Maximus wrote:It seems that some Americans just need any excuse to commit crimes.
For example, a black man gets killed by a police officer and this is a good enough reason to kill more people, loot and vandalize the place.
And some (democrat) politicians turn a blind eye to it because they think by sucking up, they are going to win some votes.
You can go back in history if you want to argue your case but what are the demands and expectations from doing that to fix the problem?
defund / abolish the police?
If the crime rate is going up, you need more law enforcement not less.
Crime goes up because the state has managed to criminalize virtually everything so that it needs more cops and more prisons and guards, and the unions from both are happy to increase their membership by arresting and throwing people into jail for crimeless “crimes”. Talk about these cunts living on blood money.
The whole thing is fucked up. So much for the “land of the free and home of the brave”!
Maximus wrote:It seems that some Americans just need any excuse to commit crimes.
For example, a black man gets killed by a police officer and this is a good enough reason to kill more people, loot and vandalize the place.
And some (democrat) politicians turn a blind eye to it because they think by sucking up, they are going to win some votes.
You can go back in history if you want to argue your case but what are the demands and expectations from doing that to fix the problem?
defund / abolish the police?
If the crime rate is going up, you need more law enforcement not less.
Crime goes up because the state has managed to criminalize virtually everything so that it needs more cops and more prisons and guards, and the unions from both are happy to increase their membership by arresting and throwing people into jail for crimeless “crimes”. Talk about these cunts living on blood money.
The whole thing is fucked up. So much for the “land of the free and home of the brave”!
...the Police at present do not occupy their time with the public at all because they have focused their work exclusively on Crime; if you are not a Criminal the Police could care less who you are, or your needs. The Public's Security, in affect is not important, only catching Criminals is important; and with unqualified immunity, abuses are far from unlikely.
...guns are the problem, take them out of the hands of Police Officers, provide the education they need to understand their beat, and what it is to "be" a Peace Officer, then when the public sees an Officer with a gun, it has a meaning.
...dare to commit a crime with a firearm then, kill an unarmed cop; a new kind of Hell would be made for such a person.
Maximus wrote:Erolz wants us to believe that slavery and the white man is responsible for the high crime rate among the black community in the US.
You believe what you want. If you systematically oppress large parts of your own population over centuries it can only end in tears.
Slavery in the US ended in 1865.
That was 8 generations ago.
No black person living in America today has any first hand experience of that kind of oppression.
Some are millionaires, role models, professionals, politicians, lawmakers, doctors and celebrities.
What oppression exists today to excuse their over representation in crime?
In 1865 the 13th amendment was passed that read "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime shall exist within the United States". This is the point where by the white criminals that had been the perpetrators of industrial scale enslavement of black people through economic necessity created a narrative of the black man as criminal. Following the introduction of the 13th amendment 100,000s of 'freed' black slaves were arrested for things like 'vagrancy' and 'loitering' in order that they could be made into slaves once more. A narrative of the black man as sub human animalistic predator and rapist was created with intent by white america. In films like 'Birth of a Nation' and a thousand newspaper articles. The fact that in terms of interracial rape it was overwhelmingly a history of the rape of black slave women by white men was irrelevant and not part of the narrative. This creation of the narrative of black man as dangerous predatory criminal in turn led to a resurgence of the KKK, portrayed as heroic defenders of white america against the threat of barbaric criminal black man. The use of the burning cross by the KKK was invented in this film. This economically needed constructed narrative led to at least 2000 lynchings of black men at the hands of baying crowds of white 'patriots' between 1865 and 1876 alone. In that brief 12-year period, known as Reconstruction, a reign of terror was unleashed by Confederate veterans and former slave owners in a brazen effort to keep black people enslaved in all but name. Technically freed slaves were lynched at an average rate of almost one every two days – putting paid to the hope that Emancipation offered millions of black people and effectively terrorizing them into submission. Another 4,400 known lynching took place between 1877 through to 1950. In 1920's america if a black man even looked 'funny' at a white woman, something as innocent as smiling at her, that could and in documented cases did lead to him being stringed up and hanged in public by baying mob of white men with no fear of any legal repercussion against them. The need to criminalise vast numbers of former black slaves was embedded in to law following the 13th amendment in Jim Crow laws, that explicitly made it clear that in law you may have been freed from slavery but you were NOT equal. This in turn led to criminalisation of any black person that tried to protest against these laws. People like Martin Luther King were labelled and treated as criminals because they sought to protest laws on segregation 100 years after the 'end' of slavery. Generations of decimated black families, of injustice, of prejudice or constructed narrative of the black man as criminal, of systematic disenfranchisement is what resulted from the ending of slavery. Just as it did not 'end' with the ending of slavery in 1865, nor did it end with the abolishion of Jim Crow laws a hundred years later. As this happened a new narrative of black man as criminal was needed and created. I do not have the will or time to cover this but this is the reality.
Maximus wrote:Black people in America have the same opportunities as every one else.
This is simply not true. It is a fiction. It was not true in 1865 when slavery 'ended'. It was not true in 1965 when segregation 'ended' and it is not true today. Whilst you, a majority of people in the US, continue to believe this fiction American will continue to periodically burn and the self fulling cycle will just continue unabated and remain unable to heal the wounds that 400 years of oppression of your own people create.
Maximus wrote:It seems that some Americans just need any excuse to commit crimes.
For example, a black man gets killed by a police officer and this is a good enough reason to kill more people, loot and vandalize the place.
And some (democrat) politicians turn a blind eye to it because they think by sucking up, they are going to win some votes.
You can go back in history if you want to argue your case but what are the demands and expectations from doing that to fix the problem?
defund / abolish the police?
If the crime rate is going up, you need more law enforcement not less.
Crime goes up because the state has managed to criminalize virtually everything so that it needs more cops and more prisons and guards, and the unions from both are happy to increase their membership by arresting and throwing people into jail for crimeless “crimes”. Talk about these cunts living on blood money.
The whole thing is fucked up. So much for the “land of the free and home of the brave”!
How do you explain the downtrend in crime rate?
That is a very disillusioned statement, Max.
Do not confuse crimes committed rates vs. crimes convicted rates.
Most reported crimes go unsolved because either the police suck in their jobs, or not interested in solving certain crimes, or they can’t prove their cases against the “criminals”.
Police go after soft “crimes” like smoking pot, drinking alcohol, public disturbances and traffic infractions to extort money from the motorist. Most police work is a joke as they have become nothing but overpaid welfare recipients of taxpayers money. What the police is very good for, is in trying to violate citizens civil right, but the citizens are now confronting these cunts as they are more educated of their right, so the police instead bully the defenseless.
Let’s not even talk about ALL the unreported crimes.
You do not even need to put in effort and connect up the dots to know that there was a specific political objective and intent in US politics of disproportionately disadvantaging citizens based on their colour well in to the later half of the 20th century. You can just listen to a leading political operative involved in this project openly talking about it. These are the words of Lee Atwater in 1981. Atwater, after a decade as South Carolina’s most effective Republican operative, was working in Ronald Reagan’s White House when he was interviewed by Alexander Lamis, a political scientist at Case Western Reserve University. The recording of this interview is now public. You can hear the entire interview here https://www.thenation.com/article/archi ... -strategy/ just in case you think the quote is 'out of context' (it is not).
Lee Atwater in 1981 wrote:Now, y’all aren’t quoting me on this? You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.…
This is not 1865. It is not 1965. This was said in 1981. The project is ongoing today.
erolz66 wrote:You do not even need to put in effort and connect up the dots to know that there was a specific political objective and intent in US politics of disproportionately disadvantaging citizens based on their colour well in to the later half of the 20th century. You can just listen to a leading political operative involved in this project openly talking about it. These are the words of Lee Atwater in 1981. Atwater, after a decade as South Carolina’s most effective Republican operative, was working in Ronald Reagan’s White House when he was interviewed by Alexander Lamis, a political scientist at Case Western Reserve University. The recording of this interview is now public. You can hear the entire interview here https://www.thenation.com/article/archi ... -strategy/ just in case you think the quote is 'out of context' (it is not).
Lee Atwater in 1981 wrote:Now, y’all aren’t quoting me on this? You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.…
This is not 1865. It is not 1965. This was said in 1981. The project is ongoing today.
Come on Erol, haven’t you heard slavery was over in 1865 and since then the blacks have same opportunities as the whites in every aspect of the “American Dream”!
Max and Paphitis believes that, so why can’t you?
Do you know how the white girls in the Southern states get back at their parent?
They openly go with a black man so everyone can see.
