There is nothing "free and loose" with the events of what happened here that would change the picture from "this guy flew off a handle and shot unarmed black kids who never even stepped out of their vehicle" to "oh maybe he was just defending himself."
It is the same topic: race and killings, and how they are related.
I've worked for black candidates to be elected. I have opposed racist individuals in my community. The imputation that anyone who doesn't merrily march along with every race thread on JUB is secretly a Klansman is lame.
The thread was and is an alarm about a black young man being slain as a racist white-on-black act. At every point I've agreed that the murder is reprehensible and not defensible. That said, it doesn't remove the pattern of these threads on JUB, which is the ongoing implication that race violence is somehow rampant in the U.S. and all the more in some states.
My point was and is that MANY MORE black men are killed by their own social and racial peers to NO ONE'S outrage on JUB, especially the watchdogs who are endlessly posting about white on black killings which occur in A MINUTE FRACTION of the rate of incidence of black on black.
If race is a valid aspect to discuss in murder, then it is a valid aspect. It is not tantamount to defending white on black murder simply because one places in perspective the numbers involved in proportion to the black on black killings.
Far from being a diversion, it is highly relevant when discussing race's role in the murder of black men in America.
The numbers are not subjective. The glass is not half-full of white men killing black teens. It is about 80% full of dead black American males killed by other black American males. Then there are a few white on black racist killing, which are in far, far fewer occurrences than these thread posters would have anyone believe.
While presumably arguing against racism, they are in fact promulgating it by implying that white men are killing black teens in any sizable numbers.
The stand your ground law may well be wrong and used inappropriately, but the imputation that race killings are rampant is just plain exaggeration, and far from the real story about what is killing young black males.
Last edited by Hard-up1; November 30th, 2012 at 06:59 PM.
I mean next up did race play no role in the Trayvon case? I don't hear about a lot of white teenagers being stalked by neighborhood watchmen cowboys on their way home from 7-11 and then being shot to death because they were "threatening" with their skittles, but hey if those stories are out there, please bring them up.
Me saying that the law in Florida is terrible would be the same whether the shooter had been purple and the kids had been fuschia. You would not catch me any less likely to say this is a stupid law that encourages cowboy vigilantism. In fact that's exactly how I've described the problem with this law multiple times, I haven't said it's a "race law telling whites to kill people", though clearly it is encouraging a few white people to take their perceptions of minorities being disruptive and dangerous and go out and handle that problem with a gun.The thread was and is an alarm about a black young man being slain as a racist white-on-black act. At every point I've agreed that the murder is reprehensible and not defensible. That said, it doesn't remove the pattern of these threads on JUB, which is the ongoing implication that race violence is somehow rampant in the U.S. and all the more in some states.
Yes, you've made that point multiple times. So Hard-up let me ask you. If an American is decapitated overseas by a terrorist, how come people have any reaction to it at all? I mean look how many Americans die in car crashes everyday. Where's the outrage over that? We shouldn't have a war on terrorism. We should have a war on automobiles!My point was and is that MANY MORE black men are killed by their own social and racial peers
^That's your logic.
Last edited by xbuzzerx; November 30th, 2012 at 08:27 PM.
Reductio ad absurdum (from the Latin: "reduction to absurdity") is a common form of argument which seeks to demonstrate that a statement is true by showing that a false, untenable, or absurd result follows from its denial… or in turn to demonstrate that a statement is false by showing that a false, untenable, or absurd result follows from its acceptance.
And I totally agree with a comment I received, he really is the epitome why we need to always have a safe place here to discuss race. It’s frightening how he and so many others can be so willingly blind.
We don't need powdery sugarcoated bullshit... we need to really tackle issues. Stop telling people on here what they can or cannot discuss. The refusal to discuss the rampant racism in this country shows how willing some are to address the issues.
And? What is that supposed to prove? It's easy to post a link... even easier not giving an argument regarding the topic.
And for anyone that has a problem with race threads or doesn't want to engage in them there is simply an option, don't click to open the thread. No thread on here is forcing your hand and subjecting you to post. It's no wonder why some members don't post as much when you have people either complaining about the topic you made or criticizing your posting style..
Topics like Race, Religion, Politics don't need to be as "taboo" or touchy as people try to make them out to be. There are people who can't go into these discussions without thinking they're right, being too emotional about the topic, being able to handle someones different opinion or being open to the fact that someone might bring something to the table that will bring a newer view about said topic*. In general they can't handle these discussions. I definitely felt like since first starting here my opinions on things changed and expanded because of discussions on here and in the "real world."
And it is sad that it really needs to come to this in order for people to able to have a civil conversation about it.And I totally agree with a comment I received, he really is the epitome why we need to always have a safe place here to discuss race. It’s frightening how he and so many others can be so willingly blind.
*I just want to point out that I can also be guilty of these things from time to time. I don't want to make it sound like I am above this kind of thing, because I'm not. Sometimes emotions do get the best of someone.
And good post Tombastep. I agree totally that the "omg u ppl just make everything race all the time" blows up the topic more than any other factor. If those people really can't stand the discussion just don't enter it.
I'm not a Pit-bull who enjoys the testosterone rush of having aggressive, loud, vicious arguments for the sake of having aggressive, loud, vicious arguments. And I'm not a pitbull who bites without thinking... but I'm assuming that your brain didn't even register those graphs in the link in the three minutes between posts on the first of December before your brain told you to bite again.
I think those statistics are more eloquent than all your frenzied, angry biting and frothing at the mouth.
^ Hmm. . . a two minute delay.
You didn't even see the statistics. I'm now convinced YOU with your biting avatar and location are The New Giancarlo.
Pat Grimshaw going after and insulting a banned member. Keep it classy. Funny how he has a lot more to say when the person is incapable of saying something back.
^ he'll back soon, biting and snapping and frothing at the mouth.
I hope Dunn is prosecuted and the "Stand-your-ground Defence" is repealed. And I wish there was more evidence and less hysteria. I reckon if tasers can be fitted with cameras then guns should be too!
BTW: It seems ‘Stand Your Ground’ Defense Rejected in this case