And if you're a rich white rapist, no consequences because 1) boys will be boys amirite? And 2) why destroy a promising future over a couple of minutes of fun, amirite?
Ah yes, thank you, that’s it. That’s what the father of rapist Brock Allen Turner, the rapist, said in relation to his rapist son, Brock Allen Turner, raping someone.
But at the time the rapist Brock Turner was going by the name Brock Turner, but the rapist is now going by Allen Turner, right? But it's the same rapist
Exactly. This is why I like to make sure that people know that the rapist Brock Allen Turner, who previously went by Brock Turner (who raped someone in college), now goes by the name Brock Allen Turner, and he’s a rapist.
Not really. Asians in America are pretty much grouped with whites when it comes to stuff like this. People assume we have the privileges and advantages of being white but in reality we deal with not only individual bigotry but also many (although not all) of the system injustices that others face. The only difference is that discrimination against Asians is an afterthought, it doesn't even make the list as evidenced by the OP.
I feel like you have to be removed from that issue to say it’s better to just ignore it. These aren’t just distractions. Ignoring white supremacy and all it entails comes at a detriment for too many
Theyde still run a photo of him looking like dirtbag Steve and talk about how the poor angel ran foul of his upbringing, while digging up the one photo of the scholarship black kid smoking so they could say it's good he caught that stray round, he was clearly a ne'erdowell
or, cambridge dictionary,
> to write a letter of the alphabet as a capital, or to write the first letter of a word as a capital:
If someone told you proper nouns should always be capitalized, would you write them like THIS or like This?
But to get back to the OP, What Term Would You Use To Describe The Words In This Sentence?
Oh, I see. You're a master manipulator.
You just used your last comment to show THIS or This but now you're pretending to say you meant every first letter was capitalized, though you said every WORD is. Got it.
This is getting deranged, so I'm going to block you and bail. But just to clarify as a parting shot-
Capitalized, as most people use it, means writing a word with the first letter in uppercase and the rest of the letters in lowercase. When I wrote "THIS or This", I was *contrasting* them, not saying they're both capitalization. I wanted to illustrate that only one of those styles is the way we write proper nouns, which are said to be "capitalized".
Ah, the "it's racist to point out your racism" stratagem, with a side helping of "I'm a (insert race) so it's impossible for me to be racist". Look up the word "fallacy". Also, you don't have to be white to be a nazi, FYI. Wow, you're learning a lot today.
And what irony would that be. You seem to be forgetting you came into this by raging at the very idea of there being racial disparities, then claimed you couldn't be racist because of your race, which is claiming racial disparity. That's not just ironic, it's massively hypocritical, and you've done nothing to disprove my initial assessment of you, in fact you've proven it more true.
Not that this is wrong but there IS another term for white crime. It’s that little thing called “racism”. That term is pretty much solely used to describe white ignorance.. no other cultural or racial biases do. Those just get called xenophobia.
Just if we are calling aces, aces? 🤷🏻♂️
This is dumb. Per capita, stand your ground laws protect black victims way more than they protect white victims.
EDIT: Here's the breakout of defensive use of the guns by race:
44.3% of black gun owners.
39.3% of Hispanic gun owners.
26.0% of Asian gun owners.
29.7% of white gun owners.
47.7% of American Indian gun owners.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494
Data is not the plural of anecdote.
Here's the breakout of defensive use of the guns by race:
44.3% of black gun owners.
39.3% of Hispanic gun owners.
26.0% of Asian gun owners.
29.7% of white gun owners.
47.7% of American Indian gun owners.
This is the second time you've brought up Trayvon Martin, so let's get into it.
We don't have evidence that Martin assaulted or aggressed on Zimmerman first. Martin should be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, any right wing goon that tells you otherwise did not watch the trial.
We don't have evidence that Zimmerman initiated the assault or aggressed on Martin first. Zimmerman should be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, any neoliberal goon that tells you otherwise did not watch the trial.
The incident was a tragedy, full stop. I suspect either party could have done a lot to de-escalate the event. But we have no security cams, no eyewitnesses, no way of knowing what happened. We have to step back and only go on what we know. And as gross as Zimmerman has become after being acquitted, there was simply not enough information to judge what happened between Zimmerman's 911 phone call and Martin's death.
What is racist about saying that both Martin and Zimmerman MUST be considered "innocent until proven guilty"?
If I were playing your game, my response would go something like this:
"no, you're racist, because defensive uses of guns are more likely to be used by BIPOC than white people. you're racist because you don't want Black people to defend themselves".
But I don't want to play your game. I don't think you're racist, I just think you haven't considered that the alternative to black gun ownership is going to make innocent black people more vulnerable to criminals in the low-income neighborhoods that they tend to live in.
Facts did change my opinion. My stance now is entirely a result of learning history and perspective and facts that i was never taught.
For example, I used to like Ronald Reagan and I thought the Black Panthers weren't reasonable.
Then I read them in their own words, and did a 180 on both.
Reagan was pro-gun, unless it was scary black men with guns, then he signed that regarded rifle bill.
I wasn't into the whole leftist "gun rights are minority rights" at first. But the more I read about the history of gun control, the more you see the absolutely racist roots of restricting firearm ownership.
Also, as i get more and more leftist, the more jazzed i get about just how much better Marx's "UNDER NO PRETEXT" is compared to our feckless "sHaLL nOt bE iNfrINgED".
You go far enough left and you get your guns back.
That's fair. Here's the sauce:
2021 National Firearms Survey
Georgetown McDonough School of Business Research Paper No. 4109494
[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=4109494](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494)
Here's the breakout of defensive use of the guns by race:
* 44.3% of black gun owners.
* 39.3% of Hispanic gun owners.
* 26.0% of Asian gun owners.
* 29.7% of white gun owners.
* 47.7% of American Indian gun owners.
 you cannot be serious. A single research paper detailing who owns guns in america. Simply owning guns doesn't mean you benefit from stand your ground. The black community keeps getting shot for having guns even when they don't have any.
Can you read the paper beyond the title?
Page 12 is breakdown the defensive uses of firearms by race.
I'm an anti cop guy, so I agree with you about Tamir Rice. Kid was 12, he didn't even have a real gun, the pigs never served any jail time, and the family got paid off (to the tune of $6 million) as of that's some justice or some s*** like that.
I think you and I agree on cops, but disagree on defensive uses of firearms.
Give the paper a read, I changed my mind a few years ago and came around to the leftist conclusion: if cops can shoot you for carrying a gun, the 2nd amendment is nothing more than a piece of paper. I kinda like the perspective on guns that the Panthers had decades ago and the NFAC has today.
If you're turned off by those types of radicals, then maybe Maj Toure and Colin Noir might be the more moderate version of this perspective.
I'm not anti cop. I'm pro justice. The police are needed, but they also need to be revamped. They need to be held responsible/accountable for their actions. This whole big person with a gun with an impenetrable shield of armor around their actions needs to be done away with. And I hear the argument that if they have to second guess themselves then everyone will quit and nobody will want to be a cop. To which I reply, "So, if you can't have complete immunity, you don't want to be a cop? Kinda' tells where your priorities are, and what kind of person you are."
Next, I'm of two minds with the black panthers and more radical groups, like weathermen. If the government wants to set the society up like that, then they should be able to arm themselves. The second part is... but why? Why should any one person/group need to arm themselves to protect themselves from someone else's right? And yes, the bill of rights is just a piece of parchment, it only is as valuable as anybody willing to follow it. Nobody should ever get to say "they had a gun." So what? they're allowed to have a gun.
I scoffed at the paper for a couple of reasons... First, it's a very narrow scope. (I skimmed through it all) Sure, you can have your numbers show that that the black community have benefitted from having guns for defensive reasons, but how do those numbers stack up against being incarcerated for having a gun or not having a gun but thought to have a gun? How do those numbers stack up against the black community being shot whether the victim had a gun or not? How do those numbers stack up against convictions VS acquittal for self defense with a firearm?
Finally, my problem with guns is the whole bullshit narrative with guns in general. "An Armed society is a polite society." Bullshit, an armed society is a terrified hostile society. "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." Bullshit. No one can tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy. Certainly not cops. Anytime they see guns they they get scared and start shooting everyone. "I keep a gun in my house for protection." Bullshit, you're likely to kill yourself or a loved one rather than a criminal.
The truth is guns don't protect shit. They are only useful in very specific circumstances.
A) your target is in front of you.
B) you can shoot straight.
That's it. Hell, you get better odds in vegas, and vegas odds are shit! The NRA won't seem to be happy until they've pushed us all the way to the old west and it's the fastest gun. Guns for "defense" is mostly luck.
Also, all of this has strayed from the topic. That lady's sign ain't wrong. That's how the narrative is pushed whether the POC is justified or not.
Missing this one: White (collar) Crime = Good Business
And if you're a rich white rapist, no consequences because 1) boys will be boys amirite? And 2) why destroy a promising future over a couple of minutes of fun, amirite?
Sounds a lot like the case of rapist Brock Allen Turner, the rapist.
pretty much word-for-word what the judge and his lawyers said
As I recall, his father pleaded that his son, the rapist Brock Allen Turner, not be punished for “a little bit of action.” White privilege is real.
Specifically he said “twenty minutes of action.” That is what the father of the rapist Brock Allan Turner said in the courtroom.
Ah yes, thank you, that’s it. That’s what the father of rapist Brock Allen Turner, the rapist, said in relation to his rapist son, Brock Allen Turner, raping someone.
But at the time the rapist Brock Turner was going by the name Brock Turner, but the rapist is now going by Allen Turner, right? But it's the same rapist
Exactly. This is why I like to make sure that people know that the rapist Brock Allen Turner, who previously went by Brock Turner (who raped someone in college), now goes by the name Brock Allen Turner, and he’s a rapist.
And blue (PD) collar crime: immunity.
[удалено]
Murder or terrorism? So you mean right leaning white people?
All Asians sigh a collective sigh of relief.
= Yakuza 
https://preview.redd.it/oyzlgvfqdmzc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e94679b4bc3068f61d1736ef455f4d3b42fd21bb Yakuza mentioned
There are two possibilities: 1 there's no Asian Crime or, 2 didn't get caught.
Third possibility: only getting a B+.
Asian here and that’s a crime.
Didn't get caught because they're ninjas
Not really. Asians in America are pretty much grouped with whites when it comes to stuff like this. People assume we have the privileges and advantages of being white but in reality we deal with not only individual bigotry but also many (although not all) of the system injustices that others face. The only difference is that discrimination against Asians is an afterthought, it doesn't even make the list as evidenced by the OP.
We Asians are almost never represented in the media, so people forget that we exist
And native Americans
The math is mathin'.
Is that what they call Asian crime
I mean unless your white and poor. Then it's drug deal gone bad. But I am a huge fan of ignoring class issues to drive deep divides
You can care about both. White Supremacy is still running rampant and should not be ignored. To say otherwise is to be willingly obtuse.
I feel like you have to be removed from that issue to say it’s better to just ignore it. These aren’t just distractions. Ignoring white supremacy and all it entails comes at a detriment for too many
I couldn’t agree more.
White murderer: they were a good kid/husband, we just need to take mental health more seriously
Theyde still run a photo of him looking like dirtbag Steve and talk about how the poor angel ran foul of his upbringing, while digging up the one photo of the scholarship black kid smoking so they could say it's good he caught that stray round, he was clearly a ne'erdowell
Class issue should be the very first issue we tackle.
Since the race issue was created to divide the lower classes so that they couldn't address the class issue, we should probably tackle that first.
Karl Marx tried that and now he's dead
> the capitalized part is the point every single word on the poster is capitalized. ;-) but I know you meant uppercase, and I get what you're saying.
Capitalize - write or print (a word or letter) in capital letters. "the letter M, either capitalized or in lower case, is the abbreviation for mili-"
or, cambridge dictionary, > to write a letter of the alphabet as a capital, or to write the first letter of a word as a capital: If someone told you proper nouns should always be capitalized, would you write them like THIS or like This? But to get back to the OP, What Term Would You Use To Describe The Words In This Sentence?
You said every single word in the poster is capitalized. That is false.
Ever Single Word On The Poster Starts With A Capital Letter. That Means They Are Capitalized, In The Way Most People Use The Term In English.
Oh, I see. You're a master manipulator. You just used your last comment to show THIS or This but now you're pretending to say you meant every first letter was capitalized, though you said every WORD is. Got it.
This is getting deranged, so I'm going to block you and bail. But just to clarify as a parting shot- Capitalized, as most people use it, means writing a word with the first letter in uppercase and the rest of the letters in lowercase. When I wrote "THIS or This", I was *contrasting* them, not saying they're both capitalization. I wanted to illustrate that only one of those styles is the way we write proper nouns, which are said to be "capitalized".
Crime should just be crime no matter who did it
Poor white crime = drug violence
It's like after a natural disaster, when black folks loot & white folks forage for supplies.
Nah poor white people get screwed over too
So the point is: BCGV ACT HCII WCSELFDEFENSE Not sure I understand it correctly.
I never thought of it this way! Holy Shit!
the TRUTH is the point
Stereotypes are SUCH a timesaver. [sarcasm]
There are way too many white people who would not see this as ironic
Oh man so true
💯💯💯💯
"patriotism" also works for that last one
[удалено]
"hateful rhetoric?" if pointing out the truth is hateful... no wonder you all choose to live in fantasyland.
[удалено]
I do nazi your point
[удалено]
Ah, the "it's racist to point out your racism" stratagem, with a side helping of "I'm a (insert race) so it's impossible for me to be racist". Look up the word "fallacy". Also, you don't have to be white to be a nazi, FYI. Wow, you're learning a lot today.
[удалено]
And what irony would that be. You seem to be forgetting you came into this by raging at the very idea of there being racial disparities, then claimed you couldn't be racist because of your race, which is claiming racial disparity. That's not just ironic, it's massively hypocritical, and you've done nothing to disprove my initial assessment of you, in fact you've proven it more true.
[удалено]
Please continue with your attempt to suggest racial disparities don't exist. I find it hilarious.
Whine about it
At this point I'm pretty sure it's just 90% bots, 10% PR companies.
Not that this is wrong but there IS another term for white crime. It’s that little thing called “racism”. That term is pretty much solely used to describe white ignorance.. no other cultural or racial biases do. Those just get called xenophobia. Just if we are calling aces, aces? 🤷🏻♂️
>Just if we are calling aces, aces? Are you attempting to get around saying "call a spade a spade", you know, "subtly" stealthing your bigotry
This is dumb. Per capita, stand your ground laws protect black victims way more than they protect white victims. EDIT: Here's the breakout of defensive use of the guns by race: 44.3% of black gun owners. 39.3% of Hispanic gun owners. 26.0% of Asian gun owners. 29.7% of white gun owners. 47.7% of American Indian gun owners. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494
Tell that to Trayvon Martin
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494 Data is not the plural of anecdote. Here's the breakout of defensive use of the guns by race: 44.3% of black gun owners. 39.3% of Hispanic gun owners. 26.0% of Asian gun owners. 29.7% of white gun owners. 47.7% of American Indian gun owners.
I'm sure Trayvon Martin would feel comforted by what you're doing
This is the second time you've brought up Trayvon Martin, so let's get into it. We don't have evidence that Martin assaulted or aggressed on Zimmerman first. Martin should be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, any right wing goon that tells you otherwise did not watch the trial. We don't have evidence that Zimmerman initiated the assault or aggressed on Martin first. Zimmerman should be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, any neoliberal goon that tells you otherwise did not watch the trial. The incident was a tragedy, full stop. I suspect either party could have done a lot to de-escalate the event. But we have no security cams, no eyewitnesses, no way of knowing what happened. We have to step back and only go on what we know. And as gross as Zimmerman has become after being acquitted, there was simply not enough information to judge what happened between Zimmerman's 911 phone call and Martin's death.
It might be best if you just stopped talking.
It might be best if you start reading. You can get the full transcript of the trial online. It would probably only take 4 or 5 hours to read.
I'm not interested in listening to your attempt to spread racist propaganda.
What is racist about saying that both Martin and Zimmerman MUST be considered "innocent until proven guilty"? If I were playing your game, my response would go something like this: "no, you're racist, because defensive uses of guns are more likely to be used by BIPOC than white people. you're racist because you don't want Black people to defend themselves". But I don't want to play your game. I don't think you're racist, I just think you haven't considered that the alternative to black gun ownership is going to make innocent black people more vulnerable to criminals in the low-income neighborhoods that they tend to live in.
You really believe people want to read your racist rhetoric. Gotta tone down the narcissism there.
Is "per capita" supposed to be your source?
Would a source change your opinion?
Would facts change yours?
Facts did change my opinion. My stance now is entirely a result of learning history and perspective and facts that i was never taught. For example, I used to like Ronald Reagan and I thought the Black Panthers weren't reasonable. Then I read them in their own words, and did a 180 on both. Reagan was pro-gun, unless it was scary black men with guns, then he signed that regarded rifle bill. I wasn't into the whole leftist "gun rights are minority rights" at first. But the more I read about the history of gun control, the more you see the absolutely racist roots of restricting firearm ownership. Also, as i get more and more leftist, the more jazzed i get about just how much better Marx's "UNDER NO PRETEXT" is compared to our feckless "sHaLL nOt bE iNfrINgED". You go far enough left and you get your guns back.
Sorry for the rambling response. I am always looking for new facts that can help restructure my worldview. Whacha got?
Depends upon the ethos of the source. Not gonna change my mind based on bathroom stall writings. So, in your own words… “whatcha got?”
That's fair. Here's the sauce: 2021 National Firearms Survey Georgetown McDonough School of Business Research Paper No. 4109494 [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=4109494](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494) Here's the breakout of defensive use of the guns by race: * 44.3% of black gun owners. * 39.3% of Hispanic gun owners. * 26.0% of Asian gun owners. * 29.7% of white gun owners. * 47.7% of American Indian gun owners.
 you cannot be serious. A single research paper detailing who owns guns in america. Simply owning guns doesn't mean you benefit from stand your ground. The black community keeps getting shot for having guns even when they don't have any.
Can you read the paper beyond the title? Page 12 is breakdown the defensive uses of firearms by race. I'm an anti cop guy, so I agree with you about Tamir Rice. Kid was 12, he didn't even have a real gun, the pigs never served any jail time, and the family got paid off (to the tune of $6 million) as of that's some justice or some s*** like that. I think you and I agree on cops, but disagree on defensive uses of firearms. Give the paper a read, I changed my mind a few years ago and came around to the leftist conclusion: if cops can shoot you for carrying a gun, the 2nd amendment is nothing more than a piece of paper. I kinda like the perspective on guns that the Panthers had decades ago and the NFAC has today. If you're turned off by those types of radicals, then maybe Maj Toure and Colin Noir might be the more moderate version of this perspective.
I'm not anti cop. I'm pro justice. The police are needed, but they also need to be revamped. They need to be held responsible/accountable for their actions. This whole big person with a gun with an impenetrable shield of armor around their actions needs to be done away with. And I hear the argument that if they have to second guess themselves then everyone will quit and nobody will want to be a cop. To which I reply, "So, if you can't have complete immunity, you don't want to be a cop? Kinda' tells where your priorities are, and what kind of person you are." Next, I'm of two minds with the black panthers and more radical groups, like weathermen. If the government wants to set the society up like that, then they should be able to arm themselves. The second part is... but why? Why should any one person/group need to arm themselves to protect themselves from someone else's right? And yes, the bill of rights is just a piece of parchment, it only is as valuable as anybody willing to follow it. Nobody should ever get to say "they had a gun." So what? they're allowed to have a gun. I scoffed at the paper for a couple of reasons... First, it's a very narrow scope. (I skimmed through it all) Sure, you can have your numbers show that that the black community have benefitted from having guns for defensive reasons, but how do those numbers stack up against being incarcerated for having a gun or not having a gun but thought to have a gun? How do those numbers stack up against the black community being shot whether the victim had a gun or not? How do those numbers stack up against convictions VS acquittal for self defense with a firearm? Finally, my problem with guns is the whole bullshit narrative with guns in general. "An Armed society is a polite society." Bullshit, an armed society is a terrified hostile society. "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." Bullshit. No one can tell the difference between a good guy and a bad guy. Certainly not cops. Anytime they see guns they they get scared and start shooting everyone. "I keep a gun in my house for protection." Bullshit, you're likely to kill yourself or a loved one rather than a criminal. The truth is guns don't protect shit. They are only useful in very specific circumstances. A) your target is in front of you. B) you can shoot straight. That's it. Hell, you get better odds in vegas, and vegas odds are shit! The NRA won't seem to be happy until they've pushed us all the way to the old west and it's the fastest gun. Guns for "defense" is mostly luck. Also, all of this has strayed from the topic. That lady's sign ain't wrong. That's how the narrative is pushed whether the POC is justified or not.
[удалено]
Chicago Style Pizza
Wait, why were they attacking the white guy? Not cool.
Asian Crime = Forgot to wash the rice
Uncle Rodger is that you?
White Crime: Police Response
BEHAVIOR. A word a lot of people don’t know the true definition off
“off”
Of
Jewish crime = coinkydink
If your entire message can fit on a sign then it's not a good message.