Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

Ferguson, Missouri


Recommended Posts

True, if I meant that.

 

It is just true for many whites in the US, not all, of course. You can't really say anything about anyone because of their skin color.

 

A big story of racism today in the US is largely that most white people deny it exists, and at the same time people who aren't white experience it every day. A landlord will not let someone black live in a unit, or an person will not hire a black person solely because of their skin color, and then if you ask them, they will say racism is not really a problem.

 

I would say that racism doesn't exist as much as people believe. Rather, it's a form of classism that exists. For example, no one would reject a rich, well spoken, polite black person. But they certainly would with a poorly-dressed, foul-mouthed, uneducated black person. It just so happens that more black people come from ghettos and live 'undesirable' lives, so it seems that it's racism.

 

That's not to say there isn't some racism. But it isn't as prevalent as it appears.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 899
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Okay, I'll have to assume you aren't a native of the English language. Just know, you are massively confusing the word's meaning, probably out of ignorance more than anything (though I haven't ruled o

Yeah, I think this really kind of fails the laugh test though. First, assuming the officer wanted to brutalize Brown (presumably for no reason), why in the world would he do it in the way described

That woks both ways I suppose?

Racial discrimination against blacks has been illegal for close to 50 years.

 

Perhaps a bit off-topic, but since I'm not an American this made me curious. Is it really formulated like that or is it about all racial discrimination in general (and it's just you that are using it specifically for black people) ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bele:
 

Linda Taylor, the original welfare queen, was indeed listed as white on her census, but apparently her actual race was hard to pin down.  Hell, even a scholarly paper investigating the effect of the welfare queen story considered her African-American.

 

As for the South Carolina primary story, the best info I can find shows that the Bush campaign officially denied the claim, but when Bush tried to approach McCain at a debate to say that he had nothing to do with it, McCain reacted angrily.

 

Anyway, I really hope that you're not saying that because something was outlawed that it doesn't exist anymore, because that's what I'm getting from your post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that racism doesn't exist as much as people believe. Rather, it's a form of classism that exists. For example, no one would reject a rich, well spoken, polite black person. But they certainly would with a poorly-dressed, foul-mouthed, uneducated black person. It just so happens that more black people come from ghettos and live 'undesirable' lives, so it seems that it's racism.

 

Actually, in the US, the well educated black person would in fact be rejected just for being black. They did a study and found that if your name sounded black (in the US) you were much less likely to be called in for an interview than the person who had the exact same qualifications but whose name did not sound black.

 

White people in the US always say that racism is not a big deal, and the people who experience it every single day, say it is a big deal. 

Perhaps a bit off-topic, but since I'm not an American this made me curious. Is it really formulated like that or is it about all racial discrimination in general (and it's just you that are using it specifically for black people) ?

 

No it is not based on "black" but on race. All the laws in the US speak of discrimination based on race (or gender, or disability). But the laws don't always prevent people from discriminating. If I am a landlord or an employer, and I reject you for your race, there is really nothing you can do. You could file a complaint and wait years to try to fight it in court, but it's not worth it at all. And most people can't pay for a good lawyer. Basically you are screwed if someone discriminates - unless it is an extreme case. A few people get lucky and can win their case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is interesting. It seems the "Innocent kid" may not be as innocent as one would think........

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=376_1408408898

 

Unless he was pointing that gun at the cop at the time he was shot, that picture is meaningless.  You're just playing into the "some people deserve to live or die based on snapshots of their life" narrative, which is reprehensible.

 

(Or, apparently it's even more meaningless since it's not him; thank you, BOA.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, in the US, the well educated black person would in fact be rejected just for being black. They did a study and found that if your name sounded black (in the US) you were much less likely to be called in for an interview than the person who had the exact same qualifications but whose name did not sound black.

 

White people in the US always say that racism is not a big deal, and the people who experience it every single day, say it is a big deal. 

 

That's just classism again. If you have the name 'John Smith', you sound normal. If you have a name like 'Jonishaquanda DaPimp', you sound like you're going to be from some stupid ghetto.

 

I believe strongly the people who claim to experience racism every day or mistaking classism for racism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord Vorontur, I should have taken your "kill them now before they become more dangerous" theory more seriously.

 

John Oliver enlightened me on this point:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KUdHIatS36A#t=593

You are using quotes to represent a statement by LV here Thunderloin but the actual quote is available in this thread.

 

Sorry, Troll, but it doesn't specify when the suspect has to pose a significant threat. It doesn't state "immediate threat".

There is no way of telling just what this person would have done. The guy HAD robbed a shop minutes before.

He WAS a criminal and was using his considerable size advantage to bully a shop keeper.

The guy would've sooner rather than later(because it starts with robbing stores and ends with imprisonment for violent crimes/death)done something considerably more violent.

(LV is quoted in the next post by MMOTroll so it is unaltered IMO)

Perhaps you interpret the bolded areas above as having the same basic meaning but I do not.

For years I have heard people say marijuana is a "gateway drug" that leads to use of harder drugs.

I read LV's comment as saying knocking over a store is a "gateway crime" that leads to more serious crime.

You also claim it as a "theory" and, I believe, the "gateway" is a credible theory when applied to behavior patterns.

Of course gateway theory is not intended to apply to all people in all circumstances but rather as a general, statistical tool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_drug_theory

 

My interpretation of LV's OP at least... I'm not saying LV is correct or that gateway theory is correct but I will say your use of quotes is an unfair representation of his OP.. (having said that I do believe gateway theory does have some credibility IMO and in application beyond substance abuse from my personal experience)

 

lol... it seems on topics like Israel and racism we tend to get passionate about our positions. :P

 

Edit: OK rereading it the post is meant in jest to combine with the video... My bad.

There have been several posts in reply to that post sequence that were also overreactions = I just joined the bandwagon. :P

Beware though Thunderloin... I'm not going to call you a racist but I'm on the verge of "Tree-hugging, commie, peacenik".

Link to post
Share on other sites

No gunshot powder residue on his body (clothes still pending).  Likely shots fired at a distance.

 

Hands up in the air in surrendur?  (As I had seen one witness say he turned and put up his hands) Or hands up for protection while charging?

 

Does an unarmed person charging, at distance, provide justification for the use of lethal force?  I'm sure they train for this stuff.  I wonder what they're told.

 

Actually, yes. Under Oregon law at least (I live there, so I'm most familiar with it), an armed person can use deadly force against an unarmed person, if the shooter believes the unarmed attacker presents a significant and immediate threat of death or great bodily harm to themselves or someone else. So if a big guy like Michael Brown were charging a police officer in Oregon, even if Brown were unarmed, the officer would be Justified in using lethal force to end the threat. It all comes down to what the shooter believes, you see.

 

As you might expect, that's a wee bit controversial bit of the law. Florida has a similar take on lethal force, thus why George Zimmerman got off for shooting Trayvon Martin, as much of the case came down to if Zimmerman believed at the time of the shooting that Martin was an immediate threat (deadly or of great bodily injury) to himself or others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that the picture ISN'T Michael Brown. But you don't really, care, do you? Don't bother replying for my sake, I put racist trash on ignore.

I know I've never posted a pic on the interwebs that I didn't either:

1) take the pic personally

2) hire a legal team to investigate it's provenance.

 

:P

 

It's a pic on the intewebs!!!111!!!!

IT MUST BE THE TRUTH!!!111!!!!

 

Cut Acidreign some slack IMO. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, yes. Under Oregon law at least (I live there, so I'm most familiar with it), an armed person can use deadly force against an unarmed person, if the shooter believes the unarmed attacker presents a significant and immediate threat of death or great bodily harm to themselves or someone else. So if a big guy like Michael Brown were charging a police officer in Oregon, even if Brown were unarmed, the officer would be Justified in using lethal force to end the threat. It all comes down to what the shooter believes, you see.

Well in cases like this is doesn't even matter since you can also play the "he tried to wrestle my gun from me" trump card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the Ferguson incident looks like collateral damage of a society that embraces, encourages and is enforced by the use of guns.

 

Add to that the collateral damage of a society that has been divided into classes by a capitalist economic system, with the zero-state of that system having all the coloured people in the lower class, essentially trapping most of them there.

 

Top it off with the collateral damage of a society that has it's people ruled by manipulating using fear.

 

And you get coloured people shot by policemen that shouldn't have had to happen.

 

Want to bet? I bet the policeman who shot Micheal Brown regrets doing so, even if he believes under his Law he had the right to do so.

 

This incident has no winners. I can only hope it leads to small steps towards a US that gets some sense about the 'right to bear arms', about what equal opportunity really means, and about the fucked up tactics quite a few of their politicians use.

 

Not saying the EU is much better off. We have our share of fearmongering politicians, class division by economics and debatable gun use too. It's just that as many things go, the US do it Bigger. Overachievers you. ;):P

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, shooting live rounds at non-human/non-live targets is good fun.

Even semi-live RPG rounds is fun.

Or practice AT4's! (shoots a 9mm tracer bullet at targets)

Or Machine Guns! There was one particular shooting range that had pop-up targets that could have different settings, where there were fox-holes and a trench where you could move between. The targets would drop when hit.

 

I've used these badboys:

s_ak5_nykolv.jpg

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ak_5 both AK 5A and AK 5B(B is fitted with scope)

Brilliant AR, super easy to handle/breakdown/clean, and not too heavy!

 

ksp58_1.jpg

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_MAG A modification on this one! (The swedish version is KSP 58, the one I used was a KSP 58B)

 

Very good MG, good rate of fire. Fun with tracers every 5 rounds! Only thing that is annoying with it is putting rounds in the belt for it, oh and swapping barrels!

My squad's Machine Gunner had a tendency to get into scraps, he got beaten up a few times, causing him to miss training exercises, I was backup.

Weighs a fair bit, for humping around all day. Glad I didn't have to do that full time!

 

600px-MOW-CarlGustav-2.jpg

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Gustav_recoilless_rifle

Used by Dolph Lundgren to great effect in Men of War.

 

 

Heavy as fuck. Thankfully, wasn't the one to have to hump this shit around daily, nor was I the loader(who had to hump ammo around).

 

And last but not least:

s_pskott1.jpg

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT4

 

Not for shooting at MBTs, just for shooting at APCs/Other Vehicles.

Never got to fire a live one, sadly. Would've been fun.

 

In any case. None of these should be available for any but the Swedish Armed Forces ;)

 

Shooting human targets is also fun (when playing airsoft that is). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shooting human targets is also fun (when playing airsoft that is). 

 

Paintball too, I suppose. There seems to be a vast improvement on what Airsoft/Paintball weaponry looks like these days compared to when it was first available(paintball, that is)in Sweden back when I was in 9th Grade(whoa, that's some time ago).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paintball guns still look like toys tbh. There are a few guns that try to mimic real ones, but mainly they're the standard model with that massive tank of pellets on top, unlike my M4 (it's really only the "WARNING" label):

WP_20140814_007.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The most I ever did was Lazer Tag in a public park in the late 80's.  This was before "children's" guns had to have brightly-coloured tips.  We still had to explain ourselves to the local police on patrol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/police-militarization-ferguson_n_5678407.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

 

 

 

A few people have pointed it out, but our ROE regarding who we could point weapons at in Afghanistan was more restrictive than cops in MO.

 

 

 

I don't know how it was in IRQ and AFG, but in Bosnia we had less firepower while on patrol than the cops in #Ferguson

 

 

 

FWIW I led foot patrols in downtown Baquba, #Iraq in 2005-06 w/less firepower than #Ferguson PD
Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that the picture ISN'T Michael Brown. But you don't really, care, do you? Don't bother replying for my sake, I put racist trash on ignore.

Just something i ran accross last night when i got home from work and threw up in here, wanted to see what others had to say about it, and they did. I wouldnt know the guy if he walked through my front door anymore than any of you would, not that he is likely too mind you. As for racism, we are all pink on the inside and we all bleed red. I have seen that first hand numerous times. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...