U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

Status
Not open for further replies.
In most states in the U.S. (including Georgia), you are guilty of DWI if you are in control of a motor vehicle. This includes being in the vehicle in any way with the keys, whether you are asleep, whether it is parked, and whether or not you had any intention of actually driving. Despite the name "driving under the influence," actual driving is not an element of the offense.
And what if said cops allowed him to drive off despite the failed sobriety test? I'm sure the city would be liable for damages and negligence as well.

Drunk driving pisses me off.

This is NOT a race thing.
 
Can insurance companies increase premiums to homes that are near black homes / people? Is that even legal? Cause I can see that happening in the future. Innocent black people being forced to leave the suburbs because people feel uncomfortable and their premiums getting increased.
No, but they can increase the premium come renewal time if crime rates have spiked since the policy was started. And if they're paying out more often because crime has risen, it's not only sensible and right, but to be expected



And this is how people become priced out of insurance and why I want to collectively cunt slap every single coddled little prick I see saying "but REEE yall have inshooooraaannnnnncccee!!"


like, no, you fucking tards, a lot of people do not. Imagine living in a world so coddled and priveledged you cannot begin to get your shit-tier brain around the fact that many people don't have it. And even if you do, a claim shits up your no claims bonus, there's a lag in the claim being submitted and it paying out, they may not pay out, and if it's a business then all too often it won't cover loss of earnings

For a bunch who like to claim they're ll bout dat sweet, sweet, kinder gentler politics they really struggle with understanding the lives of people worse off than their parents who are bankrolling them
 
Instead of burning down a Wendy's - murder or arson large news media employees (perf left leaning ones as they have higher viewership).

Really take that message to the people who can show it off. If you legit hunt down Don Lemon, you can force the world to hear your ideas about abolishing the police or whatever.

Remember, also movie and TV celebrities are the 1%. Wendy's and Wal-mart may have some ok shit, but imagine looting Taylor Swifts expensive accessories and underware. You could eat for life selling Jim Carreys gold plated rocket car.
 
One condition: fire and replace the Minneapolis government immediately.

Someone needs to tell Fauxdeau that he made his bed, then he shat in it and he laid there and did nothing....
Then he called his friend Lisa Bender over and she shat all over it too.

No no no no no, Frey. You get nothing :story: just like that deleted chromosome, Lightfoot.

The hide of these guys. It's a fucking comedy of errors. We need to laugh more at these people.
 
this reminds me of the Anglo-Zanzibar War when the Zanzibars kept running into the Brits gunfire. When the survivors were interrogated later they said that their warpaint had been blessed by their shamans and it was supposed to make them invincible. They really thought the bullets would bounce off them Superman style.

Niggers lmao

The Chinese Boxers and Peasant Crusaders had the same view.

Gandhi is serious business in India. I'd be shocked if this doesn't lead to some sort of formal (but ultimately irrelevant) diplomatic complaint.

Lots of Indians actually hate Gandhi. Gandhi wanted Pakistan and India united. He was even willing to allow Muslims to makeup most of the government. Kinda why he was killed by a Hindu.

So let me understand this timeline:

- Jogger decides to jog, escalates confrontation with police
- Jogger steals cop's taser and shoots him with it
- Nominee for Darwin Awards
- Chimps chimp out, obviously
- Atlanta suffers massive white guilt
- Dindu nuffin
- Police chief resigns bc fuck accountability
- Cop who shot him fired for doing his job
- Joggers burn down Wendy's where it happened bc better people worked there

Am i missing something or is this as retarded as I think it is?

I can't say I agree in this case.

Taser justifies deadly force -> But they used the taser on him first = retarded logic

Isn't a taser non-lethal? Isn't he just a random drunk guy by himself? This was uncalled for.
 
Lots of Indians actually hate Gandhi. Gandhi wanted Pakistan and India united. He was even willing to allow Muslims to makeup most of the government. Kinda why he was killed by a Hindu.
wasn't gandhi killed by someone who thought he was someone else?
 
Taken from James Woods twitter, I've no idea the area it's from
View attachment 1375317
THIS is why you don't fuck with middle aged working class men. They're had decades working manual jobs and have got that wood hard old man strength. They will fuck a young punk up no problem. This here is a black man, this is not a nigger.
 
Isn't a taser non-lethal? Isn't he just a random drunk guy by himself? This was uncalled for.
fists are also non lethal, doesnt mean you cant kill someone with your fists
same for shit like pepper spray, rubber bullets, batons, etc
nobody (not even cops) can be expected to just sit back and do nothing while subjected to an illegal attack by someone else. if somebody comes at you with fists, you can shoot the person to stop the attack. that's what self defense is all about.
the key here is "illegal attack". a cop putting you in cuffs is not illegal, you punching the cop in the face for trying to cuff you is illegal.
a cop tazering you to stop you from acting out isn't illegal, you tazering the cop while trying to run away from him is illegal.

"but cops used taser first"
the key difference here is that cops hava a right (and duty) to use force on perps to achieve compliance. perps do NOT have a right to use force on cops to escape arrest.
 
My emotional security? You’re the only one here talking to people like they’re Richard Spencer II for correlating crime and race and calling them “brainlets“ for not “studying the mechanisms behind the statistics”. You said you would explain the mysterious mechanisms behind the race/crime statistics and you still haven’t replied to my post containing them.

I'm not familiar with Richard Spencer's manner of speaking, but you haven't been too flattering, yourself. That's why I even bothered bringing up emotional security-- well, that, and my impression of "race realists" has largely been that they have an almost pathological need to use poorly interpreted statistics in order to stave off suicide by convincing themselves of a scapegoat uniformly worse and less accomplished than them, employing principally motte-and-bailey to worm in racist theories that they don't have the guts to outright say in the way they would actually want as well as egregious logical jumps (e.g. "the average IQ of the African is 85" --> "hardly any African has an IQ greater than 85").

He didn’t even mention crime in this post lmao. He mentioned problems (which isn’t only crime, black people have a bad rep when it comes to other things like noise disturbance, general lack of care for property, etc) and data.
Don't do that. Whenever we talk "problems" and "data", we are almost always referring to "crime" and there's no reason to suppose otherwise. Even if it's multiple matters, we're invariably talking about crime.

Except that the statistics literally correlate race and crime.

So you don't understand what correlation isn't.

This is what I was referring to with "egregious logical jumps". That there's a correlation between race and crime, statistically speaking, means something. What may that something be? It may mean that race has a causal relationship with crime, and it may not, because correlation doesn't equal causation. The correlation itself has to be explained. You can easily correlate two different things however you want, and then come up with whatever explanation you have for it-- race vs. income isn't such an arbitrary relationship to examine, but the entire system of causality isn't just race and income.

That said, you've all but denied that the issues I've brought up thus far (poverty, income inequality, the former two causing cultural rot) could be contributors, and presumably you don't think that anything outside of race (including single motherhood) would be a contributing factor. Or, maybe you think that all such issues are downstream from race-- of course, different African communities don't have the same internal issues that the African-American community has, as Africans outside America are pretty good at maintaining the nuclear family structure. Even the article you cite says that immigrant Africans have incarceration rates comparable to that of whites.

Thing is, you're not actually making that jump yourself. You're not actually explaining what about race-- and only race-- would cause higher crime rates. You're assaulting me with the perceived shock of this correlation... and you're trying to do something and nothing with it at the same time.

My “rule” is supported by statistics, and just plain reason. Example: the most dangerous cities in America are Bessemer (AL), East St. Louis (IL), and Monroe (LA). Bessemer - 70% black, East St. Louis - 98% black, Monroe - 63% black.

On the contrary, you're using a correlation without attempting to interpret that correlation, all while assuming race is the only active factor in here based on a statistical proposition that recognizes itself as purely a statistical statistical proposition. Your takeaway from that writing, for example, doesn't account for immigrant blacks being incarcerated at similar rates as white people. It doesn't acknowledge that single motherhood is stated to be a "close second", and with that, it doesn't discuss the cultural and developmental effects of such a circumstance.

You don't even discuss this from your article:

Although the data are somewhat noisy and single-motherhood is quite strongly associated with the black population (r=0.76 at the county level), it seems to me that:

  1. there is a non-linear relationship between single-motherhood and homicide (which may be throwing off the linear model estimates somewhat)
  2. counties with very high rates of single-motherhood have very high homicide rates even with negligible black populations
  3. blacker counties with low-rates of single-motherhood seem to have homicide rates much closer to the national average (the same cannot be said for other covariates)
Based on the other evidence I have seen, I have come to view the single-motherhood being at least a very strong proxy for community health is and, in many respects, a stronger predictor of inter-racial differences than other measures like poverty rates. It does not entirely explain the observed racial differences here, but it mediates much of the relationship and does so more effectively than other common measures.

And one could easily understand why single motherhood would correlate with crime rates. We know what single motherhood can do en masse. That still isn't the whole story, of course.
 
The loudest of all these idiots don't even know a world before 9/11 mate. I was 12, a Canadian, on the other side of the continent and it still changed my outlook. On everything. Even people a few years younger than me don't really remember it.

A couple of weeks ago I fucking hated the police. Niggers were happy to enforce the Karen's gay lockdown laws, arresting people for playing in the park and going to the beach. Cunts. Now I'm actually having sympathy for them.
 
fists are also non lethal, doesnt mean you cant kill someone with your fists

"but cops used taser first"

This type of thinking is pretty insane. It almost feels old fashioned to believe that deadly force is only justified when life is in danger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back