Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #481230 > unrolled thread

Another shooting in France, another Muslim

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Another shooting in France, another Muslim SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-12-11 20:55 -0500
    Re: Another shooting in France, another Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-11 19:45 -0700
    Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-12 07:08 -0600
      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-12 13:48 +0000
      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-12-13 03:16 +0000
        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-12 19:36 -0800
        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-12 20:59 -0700
        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 07:12 -0600
          Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-13 05:41 -0800
          Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 15:52 +0000
            Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 11:17 -0600
              Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 17:36 +0000
                Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-12-13 12:53 -0500
                  Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim % <%> - 2018-12-13 11:02 -0700
                  Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 14:04 -0600
                    Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 20:13 +0000
                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-14 07:12 -0600
                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-14 13:08 -0500
                        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-14 18:37 +0000
                          Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-14 14:04 -0500
                            Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-14 19:17 +0000
                              Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-14 13:47 -0600
                              Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-14 15:41 -0500
                                Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-17 15:06 +0000
                                  Re: Another shooting in France, another MUSLIM SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-12-17 10:55 -0500
                                    Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-17 10:00 -0600
                                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-17 11:28 -0700
                                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-18 03:58 +0000
                                        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-17 21:02 -0700
                                  Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-17 11:07 -0500
                                    Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-17 18:11 +0000
                    Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-13 15:03 -0800
                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2018-12-13 18:16 -0500
                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-13 17:56 -0800
                        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-14 07:39 -0800
                          Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-14 08:23 -0800
                            Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-14 09:38 -0800
                              Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-12-14 10:02 -0800
                                Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-12-14 14:31 -0800
                                  Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 16:07 -0700
                                Marxism is a sadistic cult. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-17 18:36 -0800
                              Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 13:28 -0700
                          Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 13:17 -0700
                        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 16:10 -0700
                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-14 07:09 -0600
                        Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 16:12 -0700
                      Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-12-14 13:16 -0700
                Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 12:07 -0600
                  Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-12-13 19:41 +0000
                    Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-13 14:01 -0600

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#481523 — Marxism is a sadistic cult.

> " Crime rates and inequality are positively correlated within 
>   countries and, particularly, between countries, and this 
>   correlation reflects causation from inequality to crime rates, 
>   even after controlling for other crime determinants. " 

Marxism is a sadistic cult.

The wealth and wisdom of a nation is reflected
in its birth rate -- from Singapore (.83/woman) and Macau, 
at the top, to N_iger (6.49/woman) and Angola at the bottom.
  Jeff-Relf.Me/Global.Fertility.Rates.1970.2014.PNG

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481375 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

On 12/14/18 10:38 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 9:23:50 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 10:40:00 AM UTC-5, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:56:35 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:03:46 PM UTC-5, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 1:04:24 PM UTC-7, chrisv wrote:
>>>>>> SilverSlimer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The moment anyone is actually willing to read chrisv's political opinion
>>>>>>> is the moment Western Civilization officially dies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's really funny, coming from you, Slimer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tell us, again, how the criminal justice system in the US has a racial
>>>>>> bias, and that it favors blacks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll see your 'bogus bias' claim and raise you one glaring reality...
>>>>>
>>>>> "According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans
>>>>> accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008"
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait, that can't be right! Or can it? After all, blacks are only about 13.5%
>>>>> of the total population. Ah, I almost forgot...
>>>>
>>>> Forgot to read this section of the same reference....right?
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Explanations_for_racial_discrepancies>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Plus there's also this section which mentions economics a lot:
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Modern_theories_of_causation>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (Hint:  statistical distributions of wealth-poverty vs race).
>>>>
>>>> And this is referenced too:
>>>>
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system#Causes_of_racial_disproportionality>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So no, it isn't as cut and dry a skin color issue as you're trying to make it.
>>>
>>> You seem to believe you're making a counter argument that excuses,
>>> justifies or somehow rationalizes the bizarrely gigantic disparity but
>>> I'm not seeing an actual argument from you.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>>
>> Your claim is effectively that crime only correlates to race.
> 
> LOL! "claim"? Where?

Your repeated focus on skin color / race and discounting of other 
factors, of course.

Your direct claim, fully unsupported, that liberals ignore the issues 
around this (which are largely economic disparity and racial injustice 
in this country) when the facts are conservatives are the ones who are 
so afraid to face the issues they cry and play victim when people 
peacefully and respectfully kneel to bring attention to these injustices.

>> What I've listed shows that many other factors have been identified.
> 
> So use them in an actual argument if you have one.
> 
>>> My take is... you could ... trying to explain it away with what
>>> it appears you're trying to use to do that.
>>
>> I *could* ... but it is your claim
> 
> Anyone can clearly see that I didn't make a "claim", I showed a stat,
> one I labeled as a "glaring reality" (and that part is called 'opinion').

You focused on the color of skin and discounted other stats tied to it. 
You absolutely are pushing a bias -- one based on race. You can try to 
pretend you are not, but that is just nonsense.

> If you want to argue why the stat is wrong, fine, but don't lie
> that I've done more than post it. 

You are lying when you claim you have not. And you even claimed -hh was 
posting a "counter argument", which suggests you know you ARE pushing an 
"argument" -- but now when your racist crap is being pointed out you are 
trying to say you did not claim anything.

> If there's any kind of a "claim"
> here it's inherent in the reality of the numbers, a claim no one
> needs to actually make because it's *that* glaring*. 

Ah, numbers. Research. Let's look at the related research... which you 
WILL run from because it does not back your bigoted worldview.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00230.x/full
——
The meta-analysis shows with strong consistency that minority suspects 
are more likely to be arrested than White suspects.
——

https://sites.hks.harvard.edu/criminaljustice-backup/publications/Police-on-Police_Shootings.pdf
——
Specifically, we are persuaded by evidence that both police officers and 
members of the general public display unconscious biases that lead them 
to be quicker to “shoot” images of armed black people than of armed 
white people in computer‐based simulations testing shoot/don’t‐shoot 
decision‐making.
——

http://www.rshroff.com/uploads/6/2/3/5/62359383/frisky.pdf
——
We further find that blacks and Hispanics were disproportionately 
stopped in these low hit rate contexts, a phenomenon that we trace to 
two factors: (1) lower thresholds for stopping individuals—regardless of 
race—in high-crime, predominately minority areas, particularly public 
housing; and (2) lower thresholds for stopping minorities relative to 
similarly situated whites.
——

https://washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/janfeb-2014/driving-while-black
——
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows 
how police target African Americans on highways across America.
——

http://sfblueribbonpanel.com/sites/default/files/BRP_Exec_Summ.pdf
——
While the SFPD’s policies prohibiting biased policing are in line with 
best practices, available statistics indicate racial disparities in its 
stops, searches, and arrests. Black and Hispanic people are more likely 
to be searched without consent than any other group, and of those 
searched, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest “hit rates” (i.e., 
the rate at which searches found contraband).
——

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/frisk9.pdf
——
In the period for which we had data, the NYPD’s records indicate that 
they were stopping blacks and Hispanics more often than whites, in 
comparison to both the populations of these groups and the best 
estimates of the rate of crimes committed by each group. After 
controlling for precincts, this pattern still holds. More specifically, 
for violent crimes and weapons offenses, blacks and Hispanics are 
stopped about twice as often as whites.
——

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2012.01272.x/abstract
——
The pattern of racially selective enforcement suggests the potential for 
systemic violations of the Fourteenth Amendment's prohibition on racial 
discrimination.
——

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2010.01190.x/abstract
——
The racial skew, questionable constitutionality, and limited efficiency 
of marijuana enforcement in detecting serious crimes suggest that 
nonwhite New Yorkers bear a racial tax from contemporary policing 
strategy, a social cost not offset by any substantial observed benefits 
to public safety.
——

https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/assets/files/Expert_Report_JeffreyFagan.pdf
——
Specifically, I provide evidence that the NYPD has engaged in patterns 
of unconstitutional stops of City residents that are more likely to 
affect Black and Latino citizens.
——

http://policingequity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/CPE_SoJ_Race-Arrests-UoF_2016-07-08-1130.pdf
——
That racially disparate crime rate is an insufficient explanation of 
racially disparate use of force rates for this sample of police 
departments. Given that these departments range widely in size and 
represent urban cities, suburban counties, and transportation police in 
geographically diverse jurisdictions, the results are suggestive that 
these findings may generalize beyond the sample.
——

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
——
The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of 
unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the 
probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49 
times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on 
average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that 
there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of 
racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative 
risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more. Finally, analysis of police shooting 
data as a function of county-level predictors suggests that racial bias 
in police shootings is most likely to emerge in police departments in 
larger metropolitan counties with low median incomes and a sizable 
portion of black residents, especially when there is high financial 
inequality in that county. There is no relationship between county-level 
racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific 
crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings 
in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime 
rates.
——

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no
——
“The only thing that was significant in predicting whether someone shot 
and killed by police was unarmed was whether or not they were black. ... 
Crime variables did not matter in terms of predicting whether the person 
killed was unarmed.”
——

https://chicagopatf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/PATF_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_4_13_16-1.pdf
——
Moreover, black and Hispanic drivers were searched approximately four 
times as often as white drivers, yet CPD’s own data show that contraband 
was found on white drivers twice as often as black and Hispanic drivers.
——

https://www.aclu-il.org/en/press-releases/traffic-stop-data-shows-persistent-patterns-racial-bias-according-new-report
——
The data reveals, as an example, that statewide across Illinois, African 
American and Latino drivers are nearly twice as likely as white drivers 
to be asked during a routine traffic stop for "consent" to have their 
car searched. Yet white motorists are 49% more likely than African 
American motorists to have contraband discovered during a consent search 
by law enforcement, and 56% more likely when compared to Latinos.
——

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/us/racial-disparity-traffic-stops-driving-black.html
——
Officers were more likely to stop black drivers for no discernible 
reason. And they were more likely to use force if the driver was black, 
even when they did not encounter physical resistance.
——

http://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf
——
On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty 
percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions 
with police. Adding controls that account for important context and 
civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities.
——

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/08/us/study-supports-suspicion-that-police-use-of-force-is-more-likely-for-blacks.html
——
African-Americans are far more likely than whites and other groups to be 
the victims of use of force by the police, even when racial disparities 
in crime are taken into account.
——

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550616633505
——
Regression analyses confirmed that police used less force with highly 
stereotypical Whites, and this protective effect was stronger than the 
effect for non-Whites. Results suggest that intragroup bias is a 
protective factor for Whites, but not for non-Whites, providing an 
additional route through which racial disparities in policing operate.
——

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/12/16/spd_findletter_12-16-11.pdf
——
Analysis of limited data suggests that, in certain precincts, S.P.D. 
officers may stop a disproportionate number of people of color where no 
offense or other police incident occurred.
——

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/15/oakland-police-stopping-and-handcuffing-disproportionate-numbers-of-blacks-work-to-restore-trust
——
And in Oakland, Calif., a new study found that if you are African 
American and encounter a police officer, there is a 25 percent chance 
you will be handcuffed, often in front of family or friends, even though 
you are not being arrested.
——

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo
——
The resumes with white-sounding names spurred 50 percent more callbacks 
than the ones with black-sounding names.
——

http://www.pnas.org/content/114/41/10870.full
——
We find no change in the levels of discrimination against African 
Americans since 1989, although we do find some indication of declining 
discrimination against Latinos. The results document a striking 
persistence of racial discrimination in US labor markets.
——

http://fortune.com/2016/07/19/mortgage-lending-racial-disparities
——
Blacks Are Still Significantly Less Likely to Get Approved for a 
Mortgage than Whites
——

https://phys.org/news/2015-08-african-americans-discriminated-access-local.html
——
Study shows African Americans discriminated against in access to US 
local public services
——

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
——
Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living 
in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in 
adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a 
sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children.

White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys 
raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay 
wealthy in their own adult households.
…
The research makes clear that there is something unique about the 
obstacles black males face. The gap between Hispanics and whites is 
narrower, and their incomes will converge within a couple of generations 
if mobility stays the same. Asian-Americans earn more than whites raised 
at the same income level, or about the same when first-generation 
immigrants are excluded. Only Native Americans have an income gap 
comparable to African-Americans. But the disparities are widest for 
black boys.
—

> You're
> all righteously perched to scream "racism" but what you
> won't do is address how the poverty you're trying to use, to
> justify murder to this insane extent, is something the Dem
> party had anything to do with. 

You CLAIM he is is seeking to "justify murder". Do you have ANY backing 
for that. What is being noted is causes for it... things which tie into 
it which you want to run from so you can push your racist worldview.

> Now *that* is a "claim"... one
> I'm extremely confident in making in regards to how I *know*
> you will argue because you have a history of excusing Dems.

You made a claim you will NEVER back: the idea he (or others) are trying 
to "justify murder". It is a lie on your part. Nobody is JUSTIFYING it, 
they are EXPLAINING the factors which evidence suggest is tied to it.

>>> <shrug>... no matter how you slice it, you're gonna need more than
>>> mere  'theories' to convince people why this isn't an alarming issue
>>> (one that is, somehow, rarely spoken about).
>>
>> Not theories, but just the same data
> 
> This is the part where you use that "data" in an argument that seeks
> to 'explain away' the insanely huge disparity shown by the stat.

I post a lot of related research, above. But you WILL run from it. Does 
not fit your victim-mentality racist worldview. You want to be the 
victim, or at least be seen as one.

>> "Income inequality alone explained 74% of the variance in murder
>> rates
> 
> Personally, I don't buy the "Income inequality" argument  for
> murder because there are other groups who are poor that aren't
> murdering at the same rate. You're free to selectively buy it but
> I can see why you'd feel the need to (as I address below) but good
> luck convincing others.

Ah, so the evidence here is to be ignored... but you want your evidence 
to be accepted... but you also want your claim to not be seen as a claim 
so you can distance yourself from it.... you are just in your normal 
game mode.

>> and half of the aggravated assaults. However, social capital
>> had an even stronger association and, by itself, accounted for 82%
>> of homicides and 61% of assaults."
>>
>> <https://www.zippia.com/advice/crime-income-inequality/>
> 
> Yeah... about that...
> 
> Back in the 60's almost half of black families were in or were
> approaching what was then our 'middle class'.  Have you ever
> heard of the Moynihan report, the one that Johnson based a
> famous speech on to deaf ears, that rightfully (it was one thing
> he totally got right) traced a lot of black problems back to Jim
> Crow era laws and beyond (as you are alluding to here)? Are
> you aware that Dems controlled the House and the Senate
> (sometimes in a supermajority) from 1955 (just as civil rights
> were starting to get 'interesting') until 1981?
> 
> So... we have issues that are rightfully traced back decades
> earlier and a political party that somehow managed to fritter
> away the dream of 'middle class' for the black family just as
> they  began to recover from issues traced to 'the bad old Dem'
> era. Dems were in majority for decades, why could they only
> make things worse for black communities? Hello? This is the
> group you *claimed* you were championing, WTF happened?!
> 
> Now conditions are even worse, Dems not only want to pretend
> the history we all know happened never happened... but they also
> want to pretend that their subsequent social policies, which they
> claimed would "help" the black community's family structure,
> didn't destroy a notable rise in that community just as it was
> starting to show very positive results.

Lots of claims there made by you. Now show some support.

And off you run again... as you do below:

> (snip stuff that has nothing to do with Dem creation/interference
> and the U.S.)

Yup... you just run. And that was when -hh used YOUR source to show your 
CLAIM was not as simply as you present it... not JUST about race.

Then you cry when it is noted you push racist crap.



-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481374 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

On 12/14/18 8:39 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:56:35 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:03:46 PM UTC-5, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 1:04:24 PM UTC-7, chrisv wrote:
>>>> SilverSlimer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The moment anyone is actually willing to read chrisv's political opinion
>>>>> is the moment Western Civilization officially dies.
>>>>
>>>> That's really funny, coming from you, Slimer.
>>>>
>>>> Tell us, again, how the criminal justice system in the US has a racial
>>>> bias, and that it favors blacks.
>>>
>>> I'll see your 'bogus bias' claim and raise you one glaring reality...
>>>
>>> "According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans
>>> accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008"
>>>
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States>
>>>
>>> Wait, that can't be right! Or can it? After all, blacks are only about 13.5%
>>> of the total population. Ah, I almost forgot...
>>
>> Forgot to read this section of the same reference....right?
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Explanations_for_racial_discrepancies>
>>
>>
>> Plus there's also this section which mentions economics a lot:
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Modern_theories_of_causation>
>>
>>
>> (Hint:  statistical distributions of wealth-poverty vs race).
>>
>> And this is referenced too:
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system#Causes_of_racial_disproportionality>
>>
>>
>> So no, it isn't as cut and dry a skin color issue as you're trying to make it.
> 
> You seem to believe you're making a counter argument that excuses,
> justifies or somehow rationalizes the bizarrely gigantic disparity 

He notes why this disparity likely exists -- what the evidence supports. 
Your argument, as you call it, is not even an argument... it is you 
focusing on skin color alone.

> but
> I'm not seeing an actual argument from you. My take is... you could
> cut that number in half and then in half again and still fall flat trying
> to explain it away with what it appears you're trying to use to do that.
> <shrug>... no matter how you slice it, you're gonna need more than
> mere  'theories' to convince people why this isn't an alarming issue
> (one that is, somehow, rarely spoken about).

The economic disparity and racial injustice in this country IS an 
alarming issue... but conservatives play victim and cry when faced even 
with people peacefully kneeling to bring attention to it.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481380 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

On 12/13/18 6:56 PM, -hh wrote:
> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 6:03:46 PM UTC-5, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 1:04:24 PM UTC-7, chrisv wrote:
>>> SilverSlimer wrote:
>>>
>>>> The moment anyone is actually willing to read chrisv's political opinion
>>>> is the moment Western Civilization officially dies.
>>>
>>> That's really funny, coming from you, Slimer.
>>>
>>> Tell us, again, how the criminal justice system in the US has a racial
>>> bias, and that it favors blacks.
>>
>> I'll see your 'bogus bias' claim and raise you one glaring reality...
>>
>> "According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans
>> accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008"
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States>
>>
>> Wait, that can't be right! Or can it? After all, blacks are only about 13.5%
>> of the total population. Ah, I almost forgot...
> 
> Forgot to read this section of the same reference....right?
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Explanations_for_racial_discrepancies>
> 
> 
> Plus there's also this section which mentions economics a lot:
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Modern_theories_of_causation>
> 
> 
> (Hint:  statistical distributions of wealth-poverty vs race).
> 
> And this is referenced too:
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system#Causes_of_racial_disproportionality>
> 
> 
> So no, it isn't as cut and dry a skin color issue as you're trying to make it.
> 
> 
> -hh
> 

Carroll wants to focus SOLELY on how it is blacks and wants to put them 
in a bad light. The fact they are economically disadvantaged and as a 
whole face discrimination on a daily basis he could not even imagine 
handling for a single day is of no consequence to him.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481347 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

Steve Carroll wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> I couldn't make this stuff up, folks!
>> 
>> If you'll believe Slimer's right-wing propaganda, you'll believe
>> *anything*.
>
>Good luck finding any when left-wing propaganda is being sprayed 
>from every possible direction (main stream media, academia, all the
>entertainment industries, all the big social sites, etc.).

Bias is one thing.  Ridiculous lies are something else, altogether.

I may be biased against Micro$oft and its supporters, but I would
never lower myself to outright lying to attack them, like the DumFSck
troll does to the Linux supporters.  That fscking liar actually
claimed that 'Linux "experts" say Linux is perfect. (period)'.

You just don't see FOSS advocates attacking with ridiculous lies, like
'Wintrolls think that Windows is perfect.'  I mean, what's the point
of spewing obvious lies, like they do?

And, get this, when Dumfsck was challenged to prove the above claim,
he responded with 'www.google.com/search?q="Linux+is+perfect."'  That
was his "proof", that Linux experts actually think that Linux is
"perfect".

And you know what?  Not *one* of Dumfsck's shitty pals stepped out of
line, to denounce his idiocy and his lies.

-- 
"What -hh said about Photoshop - expensive, waste, Gimp does the same
for free - is exactly the written position of most if not all
"advocates" on cola."  -  DumFSck, lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481381 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

On 12/14/18 6:09 AM, chrisv wrote:
> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> I couldn't make this stuff up, folks!
>>>
>>> If you'll believe Slimer's right-wing propaganda, you'll believe
>>> *anything*.
>>
>> Good luck finding any when left-wing propaganda is being sprayed
> from every possible direction (main stream media, academia, all the
>> entertainment industries, all the big social sites, etc.).
> 
> Bias is one thing.  Ridiculous lies are something else, altogether.

And notice he does not even list what this "left-wing propaganda" is. A 
lot of people call SCIENCE that... specifically climate science but also 
other areas.

> I may be biased against Micro$oft and its supporters, but I would
> never lower myself to outright lying to attack them, like the DumFSck
> troll does to the Linux supporters.  That fscking liar actually
> claimed that 'Linux "experts" say Linux is perfect. (period)'.

I do not know about MS supporters, but you have clearly lied about me. 
But that is not the topic here. :)

> You just don't see FOSS advocates attacking with ridiculous lies, like
> 'Wintrolls think that Windows is perfect.'  I mean, what's the point
> of spewing obvious lies, like they do?
> 
> And, get this, when Dumfsck was challenged to prove the above claim,
> he responded with 'www.google.com/search?q="Linux+is+perfect."'  That
> was his "proof", that Linux experts actually think that Linux is
> "perfect".
> 
> And you know what?  Not *one* of Dumfsck's shitty pals stepped out of
> line, to denounce his idiocy and his lies.
> 


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481373 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

On 12/13/18 4:03 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Thursday, December 13, 2018 at 1:04:24 PM UTC-7, chrisv wrote:
>> SilverSlimer wrote:
>>
>>> The moment anyone is actually willing to read chrisv's political opinion
>>> is the moment Western Civilization officially dies.
>>
>> That's really funny, coming from you, Slimer.
>>
>> Tell us, again, how the criminal justice system in the US has a racial
>> bias, and that it favors blacks.
> 
> I'll see your 'bogus bias' claim and raise you one glaring reality...
> 
> "According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans
> accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008"
> 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States>
> 
> Wait, that can't be right! Or can it? After all, blacks are only about 13.5%
> of the total population. Ah, I almost forgot... that I've read, the majority
> of murders committed by blacks are done by young (age 20-40) males,
> which comprise roughly 4% of the total U.S. population. This is, by any
> stretch, a bone jarring disparity that is often completely neglected by
> left-wing propagandists. Notably, no one had to "make this stuff up"
> (in other words... this isn't propaganda).

Why do you think the stats are as you state, and who do you think 
ignores it? If anything, liberals are the ones who note the economic 
disparity and abuse that blacks tend to face -- surely a big factor in 
those stats -- and conservatives whine when people kneel to protest 
these things.

Liberals are looking to bring focus on the very issues tied to what you 
CLAIM they ignore. In other words, not only is your claim unsupported, I 
think it is easy to argue that liberals are the ones focusing on this 
disparity and conservatives are the ones crying THEY are the victims 
over having people point it out.

>> I couldn't make this stuff up, folks!
>>
>> If you'll believe Slimer's right-wing propaganda, you'll believe
>> *anything*.
> 
> Good luck finding any when left-wing propaganda is being sprayed
> from every possible direction (main stream media, academia, all the
> entertainment industries, all the big social sites, etc.).

What an amazing claim you make. Do you have ANYTHING to back this claim 
of yours? Anything at all?

I think the closest you will get is to note most media sources and 
higher education groups focus on things DEEMED to be liberal... things 
such as evidence and reason and logic. They even back liberal morals 
such as equal rights over the special entitlements conservatives tend to 
want.

But let me give you a chance: back your claim.

My prediction: you will run away.


-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They 
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel 
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481320 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

owl wrote:

> (snip lies)

Is that all you right-wingers have?

-- 
"(Ardour is) free as long as people don't mind compiling from source.
Binaries require payment"  -  "Slimer", lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481322 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> owl wrote:
> 
>> (snip lies)
> 
> Is that all you right-wingers have?
> 

anon@lowtide:~$ cat chrisv.ps
1 .25 .95 setrgbcolor
1 .25 scale
200 900 50 0 360 arc
fill
400 900 50 0 360 arc
fill
0 0 0 setrgbcolor
1 4 scale
300 400 moveto
300 600 lineto
250 225 moveto
300 400 lineto
350 225 moveto
300 400 lineto
300 550 moveto
250 350 lineto
300 550 moveto
350 350 lineto
stroke
300 653 54 0 360 arc fill
1 1 1 setrgbcolor
275 660 10 0 360 arc fill
300 660 10 0 360 arc fill
0 0 0 setrgbcolor
275 660 5 0 360 arc fill
300 660 5 0 360 arc fill
1 1 1 setrgbcolor
2 1 scale
145 630 10 0 360 arc fill
anon@lowtide:~$ 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#481323 — Re: Another shooting in France, another non-Muslim

owl wrote:

> (snipped, unread)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web