- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Fergusons famed and reliable "witness 40"--
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:15 am to TK421
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:15 am to TK421
quote:
Some black people find it racist that I think Obama is a terrible president.
Beautiful example. How can one avoid being "part of the problem" if they let that kind of thing slide?
There is no scenario in which "the problem" is truly solved where all parties aren't required to think and speak honestly, as adults.
0
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:16 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:I agree that distorting the language and defining down racism is a part of the problem, but it's not a part of the problem we can solve first. First we have to prove we aren't racist. We can't do that when we hold up a dictionary while using words that black people think are racist code words.
I view that as a big part of "the problem."
When you say "thug", they stop listening to you.
quote:
There is no scenario in which "the problem" is truly solved where all parties aren't required to think and speak honestly, as adults.
That's correct. We will know the problem is fully solved when we are given the benefit of the doubt that we are using words as they are defined and not in a racist manner. We are a long way from that point. Part of the reason we are a long way from that point is that a lot of people that use those terms actually are racist.
About that "speaking honestly as adults" thing. Do you think Al Sharpton speaks honestly as an adult? Do you think Michael Brown was really capable of speaking honestly as an adult? We're not there yet, man. Let's start on the road to getting there. First step: wherever possible, stop giving black people reason to think you are racist, even if their reasoning is nonsense.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 11:21 am
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:17 am to uway
quote:
First we have to prove we aren't racist.
No. That is literally impossible when one side can and does flex the meaning of the word at their convenience.
ETA:
quote:
When you say "thug", they stop listening to you.
Then they never started, and in fact were not capable of listening in any meaningful way. And the "conversation" was doomed from the start.
Refusing to change my vocabulary is a great way to detect this immediately and avoid wasting everyone's time trying to feel good about myself.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 11:19 am
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:23 am to uway
quote:
First we have to prove we aren't racist
Impossible.
quote:
We can't do that when we hold up a dictionary while using words that black people think are racist code words.
When you say "thug", they stop listening to you.
Maybe we should educate them (and your dumbass, apparently) on the history of the word "thug". The might view it as a term of endearment.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:24 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
No. That is literally impossible when one side can and does flex the meaning of the word at their convenience.
Love crowds out hate. If we start actually showing them love (one way is to try to, within reason, not use language they see as racist), they will gradually come to believe we don't hate.
quote:
Then they never started, and in fact were not capable of listening in any meaningful way. And the "conversation" was doomed from the start.
I know, because they think we are racist. Both because "racism" has been defined down and because many of us actually are.
quote:
Refusing to change my vocabulary is a great way to detect this immediately and avoid wasting everyone's time trying to feel good about myself.
I don't want to feel good about myself. I want my kids to be able to live in relative harmony with the large portion of the population that is black.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:25 am to uway
quote:
What would you call a 6' 4", 280 pound, 18 year old male who walks into a store, grabs whatever he wants then as he walks out of the store threatens and pushes the store clerk who tries to stop him?
quote:
A criminal. "Thug" is a loaded word and everyone using it knows that.
According to the Oxford dictionary (American English) (US),The definition of the word, "thug" is "violent person, especially a criminal."
Since Brown stole those cigarettes then violently attacked the store clerk when the clerk tried to stop Brown from leaving, that means it is legitimate and reasonable to call Brown a thug.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:25 am to TK421
quote:
Maybe we should educate them (and your dumbass, apparently) on the history of the word "thug".
The way you spoke to me here proves you don't really want to dialogue with me. That's how we come across to black people. Again, deal with it or just acknowledge that you aren't really interested in solving the problem.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:25 am to TK421
quote:
The might view it as a term of endearment.
True, awesome story:
When I was a young highschooler, an older black dude at school said I looked like a thug because of how I had my hood up on my jacket one morning. It was meant to suggest that I looked like a badass, and was clearly a compliment.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:28 am to StrongSafety
quote:If you know privileged kids that have "done worse" then they are thugs too.
I know of many privileged kids that have done worse
This kid was a thug.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:31 am to uway
quote:
The way you spoke to me here proves you don't really want to dialogue with me.
Dialogue with a white guilt enabling person that suggests "we" must start by proving our innocence to those that will accuse us of racism now matter what our language is is pointless.
quote:
That's how we come across to black people.
I like you group black people together as a subset of Americana that must be pandered to and cannot possibly understand the words we use. Were you also a supporter of ebonics as a foreign language? You are easily the more racist person in this thread. Black people are not a homogenous group and they are capable of understanding words.
A test:
I find that Catholics are often ****rdly in their tipping etiquette.
If any portion of the above sentence strikes you as racist - you are an idiot.
ETA: Really TD?
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 11:33 am
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:32 am to ShortyRob
This board, and society by in large, hesitates to call those kids thugs.
For kids like Mike brown, the presumption was already they. They just needed a reason to speak what they already believed. (Or so it seems like, on this board)
For kids like Mike brown, the presumption was already they. They just needed a reason to speak what they already believed. (Or so it seems like, on this board)
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:33 am to StrongSafety
quote:
but there is really nothing for me to believe that he went for the gun besides Wilsons testimony.
Brown's DNA on the gun? Blood in the car?
quote:
There are no finger prints of browns hands on the gun
I understand this concern.
quote:
or on Wilsons pants or the bottom portions of his shirt.
Printing fabric is really inexact - for obvious reasons - generally needs to be a solid surface, although that has improved over the years.
quote:
There's DNA evidence of his blood on the gun, but that could be due to the close proximity of the first initial shot.
Of course, but the point is it bolsters the credibility of Wilson's statement - I'm not asking you to take Wilson's statement at face value.
If he says, "Hey, the kid ran at me, pushed me back in the car." - if no witness corroborated that - we'd have a tough time.
"He grabbed for my gun and we struggled for it. The gun went off at least once." - if no evidence of a gunshot in the car, no evidence of a struggle in and around the driver's seat, we'd have a tough time.
"He ran, but then he came back, said I wouldn't shoot him, then rushed at me." - if the objective evidence truly supported the original narrative, on his knees, hands up, surrendering, we'd have a tough time.
In this case, however, the objective evidence tends to favor Wilson's story - not 100%, but it was combat - nobody is 100% accurate on anything - so we have to go with what we have.
What we have is - violent criminal steals items, violently. Violent criminal attacks and attempts to disarm cop. Violent criminal, despite being shot at least once, does not surrender to the police when so ordered. Violent criminal then makes the last mistake of his life and rushes the police officer.
That's what a combination of the forensics, other objective evidence and eyewitness statements support. You can dismiss the testimony of the criminal accomplice and anyone who said Brown was shot in the back.
From there, it is relatively irrelevant details - at least as far as a criminal act on the part of the officer. He fired the weapon until the threat was stopped. You said you don't believe it was in cold blood - so you must believe the cop was scared and actually believed Brown could harm him.
Doesn't that make the shooting reasonable?
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:34 am to StrongSafety
quote:I can't speak for what "this board" thinks but I consider pretty much any kid who thinks it's OK to walk into a store brazenly and take shite while daring a much smaller person to stop them and shoving them out of the way a thug.
This board, and society by in large, hesitates to call those kids thugs.
Show me a video of a white kid doing the same and I'll call him a thug too. shite, if my OWN KID does that, when I get his arse home I'm going to say, "what the frick, are you some kind of thug............I didn't raise you to be an f'n thug".
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:37 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
but there is really nothing for me to believe that he went for the gun besides Wilsons testimony.
Here's a life lesson for you.
If you find yourself in a situation where people have a choice as to whom to believe
1)A person who has never discharged their weapon as a cop
or
2)A person who literally JUST FINISHED operating as a thug......
Absent compelling evidence one way or the other, people aren't going to tend to believe #2. That's the case REGARDLESS of the race of the two parties. If you deny that, you're not being honest.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:38 am to StrongSafety
quote:
This board, and society by in large, hesitates to call those kids thugs.
You're so full of shite. Nobody on "this board" or in "society by in large" is going to excuse a 300 lb+ 19 year old strongarming a store clerk to steal something, white, brown, black or whatever.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:40 am to StrongSafety
quote:
For kids like Mike brown, the presumption was already they. They just needed a reason to speak what they already believed. (Or so it seems like, on this board)
Didn't Mike Brown literally rob a convenience store minutes before he was killed?
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:41 am to TK421
quote:
Dialogue with a white guilt enabling person that suggests "we" must start by proving our innocence to those that will accuse us of racism now matter what our language is is pointless.
This would be funny if you knew my personal history. My stand is that we need to acknowledge reality and deal with people where they are if we really want to better things. If you want to stand on principle, go ahead. We're not getting anywhere right now, though.
quote:
I like you group black people together as a subset of Americana that must be pandered to and cannot possibly understand the words we use. Were you also a supporter of ebonics as a foreign language? You are easily the more racist person in this thread. Black people are not a homogenous group and they are capable of understanding words.
sigh
If you were a guest on a BET news show tonight and you called Michael Brown a thug, what do you think the audience would think? If me thinking the audience would think you were racist makes me racist, then I'm racist. I think I'm just being realistic.
quote:
If any portion of the above sentence strikes you as racist - you are an idiot.
At this point, I'm only conversing with you to make a point. You obviously aren't interested.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:44 am to StrongSafety
Why would a prosecutor call an obviously unreliable witness to the stand unless he wanted the grand jury to not to indict?
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:45 am to uway
quote:
This would be funny if you knew my personal history
Irrelevant. You are posting this nonsense now, not in your personal history. Keep trying to prove you are not a racist. I'm sure you have few token black friends to trot out when shite gets heavy.
Posted on 12/19/14 at 11:46 am to uway
quote:
You should hold yourself accountable for not unnecessarily contributing to a problem you claim to want to solve. Up to a point, it doesn't matter that their standards for what is "racist" are unreasonable. I think that I can avoid the use of the word thug without putting an unreasonable burden on my ability to communicate. For example, in this case, Brown acted like a violent criminal in that convenience store. With no harm to me, I avoided using a term that black people now see as racist. If they deemed "violent criminal" racist when describing exactly that, that would probably be unreasonable. I'll cross that bridge when it gets here. But my point is that we need to be realistic and not so rigidly idealistic (about things that don't really matter, like the webster definition of "thug") if we don't want to be part of the problem.
Are we white people not supposed to use the definition of "thug" that is in a legitimate dictionary of the English language because some black people don't like that definition and prefer to use their own made up definition of "thug" which is different from the dictionary definition?
If we white people use the dictionary definition of "thug" when describing a violent black criminal, does it make us white people racists just because some ignorant black people want to pretend it's a racist code word?
Do white people have to pander to every black person's whim so we won't be accused of being a racist?
The answers to those three questions are no, no and no.
Calling a violent black criminal a "thug" is not racist.
It is the truth and it is unreasonable and irrational of you or anyone else to say that we white people have to go by the black slang definition of the word, "thug" just so that we won't be called racists by ignorant black people and their ignorant white supporters.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 12:22 pm
Page 4 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News