So when is this "Honest" discussion regarding race relations goint to occur?

[Que]

Mostly I agree. It would make more sense to dump more winning tickets in teh areas you want to bankrupt. However the bolded sounds like something that you copied without thinking about it. Blacks on average have the lowest income in the US. If they can afford it AT ALL they spend a greater percentage of their wealth on it than the rich. I'm sure the rich spend a great percentage of their money on yachts and leer jets and trips to Paris but C'mon I buy like two pairs of jeans, a belt and three shirts a year and I still spend a greater percentage of my income on clothing than probably most rich. Why? because 3/100 is three percent. 3,000/1,000,000 is point three percent.

Bigger fish is bigger even if it's spending a smaller percentage of it's income.



I'm basically the same way, I buy $20 bucks on new years because my grand dad did and my dad does, half of whatever I win is mine the rest goes back into scratchers and that continues until I don't win or get bored or see something I want more.

The sentence right after the one you bolded says that. Blacks also statistically spend a high percentage of their income on fragrances, jewelery clothes and cars and because of all of that interest. That has, as I am sure you know from the talks we have had on real estate, a pronounced effect on their ability to qualify for home loans when debt to income ratios are out of whack.

We are talking percentages... so when I say blacks spend a higher percentage of their income on gambling that is not of much meaning if we are comparing a poor black to your hypothetical rich white yacht owner. But it is significant compared with poor white people in the same income bracket.

Also in real dollars, without regard for percentages blacks buy a lot of scratcher tickets. State sponsored lottos are a blight on those communities.

I'm waiting for Joey to ascribe a racist explanation as to why that is. It just is. As I have said culturally Luck is popular. It can, if not abused be cheap, fun entertainment. Education is not prized in the community and no one argues that the best schools are found there even if education was prized. Buying lottery tickets with your last $200 is not an educated move.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I did see the blacks in particular but with the commas it looked like one thought. And it sounded (note: not accusing you) of one of those times when someone was lying with the numbers. Which I find is as often as not unintentional and simply denotes what "direction" the person was thinking in. Like how x2, 200% and 100% MORE all mean the same thing but they sound different to a lot of people. Or in this case real dollars to percentages. The poor spend a greater percentage of their income on food, shelter and clothing which is why the various proposed VAT taxes are simply crushing to the poor.

You'll never hear me claim that education is prized by the black community. I spent my teen and young twenties loathing the black community because they alienate me because. . .because I pretty much talk like I type. I might have a bit more flair here because I can mess with the fonts n shit but over all my word choice and grammar are the same. It wasn't until a combination of run ins with cops and seeing the way Obama was treated before even stepping into office, seeing how my father was treated and realizing that I can be pissed at Smother103rd all I want for him not claiming me and me being a pussy ass bitch ass but I'll never be white and the only way my kids won't have to deal with this shit is I help fix it. And I've seen no evidence that Republicans have any interest in fixing it, they might adopt me as a friendly pet but not mostly to be used as a shaming tool. And for the record nine times out of ten Democrats don't care they just aren't actively trying to do things that will hurt my community.

However valuing education doesn't come out of thin air. We can go tour the south and show you all the poor whites down there (where do you think the real heart of this "Education Bad" is. The rest of you find ways to justify it but it's because the heart of the REpublican Party is still in the ignorant south. You need parents who were educated to instill that value into you in most cases. And you need a quality school at least if you are expected to compete with those who did.

And yes, you can occasionally find some goddamn prodigy, give me a few hours I'll find you someone who taught themselves to play the piano. But just because I can find one doesn't mean that's how it works.

 

[Ishmael]

The sentence right after the one you bolded says that. Blacks also statistically spend a high percentage of their income on fragrances, jewelery clothes and cars and because of all of that interest. That has, as I am sure you know from the talks we have had on real estate, a pronounced effect on their ability to qualify for home loans when debt to income ratios are out of whack.

We are talking percentages... so when I say blacks spend a higher percentage of their income on gambling that is not of much meaning if we are comparing a poor black to your hypothetical rich white yacht owner. But it is significant compared with poor white people in the same income bracket.

Also in real dollars, without regard for percentages blacks buy a lot of scratcher tickets. State sponsored lottos are a blight on those communities.

I'm waiting for Joey to ascribe a racist explanation as to why that is. It just is. As I have said culturally Luck is popular. It can, if not abused be cheap, fun entertainment. Education is not prized in the community and no one argues that the best schools are found there even if education was prized. Buying lottery tickets with your last $200 is not an educated move.

When it comes to gambling every demographic names it's own poison. I spent many years in Miami, FL. You could find any game you wanted there. I used to slip in on the floating craps game up in Ojus from time to time, almost all black. The ponies? You were looking at a lily white crowd. At Jai Alai you were looking at a white/hispanic mix. At the dog tracks it was a black/white mix. Poker was a white mans game. When the Playboy Plaza was under construction I stumbled on to a crap game on the fourth floor slab where Jackie Gleason was on his hands and knees in a silk suit rolling bones with the black laborers (the white boys were in the basement playing poker). You could lay off a sports bet at any beauty parlor (no shit), barber shop, or hole in the wall bar in town.

The criminal thing about state sanctioned gambling is that the money is used for education and is financed by the poor minorities that take such little advantage of it. Even worse when you consider that so many are playing with money they can't afford to lose.

Ishmael

 

[Sean Renaud]

Well it doesn't actually go into education for one. Another thing I swear you taught me Ishy but I will refrain from officially crediting you for is that money is fungible and we should really stop pretending that money from X goes to Y instead of saying we need THIS much money figure it the fuck out.

 

[Ishmael]

I see what you are saying. But its hard to become something, when you don't know what you want to be. I just want the money. They could keep the fame.

You don't have to be famous (actually I think that brings it's own hell for many). I can't begin to tell you of how many people I know that turned their hobby into a business and became relatively wealthy doing so. Got a hobby?

Hell, learn to fly a drone. It's a growth industry and there are businesses out there that will pay accomplished drone pilots. It's something, and probably would be fun.

Pick damn near anything you want and pick something you think would be fun to do. You don't have to pick something that "makes money" because you can make money doing damn near anything if you do it well.

Ishmael

 

[Sean Renaud]

Hobbies cost MONEY! Holy shit Romney. This is more of that "start a business, ask your parents for money" bullshit. Turning a hobby into a business is unrealistic for 99% of people anyway.

 

[smoothg103rd]

You don't have to be famous (actually I think that brings it's own hell for many). I can't begin to tell you of how many people I know that turned their hobby into a business and became relatively wealthy doing so. Got a hobby?

Hell, learn to fly a drone. It's a growth industry and there are businesses out there that will pay accomplished drone pilots. It's something, and probably would be fun.

Pick damn near anything you want and pick something you think would be fun to do. You don't have to pick something that "makes money" because you can make money doing damn near anything if you do it well.

Ishmael

I would rather be rich than famous. I got some soul searching to do. Git to find what makes me happy.

 

[Que]

Hobbies cost MONEY! Holy shit Romney. This is more of that "start a business, ask your parents for money" bullshit. Turning a hobby into a business is unrealistic for 99% of people anyway.

So do all of the other things that impoverished people spend money on. A pack a day is a decent nest egg in one year. Ad to that a latte a day, $20 in scratchers a week, $100 in bar tabs a week and you have enough to buy a damned lawnmower and a pickup truck.

And if you happen to think of a particularly good idea and can show you have a track record of discipline and a work ethic, Romney, or someone just like him (some are even dark complected!) will bankroll your start-up or work out of a previously failing business for 40% ownership.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Seriously, when? Obama promised an honest discussion during his 2008 run for the presidency. And Holder reiterated that sentiment during his nomination hearings. But has there been any open and honest discussions, not to my knowledge.

And by discussion I mean give and take, not a lecture by one side to the other. Not name calling when disagreements occur, and they will. Not shouting down the other side under the concept that over-talking and being loud carries the day.

I'll start;



The police know where the crime is taking place. Little push pins in maps on the wall have been replaced by GIS computer graphics, but they know. And they assign their resources accordingly. Is it any wonder that the police have a higher representation in black communities than in others? And it should go without saying that the higher the police presence, the higher the arrest rates.

And that begs the question, "Are the police victimizing the black community or are they protecting the victims of criminals?"

The police cannot fix the problems in the black communities, that fix has to come from within the community itself. The community can blame 'whitey' all they want but 'whitey' isn't forcing the black criminals to victimize their own. And poverty is no excuse for criminal behavior. There are far to many poverty stricken of all races and cultures that don't resort to criminal activity just because they're poor.

There is plenty of wrongs being perpetrated by the police out there and their victims come in all creeds and colors. Picking bogus causes and behaving in a criminal manner is not swaying popular opinion to anyone's cause. Make sure you have a real issue before you take to the streets.

OK, your turn.

Ishmael

The facts are that blacks are approx. 13% of the population but they commit close to 50% of all violent crimes and property crimes. The sole exception is rape in which their statistics are in line with their representation of the population. Over 93% of all black victims of murder were murdered by fellow blacks. And that victimization profile is true for all other violent crimes (except the aforementioned Rape). Bottom line is that overwhelmingly blacks are the victims of crime and those crimes were committed by fellow blacks.


The answer boils down to race. If the drug war was being waged in middle-class white communities or on college campuses, there would be a media frenzy and a fierce political backlash. Our nation would likely be teetering on the verge of revolution if police sweeps of middle class, white neighborhoods were occurring on a regular basis, and white youth were routinely stopped, frisked, and brutalized by the police while walking to school, standing on the street corner, or driving to the store. If the majority of young white men were under the control of the criminal justice system in major areas, we would be asking ourselves: “What is wrong with our country, our courts, our laws to have criminalized such an enormous percentage of our youth? Why are we forcing so many young people into a permanent second-class status simply because they were once caught with drugs?” We would be asking those questions if the primary targets of the drug war were white. But because they’re not, an eerie silence exists, even in communities of color. As a nation, it feels comfortable and familiar to have a racially defined group of people ostracized and excluded from the mainstream economic, social and political structure. It seems normal.

 

[Sean Renaud]

So do all of the other things that impoverished people spend money on. A pack a day is a decent nest egg in one year. Ad to that a latte a day, $20 in scratchers a week, $100 in bar tabs a week and you have enough to buy a damned lawnmower and a pickup truck.

And if you happen to think of a particularly good idea and can show you have a track record of discipline and a work ethic, Romney, or someone just like him (some are even dark complected!) will bankroll your start-up or work out of a previously failing business for 40% ownership.

I've got to live where the poor can afford to roll like that. I've never seen any poor person who could afford what you're claiming even with food stamps and other assistance. I would like to relocate to your home.

First that's bullshit. Most people even with really good ideas and good track records need help. Elon Fucking Musk had to get a loan from the stimulus package because HE COULDN'T GET LOANS. And if you're gonna work out of a failing business (unless you just needed space) you need a fairly similar idea. You're back to the insane thinking of the 1%. That's not even upper ten or twenty percent talk that's ye blessed few.

Sorry that's just reality.

 

[Ishmael]

So do all of the other things that impoverished people spend money on. A pack a day is a decent nest egg in one year. Ad to that a latte a day, $20 in scratchers a week, $100 in bar tabs a week and you have enough to buy a damned lawnmower and a pickup truck.

And if you happen to think of a particularly good idea and can show you have a track record of discipline and a work ethic, Romney, or someone just like him (some are even dark complected!) will bankroll your start-up or work out of a previously failing business for 40% ownership.

Let me point out the obvious here, if you have the money to spend on all that crap you aren't impoverished. Citizens in the US have no clue as to what true poverty is. Really, really bad decisions made by people that have no direction in life.

Re. the second part of your post. I wrote a 27 page business plan (including financials) with two partners and shopped it. It took 4 months but we ended up with $7 million seed money. And the money came from a Fortune 5 company. I learned a lot from that experience. If you have a good idea you can get funding. Funding that a bank would want you to put up your home and first born child as collateral and then only give you 25% of what you needed to make it work. The deal we made was a handshake and 30% of ownership. It was like Shark Tank before Shark Tank existed. I've started, or bought, 3 other businesses and sold them since then. All profitably and only two were in related disciplines. That's my addiction, the thrill of the deal.

Oh, the other thing I learned. Good business lawyers are expensive but necessary parasites. That first deal I spoke of required another 3 months of legal wrangling to finalize. But the lawyers saved my (our) asses. They covered details that a business creation novice like I was at the time would have over looked.

Ishmael

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Seriously, when? Obama promised an honest discussion during his 2008 run for the presidency. And Holder reiterated that sentiment during his nomination hearings. But has there been any open and honest discussions, not to my knowledge.

And by discussion I mean give and take, not a lecture by one side to the other. Not name calling when disagreements occur, and they will. Not shouting down the other side under the concept that over-talking and being loud carries the day.

I'll start;

The facts are that blacks are approx. 13% of the population but they commit close to 50% of all violent crimes and property crimes. The sole exception is rape in which their statistics are in line with their representation of the population. Over 93% of all black victims of murder were murdered by fellow blacks. And that victimization profile is true for all other violent crimes (except the aforementioned Rape). Bottom line is that overwhelmingly blacks are the victims of crime and those crimes were committed by fellow blacks.

The police know where the crime is taking place. Little push pins in maps on the wall have been replaced by GIS computer graphics, but they know. And they assign their resources accordingly. Is it any wonder that the police have a higher representation in black communities than in others? And it should go without saying that the higher the police presence, the higher the arrest rates.

And that begs the question, "Are the police victimizing the black community or are they protecting the victims of criminals?"

The police cannot fix the problems in the black communities, that fix has to come from within the community itself. The community can blame 'whitey' all they want but 'whitey' isn't forcing the black criminals to victimize their own. And poverty is no excuse for criminal behavior. There are far to many poverty stricken of all races and cultures that don't resort to criminal activity just because they're poor.

There is plenty of wrongs being perpetrated by the police out there and their victims come in all creeds and colors. Picking bogus causes and behaving in a criminal manner is not swaying popular opinion to anyone's cause. Make sure you have a real issue before you take to the streets.

OK, your turn.

Ishmael

The historical record is clear. Former segregationists and conservative politicians embraced “get tough” rhetoric on crime and welfare in their effort to appeal to poor and working class whites voters, particularly in the South, who were threatened by, anxious about, and resentful of many of the gains of the Civil Rights Movement - particularly busing, desegregation, and affirmative action. Pollsters and political strategists found that “get tough” appeals on crime and welfare were extremely successful in providing an outlet for conscious and unconscious racial biases. Although the rhetoric was colorblind on the surface, voters understood that politicians who used “get tough” rhetoric were aiming to crack down on African Americans. The politicians who led the “get tough” movement in the early years were the same politicians who had been rabid defenders of Jim Crow. After the Civil Rights Acts were passed, it was no longer acceptable to employ explicitly racist rhetoric, but some political advisors, like Haldeman, admitted openly that they were searching for a means to devise a system to deal with the “black problem” following the collapse of Jim Crow. There can be little doubt that the War on Drugs was an effort to make good on political promises to crack down on a group of people who had been not-so-subtly defined in the political discourse as black and brown.

Now, does that mean I think the conservatives of the 1970s and early 1980s aimed to create precisely the system that we have today? No, the War on Drugs has succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. And do I think everyone working within law enforcement today has consciously biased motives? No. In fact, most people who work in law enforcement believe that they are unbiased. The targeting of poor communities of color for drug law enforcement, harsh mandatory minimum sentences, and perpetual, life-long discrimination against those branded felons has been rationalized. These laws, policies and practices are defended by politicians and media pundits without the use of explicitly racist language, making it easy for people to convince themselves and others that the policies have nothing to do with race. The problem lies with “those people,” it is said, not the laws or the system itself.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Now, does that mean I think the conservatives of the 1970s and early 1980s aimed to create precisely the system that we have today? No, the War on Drugs has succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. And do I think everyone working within law enforcement today has consciously biased motives? No. In fact, most people who work in law enforcement believe that they are unbiased. The targeting of poor communities of color for drug law enforcement, harsh mandatory minimum sentences, and perpetual, life-long discrimination against those branded felons has been rationalized. These laws, policies and practices are defended by politicians and media pundits without the use of explicitly racist language, making it easy for people to convince themselves and others that the policies have nothing to do with race. The problem lies with “those people,” it is said, not the laws or the system itself.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

The mass incarceration of people of color in the United States can be counted among the most astounding, large scale human rights violations of the past century. It is my deep hope that the issue will attract more attention internationally. Many scholars believe that Jim Crow collapsed in large part because the U.S. government was concerned about the ways in which Jim Crow was tarnishing our nation’s image as leader of the “free world.” Today, it seems most people around the globe have bought into the idea that Obama’s election represents our nation’s “triumph over race.” Little do they know that the majority of black men in large urban areas are under the control of the criminal justice system or branded felons for life, largely due to a drug war that has been waged almost exclusively in poor communities of color. Perhaps if more people around the world knew that our nation has effectively re-created a racial caste system by waging a racist drug war, our government would be forced, once again, to reckon with deeply disturbing racial realities. International mechanisms will be useful, though, only to the extent they result in public debate and dialogue around the world. The U.S. government typically doesn’t care what international courts have to say about domestic human rights issues, and neither does the U.S. media.

 

[Que]

The historical record is clear....blah blah blah followed by an opinionated screed completely devoid of agreed upon "history" leaving out entirely all of the factors that good liberals have added to "improve" the black community into what it is today.

Yeah, didn't read it all. And I usually read everything.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Yeah, didn't read it all. And I usually read everything.

I think it’s fairly obvious that this drug war has little or nothing to do with ending the problems associated with the abuse of dangerous drugs. One commentator observed the war should be entitled the “War on Some Drugs.” I would argue that the war would be better described as the “War on Some People.” If you are relatively privileged, and have good access to health coverage , you may be prescribed a wide range of prescription drugs that will relieve anxiety, depression, insomnia, and nearly every other problematic emotional condition. And if you become addicted to any of those drugs, you will have access to drug treatment. The odds of you being subjected to stops, frisks, or sweeps of your home for suspected drug abuse are nil. Even if you begin selling those prescription drugs illegally to your friends and neighbors, it is highly unlikely that you will have any contact with law enforcement. But if you are poor and addicted to drugs, you will likely be subjected to police surveillance, put in a cage, and then relegated to a lifetime of discrimination, scorn and social exclusion. If we actually cared about the harms caused to people who are addicted to dangerous drugs, we would provide treatment, not cages, and support - not discrimination and scorn. Because we don’t actually care much what happens to “those people” -- people living in ghettos -- we put them in cages for extremely minor drug offenses and we imagine they need harsh treatment, not care, compassion and concern

 

[Ishmael]

The facts are that blacks are approx. 13% of the population but they commit close to 50% of all violent crimes and property crimes. The sole exception is rape in which their statistics are in line with their representation of the population. Over 93% of all black victims of murder were murdered by fellow blacks. And that victimization profile is true for all other violent crimes (except the aforementioned Rape). Bottom line is that overwhelmingly blacks are the victims of crime and those crimes were committed by fellow blacks.


The answer boils down to race. If the drug war was being waged in middle-class white communities or on college campuses, there would be a media frenzy and a fierce political backlash. Our nation would likely be teetering on the verge of revolution if police sweeps of middle class, white neighborhoods were occurring on a regular basis, and white youth were routinely stopped, frisked, and brutalized by the police while walking to school, standing on the street corner, or driving to the store. If the majority of young white men were under the control of the criminal justice system in major areas, we would be asking ourselves: “What is wrong with our country, our courts, our laws to have criminalized such an enormous percentage of our youth? Why are we forcing so many young people into a permanent second-class status simply because they were once caught with drugs?” We would be asking those questions if the primary targets of the drug war were white. But because they’re not, an eerie silence exists, even in communities of color. As a nation, it feels comfortable and familiar to have a racially defined group of people ostracized and excluded from the mainstream economic, social and political structure. It seems normal.

Look dude, you keep pushing this drug mantra. Virtually ALL of the drugs that are illegal now were made illegal in 1914. Drugs are not a CAUSE, they are an EFFECT.

Are you not listening to what smooth has to say? A community without hope will turn to any device to make money. Drugs are just a commodity in demand not unlike liquor, cigarettes, TV's, or frozen meals. And as this is Lit., there is a community in Mexico that trains their sons to be pimps, sex is a commodity too.

If you don't have an alternative you don't have shit to offer. You can decriminalize drugs and without hope they'll just turn to another commodity. Or haven't you thought that through that far? Drugs are a problem, but they are not THE problem.

Hope has to be restored, some how, some way. And providing minimal subsistence give away's does not restore hope. It merely allows life to go on without hope.

Ishmael

 

[Ishmael]

The mass incarceration of people of color in the United States can be counted among the most astounding, large scale human rights violations of the past century. It is my deep hope that the issue will attract more attention internationally. Many scholars believe that Jim Crow collapsed in large part because the U.S. government was concerned about the ways in which Jim Crow was tarnishing our nation’s image as leader of the “free world.” Today, it seems most people around the globe have bought into the idea that Obama’s election represents our nation’s “triumph over race.” Little do they know that the majority of black men in large urban areas are under the control of the criminal justice system or branded felons for life, largely due to a drug war that has been waged almost exclusively in poor communities of color. Perhaps if more people around the world knew that our nation has effectively re-created a racial caste system by waging a racist drug war, our government would be forced, once again, to reckon with deeply disturbing racial realities. International mechanisms will be useful, though, only to the extent they result in public debate and dialogue around the world. The U.S. government typically doesn’t care what international courts have to say about domestic human rights issues, and neither does the U.S. media.

To an extent I agree. But is that a result of the "War on Drugs" or the "War on Poverty?"

Ishmael

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

Look dude, you keep pushing this drug mantra. Virtually ALL of the drugs that are illegal now were made illegal in 1914. Drugs are not a CAUSE, they are an EFFECT.

Are you not listening to what smooth has to say? A community without hope will turn to any device to make money. Drugs are just a commodity in demand not unlike liquor, cigarettes, TV's, or frozen meals. And as this is Lit., there is a community in Mexico that trains their sons to be pimps, sex is a commodity too.

If you don't have an alternative you don't have shit to offer. You can decriminalize drugs and without hope they'll just turn to another commodity. Or haven't you thought that through that far? Drugs are a problem, but they are not THE problem.

Hope has to be restored, some how, some way. And providing minimal subsistence give away's does not restore hope. It merely allows life to go on without hope.

Ishmael

I'd be as likely to take advice from him as I am you. I never said it was the entire problem, as I stated earlier, corrections is a big part of the problem because no one wants to know what is going on. The drugs are just a means of turning Americans into criminals that can be subject to bias, legally for the rest of their lives.


The violence comes in when they go to prison and have to survive. They get sent to lock up which drives them crazy. After we make them worse, we release them back into the community worse than when they went it.

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

To an extent I agree. But is that a result of the "War on Drugs" or the "War on Poverty?"

Ishmael

and I will agree that public assistance often leads to dependence. However, I also believe that the richest people gave the ok for social security because it was better than having hungry angry mobs starving and looking for blood.

 

[Que]

The drugs sold and fought over in the Black community are paid for in part by the largess of the State. Until we had a welfare State in place, there was not that kind of money available there. There is a reason that drug dealers biggest days coincide with gov't checks and refills on snap cards.

The Ferguson bombs were going to be paid for by cash withdrawels off a SNAP card.

We have spent 4 trillion dollars on direct payments to individuals in the "safety net" at the same time the "War on drugs" is going on. Where do you think the billions in drug trafficking comes from?

 

[Joeybagadonuts]

The drugs sold and fought over in the Black community are paid for in part by the largess of the State. Until we had a welfare State in place, there was not that kind of money available there. There is a reason that drug dealers biggest days coincide with gov't checks and refills on snap cards.

The Ferguson bombs were going to be paid for by cash withdrawels off a SNAP card.

We have spent 4 trillion dollars on direct payments to individuals in the "safety net" at the same time the "War on drugs" is going on. Where do you think the billions in drug trafficking comes from?

Oliver North.

 

[Ishmael]

and I will agree that public assistance often leads to dependence. However, I also believe that the richest people gave the ok for social security because it was better than having hungry angry mobs starving and looking for blood.

Untrue, SS was sold on the premise of screwing the rich.

As far as public assistance is concerned it doesn't necessarily lead to dependence, but it ALWAYS leads to behavior modification in the form of unintended consequences. It just takes a few years to learn the new rules and how to work them. (At least for the lower classes, the big guys have lawyers to tell them the consequences, and the work around's, before the bill is signed.)

Ishmael

 

[toubab]

Seriously, when? Obama promised an honest discussion during his 2008 run for the presidency. And Holder reiterated that sentiment during his nomination hearings. But has there been any open and honest discussions, not to my knowledge.

And by discussion I mean give and take, not a lecture by one side to the other. Not name calling when disagreements occur, and they will. Not shouting down the other side under the concept that over-talking and being loud carries the day.

I'll start;

The facts are that blacks are approx. 13% of the population but they commit close to 50% of all violent crimes and property crimes. The sole exception is rape in which their statistics are in line with their representation of the population. Over 93% of all black victims of murder were murdered by fellow blacks. And that victimization profile is true for all other violent crimes (except the aforementioned Rape). Bottom line is that overwhelmingly blacks are the victims of crime and those crimes were committed by fellow blacks.

The police know where the crime is taking place. Little push pins in maps on the wall have been replaced by GIS computer graphics, but they know. And they assign their resources accordingly. Is it any wonder that the police have a higher representation in black communities than in others? And it should go without saying that the higher the police presence, the higher the arrest rates.

And that begs the question, "Are the police victimizing the black community or are they protecting the victims of criminals?"

The police cannot fix the problems in the black communities, that fix has to come from within the community itself. The community can blame 'whitey' all they want but 'whitey' isn't forcing the black criminals to victimize their own. And poverty is no excuse for criminal behavior. There are far to many poverty stricken of all races and cultures that don't resort to criminal activity just because they're poor.

There is plenty of wrongs being perpetrated by the police out there and their victims come in all creeds and colors. Picking bogus causes and behaving in a criminal manner is not swaying popular opinion to anyone's cause. Make sure you have a real issue before you take to the streets.

OK, your turn.

Ishmael

Interesting video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGTUcS-yQtQ

"BILL WHITTLE: FERGUSON AND THE REAL RACE WAR"

 

[Ishmael]

Interesting video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGTUcS-yQtQ

"BILL WHITTLE: FERGUSON AND THE REAL RACE WAR"

The truth be damned, it's all about the image. The MB 'truther's' are digging a hole. Let's see how deep it gets.

Ishmael