Angels Never Die

22 minutes ago, Catwhoshatinthehat said:

African Americans represent 13% of the population yet per the FBI as of 2017 they were responsible for 27% of all offenses charged, 53% of murders or non-negligent homicides, 29% of rapes, 54% of robberies 34% of aggravated assaults, 30% of burglaries and as the list goes on at no point do they represent less than 13% of any offense charged.  Even if we agree that some people are wrongly accused which happens it's not happening at rate that changes those rates much.  Racism and systemic oppression absolutely exist but for most people no matter the color of their skin choosing to commit a crime or being an absentee parent (65% of African American households are single parent) comes down to a choice.  Other non-white groups have made further strides as far as wealth accumulation, level of education achieved and some even have lower rates of single-parent households yet we hear less about that because it doesn't grab readers.  Downplaying what they've experienced is as dishonest as is ignoring what they do to contribute to it.     

So systemic oppression exists for black people but it has no explanatory power over these statistics? Racism and systemic oppression doesn't lead to poorer socioeconomic circumstances and discriminatory criminal justice practices? And those things don't lead to broken families? Hey, get this, when more police are sent to an area, guess what, they find more crime there. Shocking right? Also, when people are in poor socioeconomic conditions, guess what they don't get, great legal defenses in court, which might lead to higher rates of conviction, no? And people in poorer socioeconomic circumstances just never turn to crime out of desperation from those circumstances, right? It's all a choice, huh? Jfc, do you watch Les Miserables and see Jean Valjean as the bad guy because he stole food? How simple things must be for you. 

As to your point about other non-white groups doing better than black people, it's a complete false equivalence. Even though other non-white groups experience discrimination and oppression in their own right, that doesn't mean it's on the same level as black Americans. The history and systemic treatment is different, older, and more severe.

1 minute ago, m0nkey said:

Who said that? Two wrongs don’t automatically make a right. 
 

Shocking, I know. And it’s not just stuff, it’s destroying and burning of buildings (of their own community). Good going 

So since the idea wasn't communicated literally and directly that means it wasn't communicated? Yeah, when the paramount issue here is black people being treated like second class citizens by the state, and when they INEVITABLY lash out about that unacceptable state of affairs, people whine about property being destroyed? It passively communicates that property is more important than civil rights. The offense is extreme, so we shouldn't be surprised when the response to that offense is extreme. You're being existentially threatened and the system thinks it can get away with it because there won't be sufficient consequences for their actions, guess what happens, people create some consequences for those actions. If it takes property being destroyed in order for black communities to get justice, then I don't have a problem with that. 

14 minutes ago, m0nkey said:

I love the people that make looting acceptable in their minds. 

And I love that people are more concerned about stuff being stolen from some Target over the existential threat the police have become to black communities. 

22 minutes ago, Catwhoshatinthehat said:

So no they can't ever be compared because of the countries history which there's no changing.  Floyd didn't deserve to die and neither did numerous other people of all colors who have been killed by cops when deadly force wasn't necessary.  Racism will always exist and people will always use it as an excuse whether valid or not.  Meanwhile the media will continue to drive the divide because that's what they seem to do best and in the end none of us are better off for it.  I realize we can't just move past it nor should people be expected to but there are some ways every person can reduce the likelihood of being confronted by cops or at the very least prevent those confrontations from turning physical.  I'd like to think cops don't regularly just beat up on people particularly in this day and age with body cams, cell phones and social media.       

Like I said (which you ignored,) they CAN be compared in the larger problem of police abuse/brutality in this country, but there's a subset of that abuse that is fundamentally different because it deals with systemic racial biases which affects black people more. They're tangentially related, but they're ultimately not the same subject that's necessarily in need of the same societal response. Although I'm not fundamentally against political violence for the issue of police violence in general (outside of a racial historical context.) 

We'd all "like" to think that, but that's a naive thing to just assume. Trying to change the focus of this issue from black communities inevitably lashing out against systemic oppression to what one can do to appease their abusers better, is a dishonest attempt to downplay what black people have experienced for a very long time in this country. 

1 minute ago, Lhalo said:

Ok cool. Just wanted to make sure since you seem to be the arbiter of who can destroy public/private property and who can't.

Oh yeah, it's that simple. Either it's always ok, or it's never ok huh? The preceding events have no fucking relevance whatsoever. 

You are being very dishonest in your framing of the two things, and clearly reaching for some imagined double standard where you've been victimized the way black people have in this country by the police. 

3 minutes ago, Catwhoshatinthehat said:

Using that rationale it doesn't sound like there's any way to compare when a white cop kills a person of color to when a non-white cop kills a white person and there never will be.  

I mean, they're both relevant to the general discussion of police abuse of power, but no, they're not comparable in the sense that white people have not been historically systemically targeted by the police in the same way that black people have. It's completely dishonest to suggest the societal contexts are the same.

2 minutes ago, Lhalo said:

Should I have burned down the State Capital Building when Newsom took away my right to assemble these past few months?

Considering one is in the context of a temporary response to an extremely unique circumstance of a pandemic that is extremely important we curtail through social distancing policies, and one is in the context of centuries of unjustified racist oppression of black people by the state, I think it's a tad fucking different.

12 minutes ago, Lhalo said:

Remember when everyone burned Minneapolis down for a black cop killing an innocent white woman?

What's that you say? They only had peaceful protests? Oh never mind then.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/neighbour-of-justine-damonds-killer-gives-shocking-new-insight-into-his-behaviour/news-story/34eb2c08676af98afc376d83aaff31dd

Oh yeah, that's totally comparable as long as you completely ignore the different historical and societal contexts of the two cases. 

On 10/23/2019 at 9:55 PM, Tank said:

The easy solution is to have a third category in any competition: men, women, and other. There is no reason whatsoever to allow someone who is developmentally a male to compete against women. None.

I’m extremely surprised feminists haven’t jumped all over this, but maybe that’s the price of being woke these days.

They have, they're called TERF's. 

1 hour ago, Chuckster70 said:

 

Not surprised a milquetoast neolib whinged about not having "peaceful" protests. Fuck Obama and fuck Trump.

But wait, I thought political violence wasn't effective? 

It's an inevitable consequence to treating people as second class citizens who can be murdered by the state with impunity.

I totally approve of the riots.

The other Biden. Very underrated.

8 hours ago, Lou said:

Is that a gay clown joke?

I would never joke about that, I've got friends who are juggalos.

I'll be countersuing in comic sans.

I forgot someone I think I would've rather picked. Kelvim Escobar. Think about what difference it would've made if we had 2-3 healthy seasons from him.

What did LT do? 

She's a cutie, always liked her

I'll make it for you one day, you'll like it.

8 hours ago, Lou said:

We call that beans 

Onions, carrots, celery, beans, soyrizo, and marinara sauce. That's more than just beans, sir, like five more things. So, take that.

Vegan Chili

Bo Jackson could've been such a great baseball player if he just focused on that. It's fun to think about.

19 minutes ago, Taylor said:

I know he's not retired yet, but if Kendry(s) doesn't break his leg in 2010, a lot would have been different for the Angels in the years that followed.

Good choice, I totally forgot about Morales.

If you could just remove injuries from any past player's career (is no longer in the league), who it would be, and why? You can pick one Angels player and one non-Angels player. Lets exclude death as an injury considering it's so emotionally charged. My non-Angels pick is Nomar. I'm very tempted to pick Kerry Wood because it'd be interesting to see what his true upside would've been sans elbow/arm injuries, but with Nomar, we very much saw how good he could've been and I would love to see how great his career could've been if he remained that solid defensive SS and high average/extra base power combo. My Angels pick is Tim Salmon. I'm forever an undying Tim Salmon fan I guess, but just the longevity of his career with the Angels, him having a lot more complete seasons, especially later in his career when the Angels were more on the fringe and his health could've made the difference in team success.