going be in contact with more police officers who could be psycho racists, they have a higher chance of being in contact with incompetent police officers, shot, thrown into a back of a van, knocked out and hit the floor in a bad way and so on.
This is just going to be amplified if they're resisting arrest, trying to run away or whatever.
Whenever anyone of any race is stopped by police it's a Russian roulette as to whether you're about to deal with a psycho cop or a jolly laughing policeman, if anyone commits a lot of violent crime and resists arrest they take the chance of encountering these policemen everytime they do.

Again not to say that racial prejudice doesn't happen and not to say it isn't given out more to black people. But it's incorrect to say there's no other factors than racial bias that explain the discrepancy between unarmed white people killed by police and unarmed black people.

Who said racial bias is the ONLY factor, paulpablo? I sure as hell didn't.

But, there's no way it's not a major contributing factor, when considering that profiling accounts for a significant number of said interactions; A number of, not all of. 
I felt I should reiterate that for you, lest you respond with another rambling, inane post about how "sometimes black people are stopped for other reasons"...I know that. Everyone knows that.

Also, it's moronic to suggest that anyone of any race getting stopped by the police is pretty much in the same boat, when racial profiling is a currently accepted and encouraged practice within many US police departments. Being stopped/accosted accosting by law enforcement, NOT on account of wrongdoing or suspicion, but SOLEY on an officer's prejudicial thinking and general disdain, presents highly unfavorable circumstances for targeted minorities from the outset. There's no escaping it.

Unless of course, you choose to ignore that, and start talking about Crips...that might work.

(July 11, 2016 at 8:49 pm)Thena323 Wrote:

(July 11, 2016 at 8:48 am)paulpablo Wrote: I imagine unarmed black people have more contact with the police than unarmed black people, A theist didn't show his source that Yeaux was replying to but say if it's just talking about unarmed black men vs unarmed white men and the rates they are killed by police.

If black men are committing more crime and being arrested more then they're going be in contact with more police officers who could be psycho racists, they have a higher chance of being in contact with incompetent police officers, shot, thrown into a back of a van, knocked out and hit the floor in a bad way and so on.
This is just going to be amplified if they're resisting arrest, trying to run away or whatever.
Whenever anyone of any race is stopped by police it's a Russian roulette as to whether you're about to deal with a psycho cop or a jolly laughing policeman, if anyone commits a lot of violent crime and resists arrest they take the chance of encountering these policemen everytime they do.

Again not to say that racial prejudice doesn't happen and not to say it isn't given out more to black people. But it's incorrect to say there's no other factors than racial bias that explain the discrepancy between unarmed white people killed by police and unarmed black people.

Who said racial bias is the ONLY factor, paulpablo? I sure as hell didn't.

I said previously that I was replying to this comment not made by you.....

Quote: For there to be absolutely no racial bias in these killings, only 10-15% of police brutality victims should be black. It's far more than 15% going on the frequency of which we hear about it compared to whites being killed.

I'm saying there are other factors was in response to this person saying that if there was no racial bias the victims of police brutality should align with population sizes. 

I then said I think there are other factors like rates of resisting arrest and overall crime rates and contact with the police that probably also contribute. You wouldn't expect asian and black rates of police brutality to totally align with their population sizes when one groups crime rate towers above the other therefore making one group have way more interaction with the police. Again I'm not saying the police should dish out more brutality, but just from the law of averages it's bound to make a contribution to the likelyhood of an act of brutality from the police the more contact someone has with them.

From what I can see Asians make up 5% of the population but they are 2% of all the police killings.
Which is the exact opposite of the statistics for black people. If the differences are just because of racial bias this means the police inherently love Asians, like white people, act fairly to hispanics, and dislike black people. That's if you ignore factors like crime rate and resisting arrest and focus on racial bias.

I agree that the police being prejudice is bad for minorities.

I was talking about the crips in an unrelated matter to do with the specific website I posted a few pages back.

Think this might be relevant:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_racism

(July 11, 2016 at 10:31 am)The_Empress Wrote:

(July 11, 2016 at 4:58 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote: It's almost as if the UK police forces didn't have their own problems with institutionalised racism.

Where did I imply that?? This thread is about BLM and whether or not racial profiling is a problem in the US. 

Jesus effing christ. Why is this so hard to understand?

I'm agreeing with you. I was pointing out that paulpablo shouldn't really be that suprised as UK police forces have the same problem as regarding targeting blacks as the US does (apart from the gun deaths factor, as UK police generally don't carry guns).

You should have read my link before jumping to conclusions.