RE: Charles Barkley
December 3, 2014 at 11:09 am
(This post was last modified: December 3, 2014 at 11:15 am by bennyboy.)
(December 3, 2014 at 10:17 am)Heywood Wrote:(December 2, 2014 at 3:00 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: So you're trying to overcome it... by using the term "oreo". Gotcha. You're making some great strides there
Oreo is a derogatory word, but the "derogatoriness" of the remark refers to ones character and not their skin color. Not all blacks consider oreo to be a racist term and neither do I.
Let me be racially unbiased here, then, in saying that both you and the black people you are talking about are fucking idiots. Oreo means "black on the outside, but white on the inside." It's just about as explicitly racist as a term can possibly be.
(December 1, 2014 at 8:18 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Two things about this.Quote:The only thing I see is that today the 'typical' blue uniformed cop who pulls out a pistol, when the 'bad guy' pulls out an Uzi...
Truthfully, that's not a very common scenario. Usually the cop shoots someone who is simply unarmed.
1) How many cops have been killed by uzis, vs. how many black kids have been killed by service pistols? The ratio has to be 1 against dozens.
2) Why are cops and citizens considered on equal par? Fuck that. Cops sign up to protect citizens, and that includes risk of death. Nobody signed up to protect cops, and nobody should have to die in order for a cop to maximize his personal safety. In my opinion, no cop should ever be allowed to fire a weapon unless he's already been fired at, regardless of whether a "bad guy" (aka a 12 year-old kid) is carrying a gun, or a CITIZEN is at grave risk from knife or other weapon threats.