Take appearance into account when you are out in public.

Another innocent black teenager has been killed in Florida. I know we can debate justice and racism in America. This is ground we have been over and over. I think we might consider a tangential question - the effects of culture and assumed behavior. This sounds arcane, but it is probably the cause of much, if not most misunderstanding among groups.

First the disclaimer. Culture is fluid. In the simple dynamics, what we identify as culture changes every day if for no other reason that each day some people are born and some die. The culture group has different members every day. Individuals also change and adapt. I do not now have the same culture I grew up with. If you are trying to get better, you are changing your inherited culture. But, we need to use the concept of groups and culture because that is what we have to work with. And it is clearly true that we can identify generalities in group cultures.

Okay. I grew up in the upper-Midwest. Among virtues I consider most important are hard work and honesty. I think most of us would claim that these are virtues. But there are nuances. Some people value cleverness over honesty. You see this in the bluff. They think that it is a good thing trick people into giving them things that I was taught they don't deserve. I hate those loud and aggressive people. I hate it even more that they seem to succeed.

I also grew up with the idea that you should understate yourself. You should NOT try to stand out. Do what you do well and do it well. Don't make promises often and never make promises you don't think you can keep. Generally keep quiet around strangers. Don't brag and never make threats unless you really plan to carry something out. This was my culture and still is to a great extent. I know that other have different ideas, but it is still very hard for me not react based on my values.

Black urban culture is pretty much the opposite of my culture. Where I believe in restraint; they believe in being out there. Where I believe in taking less than I think I am entitled to, they think they should get more. A big difference is "trash talk." I am offended by trash talk. My impression is that such talk is dangerous. I think that it would be a good idea for me to understand that they are not always threatening. It is also a good idea for them to understand my culture.

So let's sum up.

I learned that it is virtue to be unobtrusive in public. I don't like loud people. I am offended by "trash talk" and certainly do not admire those who do it well. In my cultural experience, if a stranger talks loudly in public there is something wrong with him and he is a potential danger. I try to avoid such people and situations.

I also try to seem not threatening. Although I am harmless, I am a big guy and I recognize that there are situations where I might scare people. On a lonely street, I will not walk swiftly toward or behind someone. You have to try to see yourself as other see you.

We had an interesting situation recently in a theater. I went in with my family, wife daughter and two big sons. My sons are are harmless and quiet as I am, but also big. Someone was sitting in our seats, so I went out to get the usher to resolve the situation. As I came back with the usher, another patron warned him that some "big guys were trying to steal seats." Those were my sons. They were not doing any of the talking. They were just there, but their appearance created fear. When I told them the story, as young men they were a little proud. I told them never to take pride in that kind of thing. They had to take into account their appearance and try to make themselves LESS threatening.

BTW - they WERE our seats and by the time I got there with the usher the other people had correctly read their tickets.

It is not fair to be judged by your appearance, but recognize that you are and that you judge by appearance. It makes too much sense not to do it. We learn to recognize dangerous situations and people. MOST of the time we are wrong, but the stakes are too high. If I see a bear in the woods, I know that most of the time it will do me no harm. But I would be stupid not to take the risk seriously.

I know from personal experience that my appearance can create fear. It is dumb and it is completely unjustified by my behavior, but I have to adapt to it. My behavior has to be less aggressive than it would be if I was different. We all need to do that. If people were more like me in public, there would be a lot less violence and things would progress much more smoothly.


Posted by Christine & John at February 22, 2014 6:48 AM
Comments
Comment #376686

Jack,

The idea that we could view each other as a potential threat to our own personal safety must warm the cockles of Wayne LaPierre’s black heart. That those of us who are “larger” should do all we can to accomodate that fear seems rather Orwellian IMHO.
I find it interesting that even as crime statistics drop, we in this country are accepting the need to carry weapons to protet ourselves.
I also find it interesting that, while we require our military, and our police to follow “Rules of Engagement”, and “Rules for the use of Force”, that we might require ordinary citizens to also follow these rules seems a mere afterthought.

It would appear that those who perpetuate fear in this country have the most to gain from it.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 11:08 AM
Comment #376687

Rocky

I used to like to run on forest paths. I learned that when I came up quickly behind a woman or even a pair walking on the paths, they were shocked and frightened. They were not justified. I was no threat. But put yourself in their position.

I am not saying people should live in fear, but I recognize that we all need to be cautious. It is disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

Of course it can be taken too far. When we have women in their “take back the night” rallies claiming all men are potential rapist or when someone claims an old, polite black man is a thug, they go too far.

I am in no way justifying this killing. I was not on the jury, but it seems that this guy went way too far and deserves some prison time.

But I think it is incumbent on all parents to teach their kids to be quiet and polite. When I was listening to reports of this story, a black mother was complaining that she had to tell he kids to “act white” when they were in town. That included things, she said, like not playing music loud, not trash talking and not being aggressive. I don’t think that is “acting white;” it is just good manners and indeed I think that is how she should tell her kids to behave, everywhere. The fact that she has to make a special effort indicates her earlier negligence as a parent.

Posted by: CJ at February 22, 2014 11:19 AM
Comment #376688

Jack,

I hate to be the one to tell you, but Miss Manners went out the window decades ago.
Rudeness defies any color barrier, and Americans are famous worldwide for being rude.

The term “polite society” is a myth. We expect others to be polite while we are crass and vulgar ourselves. Perhaps it’s just in our DNA.

What does it say about American society when a mutton head like Ted Nugent is touring Texas with Republican gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbot?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 12:25 PM
Comment #376691

Just to put a finer point on the subject;

Through out our media, be it advertising, TV, radio, sports, hell Jack, look around you. You don’t have to go very far into even these pages to see the trash talk.

And no one is held even remotely accountable.

How can anybody be suprised when opinion has become more important than fact?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 1:53 PM
Comment #376692

Rocky

You are right about rudeness being more common. I dislike people who are rude and if I can I try to make sure they don’t get what they want. Being a little sneaky and sometimes in a position of power, I succeed with some regularity. It doesn’t matter much to me if they don’t know I did it. I think there are lots more people like me out there than the rude people know. They just think they have bad luck.

Re Americans being rude - you notice the rude ones. I was in Paris a while back. The French treated me very nicely. I think it was because I was nice to them and dressed nicely. I was a little ashamed of my fat-assed compatriots with the T-shirt that said “I am with stupid.” The waiters treated them like shit and they had it coming.

My experience in life is that if you adapt and are pleasant, you get a lot more things. This, IMO, is the secret of success and happiness, to the extent one exists. I suspect when youths in general and black youths too are treated poorly, it is more often their behavior than it is prejudice.

Posted by: CJ at February 22, 2014 2:01 PM
Comment #376693

Rocky

Let me just add that it is just good advice for rude people to wise up a bit. It hurts them more than it hurts the people around them in the long run.

Posted by: CJ at February 22, 2014 2:05 PM
Comment #376694

The least we could do is agree to disagree. Today’s Liberals seem to think no one has a right to disagree with them.

As far as I’m concerned Ted Nugent can say what he wants to say. He can say it however he wants to say it. It’s the thin skinned liberals he’s talking about that think he hasn’t the right to talk mean about their fellow liberals. Obama is riding on the backs of job creators in Texas. Liberals have no problem claiming Texas achievements as their own. I think it’s about time someone has the courage to speak up and call a spade a spade.

It’s a proven fact, Rocky Marks, that the more people have weapons the lower the crime rate. Not everyone with a gun is a criminal. If more people carried guns and rude people realized it they would be smart to be more polite.

I think the vaguary of gun laws and gun, anti-gun retoric contribute greatly to the tragic instances like the one CJ is refering to. From what I understand about the incident, the guy deserved the convictions he received. However, if there was an overwhelming possibility each of the parties knew the other was armed and willing to defend themselves, this incident, most likely, would not have happened.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 22, 2014 2:06 PM
Comment #376695

Similar quotes:

Walk softly and carry a big stick.

Peace through strength.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 22, 2014 2:18 PM
Comment #376696

Weary

In my entire adult life I have never been violently attacked or had to attack anybody violently. Thankfully, most of us do not have to deal with such things. The guy in Florida was stupid to bother the kids with the loud music. Both were in cars and presumably wouldn’t be long near each other. He was mainly at fault. The kids, however, would have been better served not being obnoxious.

Posted by: CJ at February 22, 2014 2:24 PM
Comment #376698

True. The guy should have let things go. Loud music isn’t a punishable offense. But, would they have been rude and obnoxious if they were under the impression the guy was armed? That there is a possibility the guy was unstable and willing to use a weapon against them for the simple cause of loud music? Sure, it sounds dramatic to think everyone should assume everyone else is armed and dangerous, but shouldn’t everyone also assume there may be slippery ice under the snow they’re walking on, or maybe that new fangled drug might have weird side effects?

It’s not a perfect world. We shouldn’t assume it is and expect the best and then be suprised when it turns out differently.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 22, 2014 2:42 PM
Comment #376699

Rocky writes; “I find it interesting that even as crime statistics drop, we in this country are accepting the need to carry weapons to protet ourselves.”

Hmmm…could be cause and effect here Rocky. Because more folks are armed; there is less person-on-person crime.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 22, 2014 2:49 PM
Comment #376700

Willie,

” However, if there was an overwhelming possibility each of the parties knew the other was armed and willing to defend themselves, this incident, most likely, would not have happened.”

Willing to defend themselves against what, the right to be rude?
What are you afraid of Willie?

“If more people carried guns and rude people realized it they would be smart to be more polite.”

That’s just dumb as a stump.

Sorry Willie, being rude shouldn’t carry a death sentence, a wiser man would have just driven away and found his gas elsewhere, instead a rude kid is dead.

“Walk softly and carry a big stick.”

Perhaps the “Great White Fleet” was going to pull into the gas station any minute.

There are all kinds of lovely little homilies, like “kill them all and let God sort them out”. Virtually all of them are useless in every day life.

As for Nugent, he’s a moron. He’s entitled to his opinion, but I’m also entitled to mine.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 2:54 PM
Comment #376703

Royal,

I am 61 years old.

Never in my life have I found myself in a position where having a gun in my possession would have changed anything.

As I said before, a wise man walks away.

I own a 45/70 rifle. I take it to the target range occasionally to shoot targets. Both my wife and I are quite proficient with it.
I once owned a hand gun and I sold it because I had no use for it. My wife and I agreed that we didn’t feel the need to have a hand gun to protect us.

Neither of us have that fear, and we are confused that others do.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 3:49 PM
Comment #376704

Rocky, you and your wife are fortunate and I understand and respect your reasoning.

And, you should respect the reasoning of those who wish to carry a concealed weapon where it is legal.

You and I will both agree that just because something has never happened to us before doesn’t mean that it can’t happen in the future. Many folks wish to be prepared for the unexpected. No fault there.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 22, 2014 4:04 PM
Comment #376705

Weary

I don’t really want people to have respect because they fear others might be armed. I would not want to go back to the idea of the gunslinger, where only those fast on the draw could speak freely.

Posted by: CJ at February 22, 2014 4:08 PM
Comment #376707

Royal,

Everyone that carries a gun has their own reasons for doing so.

It has been estimated that there are 220 million guns in this country. I would venture a guess that would mean virtually every household could have a gun. I’m not suggesting that every household has a gun…
I’m just saying.

How many more guns would it take for everyone to feel safe, 50, 500, 5,000, 5 million?

Someone is making a tidy profit off of the American need to have a firearm at the ready.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 4:25 PM
Comment #376710

I know that when the guy down the street decides to carry a 6 shooter then I need to carry a semi auto 10 round. But then he decides to armor up a bit so the I have to buy armor piercing bullets, so then he decides to get a bigger pistol as well, but not to be deterred I decide I need an assault rifle and some armor to go shopping with. (and we wonder why our government continually escalates the weapons race for we the people)

So whilst I’m the big dog I decide that certain music is not to be heard around me, Of course the guys in the other vehicle don’t give a crap about my unilateral decision to be the music czar. So I’m all revved up but haven’t found anyone to shoot, but wait I gave an order and they didn’t listen, so I feel the need to put then in their place and do so. I am charged but by some stretch of the imagination am convicted, not of killing the guy I killed but for not killing the others in the car, and this all makes sense in Florida!

So young kids that dress the way they want are in fact targets for the armed scared and fearfulconservatives. If they cannot legally carry a weapon to defend themselves then they must do it illegally or face death for playing their music and dressing the way they want. Because I have a right to carry a deadly weapon and the law behind me, in Florida at least, to use force to get my way. What is the problem with this, they are scary and their music dreadful. Oh and usually black.

Yet conservatives such as C&J try to pass the buck to the black kids, it’s their fault because of their music and the way they dress. They interfere with the right to bear arms. They didn’t grow up in the midwest and are loud and aggressive! The black kids culture is one of trash talk and we hate that so it is within our rights to shoot into a car of them. It’s their fault they got killed because they didn’t “massa up” when I, a total stranger, demanded they do what I told them to do. Yessa massa what ever you say, can I wash your windshield for you seeings you have the hidden gun.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=massa

Posted by: j2t2 at February 22, 2014 4:42 PM
Comment #376711

j2t2

As you may have read, I believe the shooter was in the wrong.

My comment is based on proper behaviors. I know from experience that how you present yourself makes a very big difference. I believe that racism per se is no longer a significant impediment to success, but behaviors are. I would advise poor kids, black, white or other to learn the ways of success. That is what I did. Friends of mine who insisted on holding to “our” somewhat dysfunctional urban culture did less well.

Posted by: CJ at February 22, 2014 4:52 PM
Comment #376712

Rocky asks; “How many more guns would it take for everyone to feel safe, 50, 500, 5,000, 5 million?”

Well Rocky, if those who don’t own a firearm believe as you do, then no additional weapons are needed.

As for firearm profits, only those who purchase firearms contribute unlike some federals programs that forces us all to purchase stuff.

j2t2 reasons; “I know that when the guy down the street decides to carry a 6 shooter then I need to carry a semi auto 10 round. But then he decides to armor up a bit so the I have to buy armor piercing bullets, so then he decides to get a bigger pistol as well, but not to be deterred I decide I need an assault rifle and some armor to go shopping with.”

jtwo, you live in a bad neighborhood…MOVE!

All your other imaginary scenarios are merely stupid hyperbole.

Posted by: Royal Flush at February 22, 2014 4:57 PM
Comment #376713

Royal,

“Well Rocky, if those who don’t own a firearm believe as you do, then no additional weapons are needed.”

My point was “everyone felt safe” not just those that believe like I do. I would posit that there are vastly more people, myself included, who own guns in this country than people who don’t.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 22, 2014 7:12 PM
Comment #376714

I’m ole school, and I resent this one size fits all culture. When I go to wherever I want to see/hear a native of that country, area, culture and not someone who speaks the US business language. Native traditional dress and all that.

Another generation or two and we will all look/speak/dress pretty much the same. The business speak/dialect and dress will be pretty much what we see in Ohio/Ill/Colorado/Mo, IMO.

I can appreciate the Amazon Indians, even though they may not smell up to par. I have to say, I’m not fond of loud boom boxes, or cars vibrating ‘to the base’ but these are generally transient sounds, on the move, which one can easily avoid, IMO.

Globalisation sucks, IMO

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at February 22, 2014 7:52 PM
Comment #376718

Rocky Marks, Ouch! Don’t insult stumps. :)

I can see how my comment would be hard to understand. Today’s society, as a matter of course, is demented. It is out of control for the most part. People live in fear, not of each other, but of what they are constantly exposed to each and every day. They have a fear of the gun on the street because they are constantly being told they should be afraid of the gun. It’s not hard to understand why when:

My wife and I agreed that we didn’t feel the need to have a hand gun to protect us.

Given what is in the news each and every day you would think that statement is the exception, not the rule. What is the exception is some people need a weapon to protect themselves some of the time. People are buying guns because they know if they need a cop, a cop won’t be available.

When Chicago’s murder rate and mugshots of young black men are constantly in the news it generates a fear of murder by young black men. When these same people are excused for being victims of society and returned to the streets it generates a fear of criminals on the loose. When people think they can get away with violence it makes violence easier to perpetrate. It’s not the fear of committing a crime that stops people, it’s the fear of getting caught. That fear of getting caught is practically non-existant in some people these days. Consider the “knock-out game”. People/victims walk around naked to the dangers of this demented society because they expect to be safe. They actually believe their government will protect them. Just like they think their money is real. It’s an illusion. It’s a dangerous illusion. It’s a false sense of security.

Perhaps this society is beginning a transition from a false sense of security to a society that takes the responsibility of self-defense seriously. In any transition there are trials and errors. This guy CJ refers to said he felt threatened by a shotgun and a car full of young black men. I personally think he is not being truthful. I think he overreacted and thought he could get away with it. I also think this is the exception and not the rule. You will always see the instances failed in the news and not the instances succeed. Imagine what society’s position on handguns would be if every instance of life saving uses of a handgun were portrayed in the news and the crimes were ignored. The difference would be like night and day.

Since people are getting murdered and government is powerless to stop it, shouldn’t we consider another solution?

Ask yourselves, was there really a gunslinger on every corner in the old west, or was that just Hollywood’s dramatic illusion created to sell movies? Be serious. Didn’t the side arm save more lives than it took? The west isn’t a blood covered wasteland, you know. People did survive. The side arm was used more for self protection than it was for perpetrating crime. Most of the victims were snakes, not people.

Now imagine a wild west without side arms. I think we would still be hugging the coast today if it weren’t for the side arm. People would be considered suicidal if they went west without some form of protection. Why is that different today? Why do we think we can walk around naked to the dangers of this society and expect the government to protect us? In the west it was the weak that didn’t survive. Today’s society is no different. People are preying on the weak. The weak are arming themselves to become stronger and the people who make mistakes are being used to demonize those who are taking responsibility for their own self-defense.

Children are being taught to fear a weapon. I believe we should be teaching our children how to use and respect a weapon. Today’s government thinks our children belong in school to learn how to socialize. Given what I see on the news every day the government is failing miserably in that regard. Imagine teaching our children to respect each other and the wherewithall to deserve that respect. Rudeness would fall to the wayside. I don’t know anyone who is rude to someone they respect.

Ronald Reagan:>/a>

Well, to those who think strength provokes conflict, Will Rogers had his own answer. He said of the world heavyweight champion of his day: “I’ve never seen anyone insult Jack Dempsey.”

You may think they are quaint quips, lovely little homilies, but it goes deeper than that. Roosevelt’s foreign policy gave this country the respect of the rest of the world. Do you think that would have happened if he relied on a “please” as his sole means of achieving his goals? Roosevelt’s great white fleet wasn’t used to beat others into submittion, it was used to gain respect. Roosevelt’s use of the military to end a coal miner’s strike wasn’t to kill all the strikers and let God sort them out, he used the military to mine the coal and deny profits from the coal companies.

The presence of force is much more valuable than the use of force. We would still be in a cold war with a still powerful USSR if it wasn’t for Reagan’s Peace Through Strength policy.

Again, shouldn’t we consider another solution?

To be honest, I’m really tired of the left’s insistance that everything has to remain the same for things to get better. The left believes if everything stays the way it is we will eventually be cured of our present day ills. That’s just bull asterisks. It’s why we live in a demented society. The left practices a demented philosophy. The left believes the ends justify the means. In this case the violence justifies their need for more power. End the violence and you end their power.


Posted by: Weary Willie at February 23, 2014 10:41 AM
Comment #376722

Weary Willie-
I think the notion that in a fair and balanced world, guns would get full recognition for what good they do is fairly naïve. Let’s be blunt: people respond instinctively to violence and the threat of violence. Guns are inherently instruments of that. When they operate as intended, something gets destroyed. Target practice doesn’t gain much attention for obvious reasons, so you will hear a ton about guns, not because the media is liberal, but because the media focuses on stories in the “if it bleeds, it leads” vein. What you’re asking for is a naïve kind of propaganda.

C&J-
I’d say that the preceding point dovetails nicely into what I’d warn you about, and what I’d warn you about is this: The GOP and the Conservative movement have gotten way to deep into the weeds of justifying writing policy according to feelings, according to their own fears and concerns, rather than according to what works in the real world.

Look, we feel afraid a number of times in our lives, but most of the time, we move on with our lives, and forget all about it. Most of us actually aren’t that twitchy, aren’t apt to shoot anybody.

My honest opinion is, in both the Zimmerman and the Dunn case, you have men who show signs of psychopathy and ill-will towards the victim’s group who insert themselves into situations and end up using deadly force, and then use the law to muddle what most people would think on their own are clear cases of unjustified homicide.

Ideals and feelings are one thing, the effect and the consequences of the law are another. What might fit an agenda when it’s being legislated may undermine it if the results of the law, of the structure of things are absurd on the other side.

That’s not even talking about the gay discrimination laws in Kansas and Arizona. Religious freedom? Really? I don’t get why you can’t practice your religion freely if you don’t get to discriminate against people you think are breaking YOUR religious code while running your business. The sheer variety of things one could possibly justify under such a precedent should ward people off from doing that, but then, people aren’t thinking thing through, they’re imagining things out, fantasizing about what they think the law will do, and assuming that it’s the right thing to do.

We need to grow up, and like many adults do, realize that our beliefs are not always reflected in reality, and that we can defeat ourselves in the process of trying to defeat a hated enemy.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 23, 2014 1:16 PM
Comment #376723

Stephen

Re “My honest opinion is, in both the Zimmerman and the Dunn case, you have men who show signs of psychopathy …” I agree with you. I like neither of them and would not have done what they did.

My point, as I explained up top, is different. It is incumbent upon all of us to be aware of how our behavior might be viewed. Recall the Bobby Burns poem:

And would some Power the small gift give us
To see ourselves as others see us!
It would from many a blunder free us,
And foolish notion:
What airs in dress and gait would leave us,
And even devotion!

As I said, I am seen as a threat by women if I come to close to them when they are walking alone. They have no right to shoot me and their fears of me are unjustified, but in cases like that I try to give them more space and reassure them by my actions that I am not a threat.

We should ask the same good manners of other people. I personally dislike the manifestations of ghetto culture. I am convinced that these behaviors hold back many good people. But they need to recognize that being loud and obnoxious is a signal that you are … loud and obnoxious. You cannot really be offended if people avoid you.

I used to work in a bookshop. There was a bum who used to come into the shop. He never bought anything and I would let him stay. Until he started to fart. When he did that, I kicked him out. He had violated social rules and made life unpleasant for those around him. People like you might tolerate that and just stand in the stink. Maybe you would claim it smells like roses. I am proudly less tolerant of bad behavior in myself and others.

Posted by: CJ at February 23, 2014 1:31 PM
Comment #376728

How many times do we have to listen to RM tell the same old story about his 45/70. It’s none of RM’s or SD’s business how many guns the American individual wants to own. A liberal Democrat politician recently made the comment that more Americans are not buying firearms, but the same people who own them are simply buying more. This is an outright lie. And to the absolute hatred of the left; the FBI’s latest facts show the increased ownership of firearms has led to the drop in crime. Read this little story of what is really going on in America:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/21/san-diego-wont-appeal-9th-circuit-on-concealed-car/

Liberal gun banning states are dropping their case against gun possession…why…because they don’t want the SCOTUS to rule in favor of the American people’s 2nd Amend rights again.

The gun issue is dead in America; Obama did that to himself. American’s will own as many guns as they like.

Posted by: DSP2195 at February 23, 2014 3:10 PM
Comment #376733

dsp2195,

“It’s none of RM’s or SD’s business how many guns the American individual wants to own.”

I would hate to burst your ego bubble, but except for the fact that I think people with a gun fetish are silly, I really don’t care how many guns you own. You want to own an entire arsenal and can so it within the law, knock yourself out.

My question to Royal was about how many guns do we need to own before actually we feel safe.

Willie,

“Roosevelt’s foreign policy gave this country the respect of the rest of the world.”

Actually no it didn’t. The “White Fleet” scared the rest of the world sh**less.

Fear is not respect.

And as a point of fact, the “Five Powers Treaty” signed after WW1 was as much about the rest of the world being scared of the US than anything else.

“We would still be in a cold war with a still powerful USSR if it wasn’t for Reagan’s Peace Through Strength policy.”

Actually the Soviets were in trouble before Reagan took office.

“Roosevelt’s use of the military to end a coal miner’s strike wasn’t to kill all the strikers and let God sort them out, he used the military to mine the coal and deny profits from the coal companies.”

And Roosevelt exausted all manner of negotiations before he did so.
You also failed to mention that previous Presidents also sided with the unions in their strikes against the mines.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 23, 2014 6:59 PM
Comment #376736

Rocky

“Actually the Soviets were in trouble before Reagan took office.” - this is hard to say. They could have recovered.

I am not trying to be provocative and as you recall I am an old Cold Warrior, but I believe that had Carter been reelected, followed by Mondale, the Soviet Union would have had a good chance of survival. We did a full-court press on them in Eastern Europe and elsewhere in the 1980s. I don’t think Carter would have been up to it.

IMO w/o Pope John Paul, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the evil empire could have survived.

I will also point out that all of the experts thought it would survive. I was in Vienna at OSCE on the day the Berlin Wall fell. Experts briefing there explained that East Germany was fundamentally stable. Thank God the leadership made a few mistakes and hung themselves.

The Soviet Union was indeed a horrible decadent place. Communism is a horrible and erroneous ideology. It deserved to die. But such things don’t always or even usually crash by themselves. They usually take a little kick into the ash heap of history.

I think it worked perfectly. The Soviets were afraid of Reagan. They thought he was nuts, which isn’t necessary a big thing for your enemies to think. They were driven to waste their resources. In addition, we helped freedom fighters. I know from personal experience that the Solidarity people in Poland loved Reagan. They were sure the he kept many of them alive.

Anyway, you cannot prove the negative. The evil empire fell, replaced now by evil junior, still nasty but less globally dangerous.

Posted by: CJ at February 23, 2014 7:23 PM
Comment #376737

Jack,

I don’t disagree with your assertion that the Soviets “could” have survived, however, with their invasion of Afghanistan they wrote their own epitaph.

They made virtually the same mistakes we did in Vietnam. The difference was we had capitalism, and the free market to fall back on.

The Soviets had no such luxury.

And their collapse was spectacular.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 23, 2014 8:05 PM
Comment #376739

Rocky

Nothing is inevitable and all history is contingent.

Afghanistan need not have destroyed the evil empire. And had Reagan not given stingers to the Afghan rebels, it is likely the Soviets would have pacified the place. They were a lot more comfortable with killing people. They used to say about the Romans that “The make a desert and call it peace.” The Soviets would have been willing to do that and would have done had it not been for our support.

Of course, had the Soviets succeeded, radical Islam may have been beaten down a bit. Saddam (a Soviet client) would never have invaded Kuwait and lots of other things would have been different. In a sense we traded the stability of a world under constant threat of nuclear annihilation for one with the smaller, but real incident of terrorism. On the other hand (again) “red terror,” the kind that impacted Europe, disappeared with the evil empire.

Posted by: CJ at February 23, 2014 8:30 PM
Comment #376742

Jack,

“And had Reagan not given stingers to the Afghan rebels…”

And we all know how that whole Mujahideen thing worked out.

No one has conquered Afghanistan…since well, ever. Many have tried, none have succeeded. Not even us.

Here’s another one for you Willie;

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend”.


Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at February 23, 2014 9:45 PM
Comment #376744

I don’t care much how many guns law abiding people own, just as long as those who aren’t so law abiding have fewer of them. As for whether I’d let a bum stay in a place like that?

It’s a place of business. If he becomes a problem for the other customers he becomes a problem for me. I would, however, try to keep the situation calm, and use the minimum of force.

I think the thing is, for many blacks in America, the suspicions is already high, and this creates two problems. One, they might feel that they need to be ultra perfect in their behavior, and this will never let them forget that they’re not seen as equals. While people who conform with the high expectations might not be objectionable, they will harbor resentment, and you won’t get much help from them.

The other response? A number of people, if they’re presented with a situation where they are judged incapable of doing the right thing will just say, “screw it” and flout the rules. They’ll play the loud music, forget the indoor voices, be more boisterous, and let the other folks worry about following the rules of the people who will never give them a fair shake anyhow.

By treating folks long kept in poverty as if they got themselves into that mess, folks basically threw a stumbling block in front of many people taking responsibility for themselves. I mean, why bother when nobody accounts for where you’re starting from. I mean, how do you respond internally, when somebody calls your kids thugs?

I think it’s important to give people starting up from less forgiving environments more forgiving standards, at least starting out. And by forgiving, I don’t mean they don’t eventually have to perform at the same level, more that we should account for the less privileged environment.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 24, 2014 12:27 AM
Comment #376745

What evidence do you have of a world being scared, Rocky Marks? What cities were destroyed by the great white fleet on it’s world tour? I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Is this an argument for argument’s sake? Is your Tellerite showing?

Also, why was the Five Powers Treaty necessary? It was necessary because other powers were building warships at a rate that would result in an arms race. Why would a timid and frightened country build warships in the face of a terror such as your scary monster, the United States?

I say in total to your comment, So what? Respect and fear often go together. No force was used during the tour of the great white fleet. No naval engagements occurred and an arms race was averted by the Five Powers Treaty. Roosevelt wielded the military that peacably brought the coal miner’s strike to an end. So what? It doesn’t change the fact that a presence of might does more to insure peace and deter violence much more than the lack of might and good intentions would ever do.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 24, 2014 1:26 AM
Comment #376748
My comment is based on proper behaviors. I know from experience that how you present yourself makes a very big difference.

C&J Why on earth would you include the killing of a black kid in a vehicle with loud music by a gun nut with proper behaviors if not to blame the victim? The dead kid was a high school student who worked at McDonalds, in his own neighborhood who was shot by a man passing through town. The man parked in a public place yelled out the window to the kids to turn the music down, is that proper behavior? Is firing 8 rounds into a van and then fleeing the scene proper behavior?

As far as dressing right it seems to me the only way for black kids to dress in Florida is in a dogs skins because it is illegal to shoot dogs in Florida. This is the results of the ALEC law conservatives in FLA passed is that proper behavior?


jtwo, you live in a bad neighborhood…MOVE!

Because your right to escalate the private sector arms race trumps my right to live in a neighborhood where the good guys are the bad guys?

All your other imaginary scenarios are merely stupid hyperbole.

Were that true Royal you would be able to make an intelligent comment to rebut them instead of resorting to silliness such a this.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 24, 2014 11:43 AM
Comment #376749

Look who’s talking silliness!

As far as dressing right it seems to me the only way for black kids to dress in Florida is in a dogs skins because it is illegal to shoot dogs in Florida. This is the results of the ALEC law conservatives in FLA passed is that proper behavior?

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 24, 2014 11:57 AM
Comment #376750

The elephant in the room is that black urban “thug culture” deserves every bit of the assumed behavior it gets. Making excuses for it simply out of fear of being labeled a racist has only made it worse.

Funny how you don’t really hear anything about this BS “culture” until it bites them in the ass. And the lies that follow to defend it is pathetic. Shot for wearing a hoodie? Shot for listening to loud music? BS. They were shot because they felt “disrespected” and messed with the wrong a**hole.

Dress and act like a thug, you are going to be looked upon and treated like a thug. Don’t like that? Tough sh*$.

Posted by: kctim at February 24, 2014 12:30 PM
Comment #376751
The elephant in the room is that black urban “thug culture” deserves every bit of the assumed behavior it gets.

kctim, you are assuming that because some kids are thugs that all kids are thugs! Therefore the guy in the car next to them is allowed to pop off 8 rounds into their vehicle, not because he could see them but because it was “that kind of music”. You astound me with this time of thinking. This killer was hallucinating(claims he thought he saw a weapon in the SUV), and according to his own testimony delusional(believed he was being attacked despite the kids still being in their own vehicle) and he was permitted to have a gun. You tell us basketball is a crime, after all that is what they had in their SUV! But selling guns to crazies isn’t?

You are as bad as C&J telling us it is the victims fault for wearing the wrong clothes (rape victims hear that a lot as well) and automatically assuming they were doing some type of thug activity.

Weary, a bit to soon with your post, especially with kctim being the next post telling us it is the thug culture/clothes that gives the guy in the next car the right to shot at them for no reason at all. But yes it is silly to think people in this country would have to resort to such silliness to avoid getting shot for playing loud music.
I realize this was a private gun owner exercising his 2nd amendment rights in your mind but how long before we the people decide it is acceptable for our police force to shoot people for playing the car stereo to loud?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 24, 2014 2:15 PM
Comment #376754

J2

I am not assuming anything. If you dress and act like a thug, people are going to look at you as a thug. That is a fact. If you see three guys sitting around in white sheets with pointy hats, are you going to get to know each one before thinking they are racists?

NOBODY has said anyone is allowed to pop off rounds into a car. What was said is that this guy didn’t just start firing into the car because of the loud music. You know damn well there was yelling back and forth that led to it. That doesn’t excuse what happened, and Dunn is getting what he deserves, but the fact is that the behavior of both sides probably led to what happened.
You are “astounded” only because you want people to wrongly believe it’s “hunting season on black teens” and not everybody is buying it.

“You tell us basketball is a crime, after all that is what they had in their SUV!”

Sigh, no J2, basketball is not a crime. Neither is listening to loud music. Neither is acting tough. Neither is mouthing off. Unlike the Zimmerman case, NOTHING showed Dunn was justified in his actions and he does deserves prison. Like the Zimmerman case though, sometimes the tough guy attitude bites off more than it can chew.

“But selling guns to crazies isn’t?”

Actually, it is and there are laws pertaining to it.

“You are as bad as C&J telling us it is the victims fault for wearing the wrong clothes (rape victims hear that a lot as well) and automatically assuming they were doing some type of thug activity.”

Then you are not listening to what C&J or I have said. NOBODY has said the victim deserved what he got. What was said is that appearance and behavior affect how others treat you and can sometimes lead to bad results.

Posted by: kctim at February 24, 2014 5:22 PM
Comment #376755

kctim, nothing shows he was justified yet he was convicted of not murdering the rest of the people in the SUV and the jury was hung on the murder charge.

Actually, it is and there are laws pertaining to it.

Yet the gun dealer shot the kid with legal weapons, seems to be a flaw in the system.

Then you are not listening to what C&J or I have said. NOBODY has said the victim deserved what he got. What was said is that appearance and behavior affect how others treat you and can sometimes lead to bad results.

Then I apologize kctim, the part about not having the same values as C&J must have been directed at the white guy that did the shooting. The whole big and threatening thing was referring to the shooter and I was confused. Anything else and well its blaming the victim in my book.

I understand your point kctim, appearance and behavior can affect judgement about a person but unfortunately the kid is dead and the bad judgement reflected in the shooters action has put him behind bars. Yet in Florida the hysteria has gotten to a point where killing of the innocent by those that should know better tells us something is wrong. How on earth dos a gun collector/dealer, CW permitted person do such a foolish thing?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 24, 2014 5:51 PM
Comment #376757

j2t2

You ask, “Why on earth would you include the killing of a black kid in a vehicle with loud music by a gun nut with proper behaviors if not to blame the victim?”

Had I included this under proper behavior, you would have a point, but I did not. My first sentence says, “Another innocent black teenager has been killed in Florida.” Notice the use of the adjective “innocent.”

Posted by: CJ at February 24, 2014 6:31 PM
Comment #376809

J2

He was convicted of attempted murder, there will be another trial, and jurors say race was not a factor in their decision. The rhetoric about it being open season on black males is nothing but intentional lies for personal gain.

“Yet in Florida the hysteria has gotten to a point where killing of the innocent by those that should know better tells us something is wrong.”

We have one incident where a guy who had been drinking got into a verbal altercation and somebody ended up shot and killed. That hardly qualifies as ‘hysteria’ sweeping the nation.

Posted by: kctim at February 25, 2014 9:22 AM
Comment #376817

We both agree he is innocent C&J but why mention the Dunn deal at all in the proper behaviors post unless it was related to the subject? I mean I didn’t see any “and now moving along to other issues” or anything close to that so as a reader I can only assume the innocent black kid murder was relevant to the proper behavior, Now that you have told me…. I guess if you say so. Anyway it’s good to know you are not in any way trying to blame the innocent black kid as was done by so many conservatives in the Trayvon Martin case.

You know this wouldn’t be the first time conservatives have attempted to blame the victim, hell Dunn has been telling people he feels like the victim! SO you can see why one could be confused anyway.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 25, 2014 2:36 PM
Comment #376818
We have one incident where a guy who had been drinking got into a verbal altercation and somebody ended up shot and killed. That hardly qualifies as ‘hysteria’ sweeping the nation.

One incident! Have we forgot Zimmerman stalking and killing the black kid with the hoodie? But the reason I say hysteria kctim is because it seems to me that when Florida passed the ALEC stand your ground legislation there must have been a reason. Are yo saying this law was passed without a real need for it? People weren’t being attacked in their homes and cars? They didn’t give in to fear and fear mongering?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 25, 2014 2:43 PM
Comment #376831

j2t2

The kid certainly did not deserve to be a victim of violence. There is, however, a correlation between such behaviors and violence. It would be silly to overlook that.

Posted by: CJ at February 25, 2014 6:42 PM
Comment #376847

SO C&J you seem to be hedging a bit. Exactly what behaviors are you referring to? From the reports I have seen these kids were playing basketball and headed to the store for refreshments. God I can’t believe we are going down this road, are you suggesting the “Her skirt was short so it was ok that I raped her, she was asking for it” behavior of DUnn or “the thug carrying a gun demanding the world bow to his musical preferences” behavior of Dunn? I doubt it C&J instead you focus on the behavior of the victim right! The black urban culture that you assume these kids were displaying as if it were wrong to do in this urban area the killer was visiting. The problem is the white country boy culture here C&J. The one that tells people like Dunn it is right to yell to the kids in the next vehicle demanding they turn “that crap” down, that it is ok to start fights and then blame the black urban culture, that it is ok to fire rounds into a vehicle full of kids because they did not “massa up” quick enough. Lets remember who it was that started this, not the victim but the gun owner C&J. He was loud and aggressive first. Not the kids.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 26, 2014 10:21 AM
Comment #376849

Let’s put this incident in a perspective the left can understand.

The left believes it is an assault, a physical assault on their body when a person is smoking within eyesight of them. They believe they will contact an incurable illness and that illness will kill them. They would be murdered by the “second-hand smoke”.

Now experience the bone jarring music played loudly from vehicles and it is an assault, a physical assault, on the eardrums of the person within hearing distance of that music. There is the same chance the person subjected to the ear splitting music could suffer hearing loss as a result.

Of course, this is no reason to pull out a gun and start shooting, but shouldn’t the person subjected to the assault have a right to be free from this kind of assault when he is in public? After all, he has a right to use the gas station without being subjected to physical violence.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2014 11:54 AM
Comment #376850

Weary, you seem to be continuing the stereotyping that pervades this post and thread. The kids were black so they displayed the urban black culture, liberals consider smoking to be an assault yadayada. It does seem we agree that none of this is a reason to shoot and kill people,but I’m just saying Dunn does have a “right” (how comical is that)to use the gas station (a public place)without being subjected to the music or as you say “physical violence”(based upon a stereotype).

Your previous comment seems to suggest not just Florida but the entire country is in a hysteria due to “When Chicago’s murder rate and mugshots of young black men are constantly in the news it generates a fear of murder by young black men.” and I can agree (Except of course it isn’t just black kids and Chicago but…).

I was wondering, since you can explain liberals so well to liberals can you explain this false sense of hysteria to kctim? He seems to be in denial about it. People are running out and buying assault weapons, amongst many other types of guns, because the gun industry/lobby has told them Obama(a half black guy) is taking them away from them. The corporate media has told them black kids are killing everyone off in droves so arm up America.

While you are at it can you explain to C&J that despite the caveat in the post it kinda sounds like conservatives have a fear of black’s in general and such fear can manifest itself in racism and the over use of rationalizations to justify the killing of black kids(much like we see in this thread).

Posted by: j2t2 at February 26, 2014 12:45 PM
Comment #376852

Perhaps you could explain to liberals how jumping to your own personal conclusion and relating it to what a conservative says is only perpetuating your own personal conclusion for the purpose of criticizing the conservative.

CJ only makes a suggestion that personal behavour determines what other people think about someone. You look at this as an opportunity to put words in his mouth and to accuse him of trying to justify a white guy killing a black kid. His post isn’t what you claim/want it to be. He repeatedly said the guy was not justified in his actions and only points out that people are judged by their behavour. If it walks like a duck… as the saying goes. He also makes a point that good manners go a long way toward how people relate.

kctim is correct when he says there is not a wave of white gun nuts randomly shooting black people on the streets. I made the point that the media will jump on a single instance such as this and use it to create a hysteria to promote their political position against guns. Again, imagine what an environment we would have if every instance of a gun saving a life or preventing a crime was repeated over and over in the media and crimes using guns were ignored. Even you would have to admit the atmosphere toward guns would be 180 degrees to what it is now.

Most of your arguments are for argument’s sake, j2t2. Your Tellerite is showing again. I’ll admit WatchBlog would be a boring place if there weren’t opposing points of view, but when someone wants to oppose a point of view simply to deny another the credibility of theirs, well, that’s just crass.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2014 1:32 PM
Comment #376856

Weary
You are one screwy guy. First over in the middle column you insult a commenter by telling them to “shut the fuck up” and now you call j2t2 crass. Pot, kettle. I also do not know what the heck you are trying to say when you type the word “Tellerite”, that is not a word I am familiar with. There is tellurite (a salt of tellurous acid) and Tellarite (a fictional species from Tellar) you are confused. That does not surprise me as your comments always seem to have a flavor of confusion, misinformation and down right stupid as the main ingredient. The whole stand your ground, conceal and carry and crazy gun nut fervor has only really come about in the last 20 years. I have known people who own and use guns all of my life and almost all of them I am certain would not recognize what the current manic obsession with guns is all about. They thought of them as protection or useful for hunting but not what it is thought of today. I might suggest they would think as I do that this is a dangerous outcome of the right wing crazy talk. Oh and as I said in the middle column you are an offensive cretin. Your presence on this blog has not enhanced it’s conversation.

Posted by: Speak4all at February 26, 2014 4:05 PM
Comment #376857

Democratics can dish it out, but they can’t take it. Your side seems to think you can slander, lie, destroy reputations, and when the slander and lies are brought out in the open for all to see it’s double-down time. More name calling and slander.

Democratics have no problem fighting fire with flame throwers. It’s all they got, because their real intentions wouldn’t stand for a second in the light of day.

By the way, Speak4all, I did no such thing. I was only relating some words of wisdom of my mother’s. Leave it to a Democratic to feign revulsion, twist comments, and lie to create an opportunity to express their faux outrage.

Thanks for the spelling correction. Make sure you scratch a great big long hash mark on your pencil to tally the occasion.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2014 4:27 PM
Comment #376859

Still bringing the cray, cray. What the heck do you mean by your constant miscreant adaptation of the word “Democratic”. You do not know how to use the word, I would suggest that you try using something else. I might also suggest that I did not express faux outrage, I expressed revulsion.

Posted by: Speak4all at February 26, 2014 4:34 PM
Comment #376860

Yea, I think I covered that.

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2014 4:50 PM
Comment #376861
CJ only makes a suggestion that personal behavour determines what other people think about someone. You look at this as an opportunity to put words in his mouth and to accuse him of trying to justify a white guy killing a black kid.

But I put no words in anyone’s mouth Weary I called him out on his words. I started with a scenario that summed up my initial reactions to the post and the Dunn case but didn’t put words into anyone’s mouth Weary. So I am confused about why you would say such a thing.

His post isn’t what you claim/want it to be. He repeatedly said the guy was not justified in his actions and only points out that people are judged by their behavour. If it walks like a duck… as the saying goes. He also makes a point that good manners go a long way toward how people relate.

Yes combined into one post Weary. That was why I questioned the intent of the post. All y’all could have been very clear in answering my concerns but instead chose denial. I pressed on the issue and all y’all hedged each and every time.

OH you made the perfunctory denials as I was told “Notice I said innocent” “The kid certainly did not deserve to be a victim of violence. There is, however…., and of course your own “Of course, this is no reason to pull out a gun and start shooting, but shouldn’t the person subjected to the assault have a right to be free from this kind of assault when he is in public?”. SO you tell me there is no relationship between the black kid and their behavior so then the murder must be included in this post due to Dunn’s behavior. Yet all y’all continue to bring up the black kids perceived behaviors. AS if it were their fault Weary. All y’all hedged your bets each and every time.


I made the point that the media will jump on a single instance such as this and use it to create a hysteria to promote their political position against guns.

SO you agree that there is hysteria surrounding the black kids as killers then? This and your comment “When Chicago’s murder rate and mugshots of young black men are constantly in the news it generates a fear of murder by young black men. When these same people are excused for being victims of society and returned to the streets it generates a fear of criminals on the loose.” Seems to be making excuses for the improper behavior of Dunn Weary as well as telling us there is in fact a hysteria amongst us.


Most of your arguments are for argument’s sake, j2t2. …. but when someone wants to oppose a point of view simply to deny another the credibility of theirs, well, that’s just crass.

Such profound insight Weary I argue to argue truly a Zen moment. Yet I am crass for denying another credibility of their point of view! Weary, you and our conservative friends do that all by yourselves without any help from me. I cannot deny you guy’ anything I can only express my point of view. Perhaps if your point of view were based in truth this fear you have of me denying you credibility…, just saying.

But it dos bring up another point which is the continuing problem of persecution conservatives feel when questioned about anything, the inability to accept personal responsibility when they smokescreen issues then claim they were denied the credibility of their viewpoint by someone just because they disagree with them. What’s a person to think?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 26, 2014 5:57 PM
Comment #376863

If anyone is hysterical it is demonstrated by your argument. I attribute that to the media’s constant war against the second amendment.

Your initial comment was a racist rant that put words in CJ’s mouth. You start off with a hypothetical arms race. Then you posit that since you have the biggest weapon you are allowed to start a war, being revved up. Then you say that conservatives target young kids for their dress. You excuse their loud and aggressive behavior and claim it’s ok to shoot them. You inject the words “massa” and “Yessa massa”! Did you read the same post the rest of us did?

CJ never said anything like this in his post. It’s racist bigotry that had you interpret his post as you did. He referred to himself and his family more than he referred to “Black Culture”. Trash talk isn’t exclusive to the black culture. I’ve seen white people take up more space than a gorilla when they project themselves. I don’t like it either. But if someone disagrees with the gorilla in the room I don’t question their motives for political reasons and make excuses for the gorilla.

I agree with CJ’s post. If people were more polite in public many instances of fear, violence, and aggression would be avoided. If people thought more about the people they encounter instead of only themselves people would have more opportunity to get along with each other, whatever color they may be. It is unfortunate CJ used this particular scenario to make his point. In doing so he gave racists and political bigots another opportunity to criticize.


Posted by: Weary Willie at February 26, 2014 7:35 PM
Comment #376866

Weary, playing the race card! how pathetic is that?

If anyone is hysterical it is demonstrated by your argument. I attribute that to the media’s constant war against the second amendment.

Thank you, that is my argument but it was with your help as I mentioned above(The Chicago comment), lets not forget that. Could you be confusing the corporate media “if it bleeds it leads” mentality with a concerted attack on the 2nd amendment?

Then you posit that since you have the biggest weapon you are allowed to start a war, being revved up.

Weary certainly that is the conservative way kinda like the peace through strength quote you posted in this thread, on individuals ..here lets let the">http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=red+dawn+1984&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz35”>the Colonel explain (at about 2:10 into it)

Did you read the same post the rest of us did?

Yep and then I gave my initial reactions to the post. The arms war I spoke of has been ongoing for years both at the global level and here in this country on the personal level IMHO. As we continue to drink the swill put out by the NRA and others we become intoxicated leading to bad decisions such as Dunn’s decision to shoot into an SUV full of kids. Or the guy in Dearborn Heights shooting the accident victim on his porch.

If people were more polite in public many instances of fear, violence, and aggression would be avoided.

I would say this is but the tip of the iceberg Weary. If we were all the same we would be more polite IMHO. But we aren’t and, as but one example,with the conservative media telling us “When Chicago’s murder rate and mugshots of young black men are constantly in the news it generates a fear of murder by young black men. When these same people are excused for being victims of society and returned to the streets it generates a fear of criminals on the loose. When people think they can get away with violence it makes violence easier to perpetrate.” how can we say it is just a matter of being more polite. They exploit the fear, I mean the jails are filled with blacks Weary yet they would have us believe these guys are excused, what a joke.

It is unfortunate CJ used this particular scenario to make his point.

Yes it is especially when they had the opportunity to clear it us and instead hedged their words. I think it was their intent all along.

In doing so he gave racists and political bigots another opportunity to criticize.

And you have done a good job at it Weary. But go back and look at all the misconceptions you have glossed over in this thread and add them to the being more polite idea , then we would have less violence, IMHO.


Accusing me of putting words into people mouths whilst putting words into my mouth! What a guy Weary.

Posted by: j2t2 at February 26, 2014 9:03 PM
Comment #376908

Weary lets try againthe Colonel explain (at about 2:10 into it)

Posted by: j2t2 at February 27, 2014 1:25 AM
Comment #376909

ok 1 more time The Colonel explain

Posted by: j2t2 at February 27, 2014 1:28 AM
Comment #376921

Victims Of Society

So what is the solution? What explains humans being willing to go out and eliminate vast numbers of innocents? Or to kidnap young girls as sex slaves?
They think they can get away with it.


But wait, there’s more. When the culture promotes the idea that “we belong to the government”; when the culture promotes the idea that it’s perfectly all right to kill the very young, the suffering old, the mentally afflicted, the bodily deformed… Once you accept the idea that common humanity or not, there are people who aren’t “people” as such…

You let the monster out. Whether you do it yourself or you vote to have people “whose lives aren’t worth living” put to death, it’s the same.
You’ve stopped respecting humanity and therefore rendered yourself less than human.
Treating people as units, instead of bringing about Earthly paradise always brings about mass graves. Perhaps because it mimics the thought processes of a psychopath who views others as means to his end.
And the only true victims are the dead, the maimed and the coerced.
Posted by: Weary Willie at February 27, 2014 10:59 AM
Comment #376922

http://psikoloji.fisek.com.tr/makale/crimeand.htm

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 27, 2014 11:25 AM
Comment #376923

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/25/gun-grabbers-treat-criminals-as-victims/

Posted by: Weary Willie at February 27, 2014 11:35 AM
Post a comment