Shooting at SC Church During Bible Study - Suspect still at large

[PureX]

You could start with justice. Execute the murderer. Do it tomorrow. Do it on live TV with rocks. How much could that cost compared with paying for his lawyers, food and accommodation for the next 60 years?

People who are actually interested in justice, rather than just getting revenge, would want to be certain that any and all mitigating factors be brought to light and considered before executing someone. Especially the one about making sure you've got the right criminal, as we do have a long history in this country of convicting the wrong person precisely because we are in such a hurry to get our revenge.

Also, increasing our lust for violence by making a spectacle of bloody executions is just stupid. The U.S. is already one for the most violent places on Earth, and has been for many decades. And the glorification of violence is a big reason for that.

The legacy of stupidity continues.

Yes it does, as we have become a culture and a people raised on the love of violent retribution. Yet the more we glorify it, and engage in it, the worse we become.

 

[Stripe]

People who are actually interested in justice, rather than just getting revenge, would want to be certain that any and all mitigating factors be brought to light and considered before executing someone. Especially the one about making sure you've got the right criminal, as we do have a long history in this country of convicting the wrong person precisely because we are in such a hurry to get our revenge. Also, increasing our lust for violence by making a spectacle of bloody executions is just stupid. The U.S. is already one for the most violent places on Earth, and has been for many decades. And the glorification of violence is a big reason for that.Yes it does, as we have become a culture and a people raised on the love of violent retribution. Yet the more we glorify it, and engage in it, the worse we become.

So you don't have anyone — let alone me — who has downplayed the racist nature of this crime. Gotcha. :up:

You should stop presenting lies.

 

[drbrumley]

Black America's Real Problem Isn't White Racism
By Patrick J. Buchanan

July 20, 2013





After researching the FBI numbers for “Suicide of a Superpower,” this writer concluded: “An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides — in America?

 

[Granite]

Black America's Real Problem Isn't White Racism



After researching the FBI numbers for “Suicide of a Superpower,” this writer concluded: “An analysis of ‘single offender victimization figures’ from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.”

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides — in America?

Let's take time this Sunday to play "Blame The Black Guy." We've been doing it for about four centuries, why stop now.

 

[drbrumley]

Let's take time this Sunday to play "Blame The Black Guy." We've been doing it for about four centuries, why stop now.

I'm not the one who is spouting at the mouth that white people are the problem. That would be you and PureX

 

[drbrumley]

Let's take time this Sunday to play "Blame The Black Guy." We've been doing it for about four centuries, why stop now.

And no, I don't blame the black man. Racism sucks. We can all agree. At least I hope so. It's a matter of the heart against your fellow man.

 

[Granite]

I'm not the one who is spouting at the mouth that white people are the problem. That would be you and PureX

Pretty pathetic if that's what you're taking away from this conversation. A woe-is-me kind of pity party: My gosh, the white man's being attacked. Seriously, is that all you're getting from this?

 

[Granite]

And no, I don't blame the black man. Racism sucks. We can all agree. At least I hope so. It's a matter of the heart against your fellow man.

So what's the implication from Buchanan's article, then? (Also: "The black man"? Really?) This is a classic example of "just saying" or "yeah but" type thinking. But his last question speaks for itself. He's saying that the "real" racists in America just so happen to be black. And by citing it without comment you seem to be agreeing with him.

 

[Stripe]

Let's take time this Sunday to play "Blame The Black Guy." We've been doing it for about four centuries, why stop now.

Actually, I blame the white guy. He should be executed.

So what's the implication from Buchanan's article, then? He's saying that the "real" racists in America just so happen to be black. And by citing it without comment you seem to be agreeing with him.

Nope. The question was clearly a conditional; the clue being the little word "if" at the beginning.

How about you put his statistics into your little rant and see how effective your rhetoric is then?

 

[drbrumley]

So what's the implication from Buchanan's article, then? (Also: "The black man"? Really?) This is a classic example of "just saying" or "yeah but" type thinking. But his last question speaks for itself. He's saying that the "real" racists in America just so happen to be black. And by citing it without comment you seem to be agreeing with him.

The thing is Granite, your not entitled to your own facts. The numbers show it. If that makes you uncomfortable, then so be it.

 

[Stripe]

I don't think we've ever really had a reckoning when it comes to race in this country. Black on white violent crime is 40 times the reverse. There are certain topics Americans just don't talk about.

Needs to change. Now.

:think:

 

[drbrumley]

Actually, I blame the white guy. He should be executed.

EXACTLY!!!!!

Nope. The question was clearly a conditional; the clue being the little word "if" at the beginning.

How about you put his statistics into your little rant and see how effective your rhetoric is then?

:up:

 

[Granite]

The thing is Granite, your not entitled to your own facts. The numbers show it. If that makes you uncomfortable, then so be it.

Show what? Specifically? That blacks are inherently violent? That they're the "real" racists in this country? What exactly are you driving at? And when it comes to whatever problems you perceive, what do you propose as a solution?

How much of Roof's manifesto do you actually disagree with, doc?

 

[PureX]

Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse.

Ummm … don't you think you should think about that for a minute?

If 1 person in 10 is black, and the other 9 are white, and all black criminals were colorblind, they would still commit 9 crimes out of 10 against white people, simply because there are that many more white people then black.

Now, if the person spewing these stats was too stupid to recognize this rather obvious fact, why should I or anyone with a brain give the rest of his spewings any credence?

By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

Well, if he's outnumbered 40 to 1 in a predominantly white society, that would be expected.

Also, criminals tend to commit crimes for money. So even if a black male is only outnumbered by 20 to 1 in terms of color, but he's also outnumbered 20 to 1 in terms of economic disparity, then it's still expected that he would be 40 times more likely to commit crimes against whites.

If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides — in America?

It tells us that racism resides mostly among the people who are most able to change it, but are not. That would be the overwhelming white majority, and the wealthiest and most powerful among us (also overwhelmingly white).

 

[Stripe]

Show what? Specifically?

That you're a hypocrite; demanding something of somebody because of a laundry list of emotionally charged rhetoric, but unwilling to respond in the same way when faced with statistics.

You're a race baiter.

 

[Sancocho]

The reality is the black family has been destroyed since they were brought in chains to the US. Many Protestant Christians used the mention of slavery in the Bible to justify treating the blacks as animals, and the Democrat Party enabled the laws to do this. The blacks were purposely separated from their families and the better physical specimens were treated like stud horses to create more slaves. Furthermore, the Protestant Christians would not accept them into their church ON THE WHOLE but no doubt grudgingly gave them the Word at the same time claiming they weren't human or fully human.

After the civil war the prejudice was kept in tact by the Democrat Party's Jim Crow laws, thus making it very difficult for a black person to survive. Obviously this fomented frustration and desperation in the black community. In the early 20th century new tactics were developed by the Democrats to try to eliminate the blacks from American life or at least keep them from growing as a community. First was Margaret Sanger and Lothrop Stoddard, both eugenist racist whose main goal was to prevent blacks from reproducing. Then came the New Deal by Democrat president Roosevelt to create a dependency in the black community so they could easily be controlled and have their "numbers" at a "manageable" amount.

Fast forward to the present and the blacks unwittingly support the Democrat Party at unprecedented levels even while child sacrifice kills almost HALF of all black children conceived. Child sacrifice is one effective method of destroying the family and community, as is clearly evident in the black community, and ironically the blacks have been manipulated to believe this is the best for them. Tragically, many black Christians and pastors support abortion.

Therefore, if the black community is not functioning as a Christian community should much of it is not their fault because they have been manipulated since they were brought to the US in chains. If you want the black community to change what you need to do is fight tooth and nail to have abortion outlawed by law and get GOD back in schools. Only HE can fix the damage that has been done to the black community by others.

 

[Granite]

The reality is the black family has been destroyed since they were brought in chains to the US. Many Protestant Christians used the mention of slavery in the Bible to justify treating the blacks as animals, and the Democrat Party enabled the laws to do this. The blacks were purposely separated from their families and the better physical specimens were treated like stud horses to create more slaves. Furthermore, the Protestant Christians would not accept them into their church ON THE WHOLE but no doubt grudgingly gave them the Word at the same time claiming they weren't human or fully human.

After the civil war the prejudice was kept in tact by the Democrat Party's Jim Crow laws, thus making it very difficult for a black person to survive. Obviously this fomented frustration and desperation in the black community. In the early 20th century new tactics were developed by the Democrats to try to eliminate the blacks from American life or at least keep them from growing as a community. First was Margaret Sanger and Lothrop Stoddard, both eugenist racist whose main goal was to prevent blacks from reproducing. Then came the New Deal by Democrat president Roosevelt to create a dependency in the black community so they could easily be controlled and have their "numbers" at a "manageable" amount.

Fast forward to the present and the blacks unwittingly support the Democrat Party at unprecedented levels even while child sacrifice kills almost HALF of all black children conceived. Child sacrifice is one effective method of destroying the family and community, as is clearly evident in the black community, and ironically the blacks have been manipulated to believe this is the best for them. Tragically, many black Christians and pastors support abortion.

Therefore, if the black community is not functioning as a Christian community should much of it is not their fault because they have been manipulated since they were brought to the US in chains. If you want the black community to change what you need to do is fight tooth and nail to have abortion outlawed by law and get GOD back in schools. Only HE can fix the damage that has been done to the black community by others.

Turning this tragedy into an excuse to dump on a party you disagree with's both predictable and lame.

 

[Stripe]

Turning this tragedy into an excuse to dump on a party you disagree with's both predictable and lame.

But using it to promote your racist agenda is just fine.

 

[rainee]

...and the victors of the Civil War made literal amends towards ending the institution. If you really want to go there dig into the Confederate Constitution, which protects slavery far more than its counterpart ever did. If you know history as well as you claim, this shouldn't be news.

The rebel flag is uniquely despicable in that its very existence was born of a demand to perpetuate slavery. While slavery was incidental in the formation of the United States it was the very lifeblood of the Confederacy.

This love affair with the lost cause needs to end.

Oh this is killing me!!
Why say things like this?

The South were the producers The North were the needy consumers...
And then - And Then Came Constructing of The Railroad - and all who were visionary and business literate and good with numbers knew that The Railroad was going to kick the freaking door of the future open... Life was going it get a lot bigger and more lucrative (for some)

But one problem, yes Granite?

It would get twenty times better for the South than for the North East where a lot of these smart men lived.

First time Lincoln tried to run did he get anywhere? I was told he did not... But when he made slavery and the morality of it a major part of his platform - he was in. Like Flinn.

The East hated slavery it turns out - but never quite so unitedly and intensely as when some very smart people were looking at the future of themselves ---- I mean the slaves -- And of America! (Play loud patriotic music)

Of course now the same kind of business men (almost ALL in the North East) take their business to poor countries...but who can get
Soppy over racism then?

Wake up, I am glad slavery is gone, as long as one is not free no one is free. But please don't buy into the ridiculous lies.

I know someone whose great grandfather lived during the time of slavery. His dad had an orchard on a river in Tennessee and had all daughters until he came along as a change of life baby.

His dad didn't want his only son being around nothing but females -
So he brought in the son of the house maid to live and be a male companion to his boy. This child was photographed with the family just like an adopted son....
What do you really know about slave owners?
Did you really think they were all bad and not like all other employers both good and evil existing through time?

 

[Alate_One]

Actually, I blame the white guy. He should be executed.

Do you *only* blame the individual when there's an ideology he's feeding on? Would you say the same for the Boston Bombers? Would you have said the same in the 1960s?

But using it to promote your racist agenda is just fine.

Um the shooter was the racist here. Are you unwilling to discuss that fact?