(10-20-2016, 08:42 PM)Beaker Wrote: Once again, if they are already being stopped for some other violation (in which case they may not be innocent), and they fit a profile, why is it bad to check them out further?
I have already answered this 2 or 3 times.
Because they may be on their way to work or pick up their kids.
You can't violate the rights of innocent people just because of the color of their skin.
I am starting to believe you are just trolling in this thread.
(10-20-2016, 08:45 PM)Beaker Wrote: So you going with sex offender or pedophile?
Why bother choosing? You white dudes are aces in both categories!
(10-20-2016, 08:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have already answered this 2 or 3 times.
Because they may be on their way to work or pick up their kids.
You can't violate the rights of innocent people just because of the color of their skin.
I am starting to believe you are just trolling in this thread.
Black men on the way to work and/or to take care of their kids? Yeah, I'm sure that argument will really convince the "ALL LIVES MATTER" truthers to soften their stance!
(10-20-2016, 09:14 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Black men on the way to work and/or to take care of their kids? Yeah, I'm sure that argument will really convince the "ALL LIVES MATTER" truthers to soften their stance!
And black males are more than twice as likely to be unemployed than white males. (As of 2016) http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpsee_e16.htm (8.9% vs 4.3%, was 9.7% vs 4.3% in 2015, granted the US Unemployment numbers are always rather iffy.)
Crazy numbers. It does show why Asians are the most successful ethnicity in America, though. Highest number of two parent families (only 17% single parent families in 2014) and lowest amount of unemployment.
(10-22-2016, 02:01 AM)Beaker Wrote: You keep insisting innocent people and skin color. I did neither.
I have no idea what you are trying to say anymore.
You claim that people should be profiled based on their demographic. If that does not include skin color then what does it mean?
And anytime you profile people based on a demographic with no evidence of criminal activity you are going to detain/search/investigate/violate the rights of a lot of innocent people.
Please explain exactly what you mean because I get the impression that you think a simple traffic violation should justify a full search/seizure but only for people in a certain demographic.
(10-22-2016, 08:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have no idea what you are trying to say anymore.
You claim that people should be profiled based on their demographic. If that does not include skin color then what does it mean?
And anytime you profile people based on a demographic with no evidence of criminal activity you are going to detain/search/investigate/violate the rights of a lot of innocent people.
Please explain exactly what you mean because I get the impression that you think a simple traffic violation should justify a full search/seizure but only for people in a certain demographic.
A demographic is a specific segment of a population whose members share characteristics. Those characteristics do not necessarily have to be skin color. Age, sex, religious affiliation, occupation or combinations of factors are other....but not the only examples.
And a traffic stop does not necessarily justify full search and seizure, but could justify further questioning if logical suspicions are aroused. The police can also be in attendance for any variety of reasons, some (but not the only) examples being domestic violence or disturbing the peace, or some other violation.
So I don't think its ok to stop or detain someone based solely upon skin color. Notr do I think its ok to randomly pick out citizens who have committed no offense.
This is what are are coming to. BLM is nothing more than a tactic, and the poor people taking part of it are just pawns, being used by folks like George Soros to create civil unrest, and a narrative that further pushes the anti-American agenda. Straight out of Rules For Radicles. No surprises
This is what are are coming to. BLM is nothing more than a tactic, and the poor people taking part of it are just pawns, being used by folks like George Soros to create civil unrest, and a narrative that further pushes the anti-American agenda. Straight out of Rules For Radicles. No surprises
The other issue with BLM is that if you oppose their tactics you are considered to be a racist. We see it here and Nationally. One of the biggest complaintI have with BLM and those that enable them is the stance they took with the fellowship cookout in Wichita:
(10-23-2016, 01:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The other issue with BLM is that if you oppose their tactics you are considered to be a racist. We see it here and Nationally. One of the biggest complaintI have with BLM and those that enable them is the stance they took with the fellowship cookout in Wichita:
Yeah its bad. It's just a tactic. They arent even a real org if you ask me. If they cared about black lives they would be camping out in Chicago full time and addressing the black on black crime epidemic there. But its all for show if you ask me. And you are right about them calling everyone who doesnt fall in line with them a racist. Then black folks stand against them and they are uncle tom lol. Pathetic.
(10-05-2016, 01:08 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Might be a result of the rest of the country treating them as less than Americans because of their skin color for 190 years.
But I agree that it hurts their credibility to react this way to what appears to be criminal activity.
This is what kind of kills me about BLM. Their claim of systemic bias, if it's as prominent as they claim, won't take long to show itself. So with that in mind, they should be mindful of which occurrences they capitalize on instead of acting like blubbering assess immediately after anything happens.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: jamarr-chase.gif]](https://media.tenor.com/Ycw6u-nmw3AAAAAM/jamarr-chase.gif)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
