Shootist Jeff

Is this a racist comment?

Is this a racist comment?  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. "The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.

    • Yes, this is not only absolutely racist but untrue as well.
      10
    • Yes, its a racist comment but unfortunately its sadly true.
      7
    • Yes, its racist as hell - but I'll give it a pass because gun control is more important
      0
    • No it's not racist because its true
      6
    • No, it's not racist because Team D
      2
    • My answer depends on who said the comment
      2


Recommended Posts

Discuss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's designed to be divisive and will add nothing to debates of racism or gun control. Mixing the two together in this fashion is to try to create a shitfight.

This shite is similar to the urge to drive down Cali highways, smoking cigarettes and tossing them into the brush. What fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Jeffie poo's feeling ignored again

His two favorite snowflake topics all rolled into one. It’s like the elusive Grand Unified Theory - but for Crackers, not physicists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrible. Anyone who thinks this, yet alone says it is a ignorant piece of shit who probably has never lowered him/herself to actually associate with any POC. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact: More blacks mispronounced the word "ask" as "ax" than white people.

Discuss.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, this kinda thing is exactly how the right is run. Folks reduce a topic to its most divisive elements, and then enjoy the popcorn. Leave people no real choices, just stark, polar opposite positions. Nuance is bad, understanding anathema. Compromise is foolish and weak.

Do they even like "democracy"?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The goal is to label any comment about race as racism so the topic can not be discussed at all.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Purposely devicive. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, benwynn said:

Fact: More blacks mispronounced the word "ask" as "ax" than white people.

Discuss.

I heard some guy on the radio argue that ax is the the original pronunciation. The original word was a shortened version of "acknowledge" thus "acks" and through some natural linguistic process, the letters tend to get switched around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mad said:

Purposely devicive. 

Exactly. I think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

The goal is to label any comment about race as racism so the topic can not be discussed at all.   

Nice. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, phillysailor said:

To be honest, this kinda thing is exactly how the right is run. Folks reduce a topic to its most divisive elements, and then enjoy the popcorn. Leave people no real choices, just stark, polar opposite positions. Nuance is bad, understanding anathema. Compromise is foolish and weak.

The user in question wrote the comment in this forum years ago, yet every attempt to have him explain it gets ignored.

But feel free to continue to blame everything in a left wing echo chamber on "the right".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the OP question, regarding which the survey cannot reveal useful info, I’m stuck by a couple of things. 

“The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.”

There’s a lot of perjorative words to unpack in that sentence, and they have little utility describing gun death stats... was the context a scientific discussion? If so, then the words used are terrible since available stats on maturity aren’t commonly available, and desire isn’t commonly broken down into short and long term components. 

The statement that desire for gunpower is “more volatile” in blacks, is where we start to question motives and the mindset of the writer, which seems to have veered into generalizations based on preconceived notions of another race, ie racism. 

I’d just prefer whoever originally posted the quote either expound upon their thought or let’s just let it slide. 

Like all conversations about race, it’s easy to say things wrong and playing “gotcha” is rarely useful in improving understanding. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bpm57 said:

The user in question wrote the comment in this forum years ago, yet every attempt to have him explain it gets ignored.

But feel free to continue to blame everything in a left wing echo chamber on "the right".

To what “everything”, pray tell, are you referring?

Im saying that labels like “Death Panel” or “Pro-Life” represent such condensation of complex subjects as to become ridiculous. 

But it works. Folks are motivated to “save babies” in a way that mobilizes voters, but decreases understanding and reduces the possibility of good policies that improve the lives and options of moms, kids and families. 

Increasing divisions gets primary voters, but makes democracy difficult.

Thats just one example, but FOX supplies more on a continual basis. Lefties I respect watch PBS and read long articles, hardly comparable to such tripe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Im saying that labels like “Death Panel” or “Pro-Life” represent such condensation of complex subjects as to become ridiculous. 

Oh, I see. And you suggest that this behavior is unique to "the right".

I read this forum and see plenty of this, mostly from "the left" - do you not see it, or do you just ignore it because you agree with it?

1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Thats just one example, but FOX supplies more on a continual basis.

As opposed to, say, CNN & MSNBC, who can be counted on to give your daily dose of (D) talking points all day long.

1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Lefties I respect watch PBS

Which explains the ratings of PBS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bpm57 said:
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Thats just one example, but FOX supplies more on a continual basis.

As opposed to, say, CNN & MSNBC, who can be counted on to give your daily dose of (D) talking points all day long.

When was the last time CNN and/or MSNBC blatantly lied about "news"?

Fox does this every day.

There is no equivalence. The right is enthralled by a spewing of vicious lies and hatred. There is simply nothing like this on the left.

Here's another question...... when was the last time you read a book? If you can remember, what was the title & author?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

When was the last time CNN and/or MSNBC blatantly lied about "news"?

Fox does this every day.

There is no equivalence. The right is enthralled by a spewing of vicious lies and hatred. There is simply nothing like this on the left.

Here's another question...... when was the last time you read a book? If you can remember, what was the title & author?

-DSK

3750674e36bc2682e92e75d4fd5b472e.jpg

Got it when it came out, it's the only book he has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

When was the last time CNN and/or MSNBC blatantly lied about "news"?

Fox does this every day.

There is no equivalence. The right is enthralled by a spewing of vicious lies and hatred. There is simply nothing like this on the left.

Remember the day when the News simply got reported, and you were left to reach your own conclusions as to the wider implications of that news?

All news organizations now insist on providing an editorial providing you with their interpretation of the News and it implications.

Fox goes a step further giving their followers "News" they want to see and hear,  while telling them they are smart to agree with their conclusions.

All packaged up by vacuous blonde bimbos that could not argue the their way out of a paper-bag without a producer and a teleprompter to assist if things went off script.

If someone on Fox said quick you need to drink this kool-aid, it would be mass murder.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm not saying just bias, but oversimplification and minimization of detail, nuance and the possibility of compromise and agreement. 

I don't watch CNN, MSNBC because they suck. I did reference PBS and liberals I respect. Trust sources which dare to challenge their preconceived notions, and a weekly debate like Shields & Brooks is an example of that in action. The right's version of that frequently devolve to shouting fights or have a need for a clear "winner." More like Pro Wrestling than wrestling with the important issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s up Jeffie? Need some attention? Has she locked you out and won’t let you watch again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mad said:

Purposely devicive. 

Hard to tell, could be the author really believes that and may even have evidence to back it up for all we know. Context is needed to sort out intent. The assertion that bears close examination right off is the immaturity exhibited by those who desire guns. Who buys more guns per capita , whites or blacks? Is there a way to measure immaturity...aside from a strong desire to own lots and lots of guns? 

 Interesting questions abound! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mark K said:

Hard to tell, could be the author really believes that and may even have evidence to back it up for all we know. Context is needed to sort out intent.

 

8 hours ago, phillysailor said:

I’d just prefer whoever originally posted the quote either expound upon their thought or let’s just let it slide. 

Let's have full disclosure. And let's have fairness. The OP needs to lay out the source and context of the quote, so others can decide appropriately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, phillysailor said:

To be honest, this kinda thing is exactly how the right is run. Folks reduce a topic to its most divisive elements, and then enjoy the popcorn. Leave people no real choices, just stark, polar opposite positions. Nuance is bad, understanding anathema. Compromise is foolish and weak.

Do they even like "democracy"?

Nuance???  Where was the nuance in that statement?  You DO know that @jocal505 said that quote don't you?  But he gets a pass because he's Team D and because you agree with his gun control stance.  As evadent.  Had I or AGITC, or Chinabald, or BPM or anyone in my elk herd had said the exact same quote above in the same context - we would have been run out of here on a rail and would have not been asked for nuance or context.  And you know that is true!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mark K said:

The goal is to label any comment about race as racism so the topic can not be discussed at all.   

Au contraire, mon chere.  I label it as racism because its racism and because I WANT to discuss it.  Besides we get the added bonus of exposing the hypocrisy of the SJWs, so win win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, phillysailor said:

To the OP question, regarding which the survey cannot reveal useful info, I’m stuck by a couple of things. 

“The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.”

There’s a lot of perjorative words to unpack in that sentence, and they have little utility describing gun death stats... was the context a scientific discussion? If so, then the words used are terrible since available stats on maturity aren’t commonly available, and desire isn’t commonly broken down into short and long term components. 

The statement that desire for gunpower is “more volatile” in blacks, is where we start to question motives and the mindset of the writer, which seems to have veered into generalizations based on preconceived notions of another race, ie racism. 

I’d just prefer whoever originally posted the quote either expound upon their thought or let’s just let it slide. 

Like all conversations about race, it’s easy to say things wrong and playing “gotcha” is rarely useful in improving understanding. 

I would very much like that too.  But despite repeated attempts to have him do so, he's instead doubled down on his statement.  Perhaps you should ask the author @jocal505 to expound on his thought. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Hey, I'm not saying just bias, but oversimplification and minimization of detail, nuance and the possibility of compromise and agreement. 

I don't watch CNN, MSNBC because they suck. I did reference PBS and liberals I respect. Trust sources which dare to challenge their preconceived notions, and a weekly debate like Shields & Brooks is an example of that in action. The right's version of that frequently devolve to shouting fights or have a need for a clear "winner." More like Pro Wrestling than wrestling with the important issues.

PBS, NPR and the BBC are pretty much the only news I consume for the reasons you state.  Its not just for liberals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I would very much like that too.  But despite repeated attempts to have him do so, he's instead doubled down on his statement.  Perhaps you should ask the author @jocal505 to expound on his thought. 

I've explained it a dozen times, including all fucking week on the Mitch McConnel thread. I use the numbers, folks. And I relate my years as a ghetto street worker, doing violence interruption. It bugs Jeff that I went unarmed among street punks, I think.

Anyway, the original context contained, and the present situation displays, these horrifying stats, showing high black carnage by gunfire. Jeff is playing games, and smearing a social worker, off a gun bloodbath based on racial strife.

Quote

Race, Based on available data from 1980 to 2008—

(Data from FBI UCR and SHR reports.)

--Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders.

P11 Trends by race

  • -- In 2008, the homicide victimization rate for blacks (19.6 homicides per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for
  • whites (3.3 homicides per 100,000).
  • -- The victimization rate for blacks peaked in the early 1990s, reaching a high of 39.4 homicides per 100,000 in 1991 (figure 17).
  • -- After 1991, the victimization rate for blacks fell until 1999, when it stabilized near 20 homicides per 100,000.
  • -- In 2008, the off ending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was 7 times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 off enders per 100,000) (figure 18).
  • -- The offending rate for blacks showed a similar pattern to the victimization rate, peaking in the early 1990s at a high of 51.1 off enders per 100,000 in 1991.

-- After 1991, the off ending rate for blacks declined until it reached 24 per 100,000 in 2004. The rate has since fluctuated, increasing to 28.4 offenders per 100,000 in 2006 before falling again to 24.7 offenders per 100,000 in 2008.

http://www.bjs.gov/c...df/htus8008.pdf

 

. The quote is used as a provocation and as an insult, of course, usually by Tom Ray...but Mark K ID'd the true purpose. Jeff and Tom want to de-rail discussion of the subject of improved race relations.

 Jeff, my good man, it appears that  you are on a journey here, and you say you are seeking answers. Your flat-earth, Dabs-light racial understanding is sad, much- repeated, and public. You need to simply do some reading, and MLK covers the objective of your search, what you claim you want to know here, quite well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Discuss

You are really hung up on race.

Did you ever think that the way to resolve these questions is to get rid of the people that are different?

Discuss. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff and Tom tell us they are Adam Winkler fans. Here are the gun murder rates Mr. Winkler quotes.

 

USA     White homicides 11.9/100k/    Black homicides 21.6/100k

Alabama 18.6/27.8

Florida  11.1/18.3

California  8.0/19.8

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel={"colId":"Location","sort":"asc"}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jocal505 said:
11 hours ago, phillysailor said:

I’d just prefer whoever originally posted the quote either expound upon their thought or let’s just let it slide. 

Let's have full disclosure. And let's have fairness. The OP needs to lay out the source and context of the quote, so others can decide appropriately.

It's your quote Joe  - the floor is yours.  Please feel free to explain the source and the context of your quote.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Nuance???  Where was the nuance in that statement?  You DO know that @jocal505 said that quote don't you?  But he gets a pass because he's Team D and because you agree with his gun control stance.  As evadent.  Had I or AGITC, or Chinabald, or BPM or anyone in my elk herd had said the exact same quote above in the same context - we would have been run out of here on a rail and would have not been asked for nuance or context.  And you know that is true!

If you could get over your snowflake , I'm so hard done by, right-wing victimhood for two seconds, you'd realise two things:

  1. Philly didn't give it a pass. He simply misattributed the criticism to the wrong side of politics
  2. Most people don't read jocal's shit, so most people don't know what he says. He's not worth reading for most of us after the first page or two or you and Tommy Dogballs taking turns at him. 

Frankly, I'm a little surprised philly couldn't spot your "gotcha bait". You asking for comment without insulting someone or deliberately trying to trigger an outburst is generally a sign you're playing games. As Eva Dent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

Jeff and Tom tell us they are Adam Winkler fans. Here are the gun murder rates Mr. Winkler quotes.

 

USA     White homicides 11.9/100k/    Black homicides 21.6/100k

Alabama 18.6/27.8

Florida  11.1/18.3

California  8.0/19.8

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel={"colId":"Location","sort":"asc"}

Where are the corresponding stats on what race are the perpetrators of those murder numbers above?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

If you could get over your snowflake , I'm so hard done by, right-wing victimhood for two seconds, you'd realise two things:

  1. Philly didn't give it a pass. He simply misattributed the criticism to the wrong side of politics
  2. Most people don't read jocal's shit, so most people don't know what he says. He's not worth reading for most of us after the first page or two or you and Tommy Dogballs taking turns at him. 

Frankly, I'm a little surprised philly couldn't spot your "gotcha bait". You asking for comment without insulting someone or deliberately trying to trigger an outburst is generally a sign you're playing games. As Eva Dent.

I wasn't playing games.  Jocal keeps saying its not a racist comment and would not listen to me.  I wanted to see what the rest of the hive thought.  70% of the respondents thought it was racist.  So at least I'm not out to lunch on this one.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a racist statement?

if not, why not?

"The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among Americans. Even more deadly than among Serbians.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I wasn't playing games.  Jocal keeps saying its not a racist comment and would not listen to me.  I wanted to see what the rest of the hive thought.  70% of the respondents thought it was racist.  So at least I'm not out to lunch on this one.  

Uh huh. Which is why you leapt down philly's throat with this drivel:

3 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Nuance???  Where was the nuance in that statement?  You DO know that @jocal505 said that quote don't you?  But he gets a pass because he's Team D and because you agree with his gun control stance.  As evadent.  Had I or AGITC, or Chinabald, or BPM or anyone in my elk herd had said the exact same quote above in the same context - we would have been run out of here on a rail and would have not been asked for nuance or context.  And you know that is true!

 

You wanted someone to latch onto it and blame 'the right' so you could get your victimhood panties all twisted about it. As expected from this place, there is always someone to provide an excuse for acting like a butt-hurt snowflake, but no-one is going to buy you weren't looking for an excuse to whine about how people treat you differently. You and Tom are two peas in a pod like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, phillysailor said:

To the OP question, regarding which the survey cannot reveal useful info, I’m stuck by a couple of things. 

“The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.”

There’s a lot of perjorative words to unpack in that sentence, and they have little utility describing gun death stats... was the context a scientific discussion?

The context:

On 5/4/2015 at 2:35 PM, jocal505 said:

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.


If you're wondering how that provides context, here's an image that might help:

quote-linkback.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mark K said:

Who buys more guns per capita , whites or blacks?

Whites, by a lot.

And yet...

3 hours ago, jocal505 said:
Quote

Race, Based on available data from 1980 to 2008—

(Data from FBI UCR and SHR reports.)

--Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders.

P11 Trends by race

  • -- In 2008, the homicide victimization rate for blacks (19.6 homicides per 100,000) was 6 times higher than the rate for
  • whites (3.3 homicides per 100,000).
  • -- The victimization rate for blacks peaked in the early 1990s, reaching a high of 39.4 homicides per 100,000 in 1991 (figure 17).
  • -- After 1991, the victimization rate for blacks fell until 1999, when it stabilized near 20 homicides per 100,000.
  • -- In 2008, the off ending rate for blacks (24.7 offenders per 100,000) was 7 times higher than the rate for whites (3.4 off enders per 100,000) (figure 18).
  • -- The offending rate for blacks showed a similar pattern to the victimization rate, peaking in the early 1990s at a high of 51.1 off enders per 100,000 in 1991.

-- After 1991, the off ending rate for blacks declined until it reached 24 per 100,000 in 2004. The rate has since fluctuated, increasing to 28.4 offenders per 100,000 in 2006 before falling again to 24.7 offenders per 100,000 in 2008.

http://www.bjs.gov/c...df/htus8008.pdf

 

So maybe the guns are not the issue. Maybe Joe's right that it's immaturity and volatility caused by melanin in skin. I doubt it, but as you said, he might have evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just stop it.

There's much more to this than the colour of someones skin.

If you want to break down the stats on gun violence, do us a favour and leave skin out of it. 

How about you just look at other countries and inner city crime, unemployment, drug abuse, poverty and gun availability and then get back to us.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

just stop it.

There's much more to this than the colour of someones skin.

 

Yeah, like the fact that older white guys own lots of guns and have a very low violent crime rate. Not quite as low as the rate for older black men, but low. For men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Yeah, like the fact that older white guys own lots of guns and have a very low violent crime rate. Not quite as low as the rate for older black men, but low. For men.

read my edit.

Those on the bottom of the compost heap in any city are more prone to crime, for bloody obvious reasons.. add guns into the mix? hey presto..you're going to get more violent crime..skin colour is just a lovely easy way to not fix the problems..blame the victims and you can be all cosy and pat yourselves on the back..we are not them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

How about you just look at other countries and inner city crime, unemployment, drug abuse, poverty and gun availability and then get back to us.

If you had the ability to see my non-gun posts, you might realize that I've had a few comments on the stupid drug war. I think drug prohibition, like alcohol prohibition before it, has spawned a lot of crime and governmental abuses. This is the first time I've noticed any concern about it on your part.

 

20 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Those on the bottom of the compost heap in any city are more prone to crime, for bloody obvious reasons.. add guns into the mix? hey presto..you're going to get more violent crime.

And those, like me, who need a rather large building for our boats are not so prone to crime. Add guns into the mix? That doesn't change. So banning and confiscating my assault weapon doesn't make a whole lot of sense, yet that is what our grabberz propose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this quote is loaded with some historical meaning, a touchstone for old familiar arguments and battle lines. Nicely laid trap, @Shootist Jeff, but the interpretation is the same. 

It does sound a little racist, and I think we all are, to some degree. Seems Jocal has some personal experiences to justify (in his mind) what he said, perhaps even the “immature” stuff. Like I said, I’d like him to expound on it a bit more, or use less loaded terms.

Personally, I feel different on the streets of Chester, PA when seeing black guys than when I see black colleagues in the hospital. Racism? I dunno, maybe. Probably, even. Go ahead & jump on me with your sanctimonious attack.

But talking about this stuff is complicated and playing “gotcha” with an old quote is a dick move, a card played when you want to hurt someone.

Did you get teased as a kid, so now you prefer of dropping bombs with invulnerability and sniping on online forums? I dunno, but you certainly aren’t interested in valuable discussions about race and violence.

You’re more interested in fucking over a well-meaning guy who thinks differently than you, & so is your enemy. WTGA Mission Accomplished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

If you had the ability to see my non-gun posts, you might realize that I've had a few comments on the stupid drug war. I think drug prohibition, like alcohol prohibition before it, has spawned a lot of crime and governmental abuses. This is the first time I've noticed any concern about it on your part.

 

And those, like me, who need a rather large building for our boats are not so prone to crime. Add guns into the mix? That doesn't change. So banning and confiscating my assault weapon doesn't make a whole lot of sense, yet that is what our grabberz propose.

It's not about you Tom..it's not about those living in comfort in rural or semi rural  areas, it's about crime in slums...Colour is not a factor.  and I do read your non gun posts sometimes..I read everyone's posts..sometimes.

I'm not particularly interested in the gun debate, I'm particularly not interested in guns, prolly the most boring subject ever discussed, I'm particularly particularly not interested in YOUR guns, or YOUR gun rights....ITS FUCKING BORING.BORING BORING BORING

If you bother to notice, I rarely comment of drug threads either.

I actually quite like you tom, (I don't like Jeff) If you stopped banging on about your or anyone elses FUCKING GUNS for half a minute, people might actually treat you with a tad more respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, phillysailor said:

I think this quote is loaded with some historical meaning, a touchstone for old familiar arguments and battle lines. Nicely laid trap, @Shootist Jeff, but the interpretation is the same. 

It does sound a little racist, and I think we all are, to some degree. Seems Jocal has some personal experiences to justify (in his mind) what he said, perhaps even the “immature” stuff. Like I said, I’d like him to expound on it a bit more, or use less loaded terms.

Personally, I feel different on the streets of Chester, PA when seeing black guys than when I see black colleagues in the hospital. Racism? I dunno, maybe. Probably, even. Go ahead & jump on me with your sanctimonious attack.

But talking about this stuff is complicated and playing “gotcha” with an old quote is a dick move, a card played when you want to hurt someone.

Did you get teased as a kid, so now you prefer of dropping bombs with invulnerability and sniping on online forums? I dunno, but you certainly aren’t interested in valuable discussions about race and violence.

You’re more interested in fucking over a well-meaning guy who thinks differently than you, & so is your enemy. WTGA Mission Accomplished.

Jeff gets bored, can't be much fun living in a compound...Is he really a mercenary? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

It's not about you Tom..it's not about those living in comfort in rural or semi rural  areas, it's about crime in slums...Colour is not a factor.  and I do read your non gun posts sometimes..I read everyone's posts..sometimes.

I'm not particularly interested in the gun debate, I'm particularly not interested in guns, prolly the most boring subject ever discussed, I'm particularly particularly not interested in YOUR guns, or YOUR gun rights....ITS FUCKING BORING.BORING BORING BORING

If you bother to notice, I rarely comment of drug threads either.

I actually quite like you tom, (I don't like Jeff) If you stopped banging on about your or anyone elses FUCKING GUNS for half a minute, people might actually treat you with a tad more respect.

Your first thread here was a gun thread and you seem to post in those but not others. What am I to conclude?

I agree that the endless TeamD quest to ban and confiscate my guns is boring and I wish they'd stop, but they won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Your first thread here was a gun thread and you seem to post in those but not others. What am I to conclude?

I agree that the endless TeamD quest to ban and confiscate my guns is boring and I wish they'd stop, but they won't.

My first posts in PA were some general queries, my third post was

Re the "ending the gun epidemic"

I think both sides in this debate need to take a deep breath and a reality check.

 

The USA will never be able to do what Australia did.

Gun ownership in Austrailia was barely a blip on the consciousness of most Australians.

Hand guns were mainly confined to sports shooting clubs.

Long guns by farmers and hunters.

Numbers in those groups were tiny.

The gun controls were overwhelmingly supported by the general public, (sorry Gumpy but that's the gist of it).

 

Guns always have been a huge part of American Culture, for hunting, in folk law and of course historically in your war of independence and enshrined in your constitution.

In those contexts it's not a bad thing it's just the way things are.

 

The problem arises when you get what I'll call "Gun Leakage"

When ownership of guns becomes so great and so unregulated that like too much of any good thing, it spills over and becomes a menace.

 

You aren't going to be able to plug this leak in 1 year or ten.But it can be done slowly

It can be done if all party's with a hand in the game got together and agreed on some general principles.

No one except the criminal need have anything confiscated that's currently legal.

 

Maybe start with volutary hand backs of unwanted firearms pay reasonable compensation and destroy them. and public gun storage units for folks to volutarily keep guns they dont want in the home but don't want to part with. Let collectors have a collectors licence etc.

Destroy all guns found in the posession of criminals.

 

I truely wish you all well in this.

 

I hardly think that post makes me a GUN GRABBER.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, phillysailor said:

I think it's designed to be divisive and will add nothing to debates of racism or gun control. Mixing the two together in this fashion is to try to create a shitfight.

This shite is similar to the urge to drive down Cali highways, smoking cigarettes and tossing them into the brush. What fun!

I agree.  In addition, the question mixes unnecessary and inflamatory opinion.  Immature?  Short sighted?  how do you even quantify words like that when trying to decide if this question is factual or correct?  Amplified?  Volatile?  These are not words you use in a factual statement because of their imprecise and opinionated nature.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

talking about this stuff is complicated and playing “gotcha” with an old quote is a dick move

Yoo Hoo. It's sometimes considered funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

It's not about you Tom..it's not about those living in comfort in rural or semi rural  areas, it's about crime in slums...Colour is not a factor.  and I do read your non gun posts sometimes..I read everyone's posts..sometimes.

I'm not particularly interested in the gun debate, I'm particularly not interested in guns, prolly the most boring subject ever discussed, I'm particularly particularly not interested in YOUR guns, or YOUR gun rights....ITS FUCKING BORING.BORING BORING BORING

If you bother to notice, I rarely comment of drug threads either.

I actually quite like you tom, (I don't like Jeff) If you stopped banging on about your or anyone elses FUCKING GUNS for half a minute, people might actually treat you with a tad more respect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

If you could get over your snowflake , I'm so hard done by, right-wing victimhood for two seconds, you'd realise two things:

  1. Philly didn't give it a pass. He simply misattributed the criticism to the wrong side of politics
  2. Most people don't read jocal's shit, so most people don't know what he says. He's not worth reading for most of us after the first page or two or you and Tommy Dogballs taking turns at him. 

Frankly, I'm a little surprised philly couldn't spot your "gotcha bait". You asking for comment without insulting someone or deliberately trying to trigger an outburst is generally a sign you're playing games. As Eva Dent.

This thread OP is EXACTLY what I was referring to when I accused right wingers of reducing discussion to simplistic and starkly defined elements so as to draw battle lines and separate Americans. 

Laying traps and revisiting three year old posts to sneakily attack someone raises tension and reduces trust. But I guess it’s easier than understanding, forgiveness or respectful dialogue for @Shootist Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

This thread OP is EXACTLY what I was referring to when I accused right wingers of reducing discussion to simplistic and starkly defined elements so as to draw battle lines and separate Americans. 

You haven't noticed a distinctly lefty chorus doing exactly what you're talking about? They've taken to singing about canine testicles recently in pretty much every thread. Don't know how you missed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

This thread OP is EXACTLY what I was referring to when I accused right wingers of reducing discussion to simplistic and starkly defined elements so as to draw battle lines and separate Americans. 

Laying traps and revisiting three year old posts to sneakily attack someone raises tension and reduces trust. But I guess it’s easier than understanding, forgiveness or respectful dialogue for @Shootist Jeff

Is he really a mercenary? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shortforbob said:

Is he really a mercenary? 

He's a drone operator but doesn't work directly for a government. You know, like the person who sent us random.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Uncooperative Tom said:

You haven't noticed a distinctly lefty chorus doing exactly what you're talking about? They've taken to singing about canine testicles recently in pretty much every thread. Don't know how you missed it.

well Der Tommy, If you hadn't noticed this is a predominantly lefty forum.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Uncooperative Tom said:

He's a drone operator but doesn't work directly for a government. You know, like the person who sent us random.

OH he takes real estate pics..got it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

This thread OP is EXACTLY what I was referring to when I accused right wingers of

Laying traps and revisiting three year old posts to sneakily attack someone raises tension and reduces trust. But I guess it’s easier than understanding, forgiveness or respectful dialogue for @Shootist Jeff

What do you expect from people you deem to be morally inferior? (certainly not in an attempt to reduce discussion to simplistic and starkly defined elements so as to draw battle lines and separate Americans of course)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Maybe Joe's right that it's immaturity and volatility caused by melanin in skin.

I didn't say that. You are racebaiting again.  I said that etrenched, incomplete misunderstandings, such as your own, are at the heart of this.

Instead of jerking off to the sound of your own voice, you could expose yourself to another perspective. Try this tomorrow morning  (instead of reason.com and Brietbart).

TA-NEHISI COATES

JUNE 2014 ISSUE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

PBS, NPR and the BBC are pretty much the only news I consume for the reasons you state.  Its not just for liberals.

I generally like any Reuters or AP news, but I read a lot of different stuff. One of my standards of judging the "seriousness" of any news agency is "when was the last time they fired a reporter for publishing false stories?"

Fox = never

NY Times= rarely a fully year goes by without at least one.

Who's the lying sack of shit in the above equation?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here's specifically what bugged me about the immaturity of street punks. You're looking at someone committing a crime, and you challenge the idiot, with his hand right in the cookie jar. This is the rule: the more you got him, the louder the spew. And there is no point in processing the spew. This, in particular, burned me out.

I now see this from the White House.

Secondly, violent reactions are immaturity itself. And violent philosophies based on them are, to be nice, sophmoric. The logic displayed within Jeff's forty gansta pics is not mature, is it? Being fixated on that crowd, and planning to challenge it or chenge it with gunz,  isn't particularly mature, either.

Race-baiting is not mature. Hating whitey is not mature. Boys, I think these general statements are supported outside  my own opinions and experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

You haven't noticed a distinctly lefty chorus doing exactly what you're talking about? They've taken to singing about canine testicles recently in pretty much every thread. Don't know how you missed it.

There’s a lot of truth in this. I will start calling shmucks on it. I spoke lukewarmedly about Dogs points in another thread, by way of showing understanding, but should probably chastise unnecessary piling on. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

You haven't noticed a distinctly lefty chorus doing exactly what you're talking about? They've taken to singing about canine testicles recently in pretty much every thread. Don't know how you missed it.

So, are you proud of your monument you built to yourself in PA, Tom?

Hint: It's not the lefties who did this......

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

It's your quote Joe  - the floor is yours.  Please feel free to explain the source and the context of your quote.  

Asked and answered, mate. See my two posts before yours. Why are you insatiable on this subject? 

About context The context of the original discussion is unambiguous. You see, a trite little fellow, @Uncooperative Tom, just took a dump on MLK's spiritual beliefs, right on Political Anarchy, where I exist. It was fight or flight.

I had challenged Tom about MLK in no uncertain terms on Mar 25. It triggered a week of race-baiting. The red ink was typed in anger, and became nine months of Southern Frind Racebaiting, then thirteen months of it, and now, Tom has vented, lo, these three long years.

About "amplified". Adam Wikler's is my source here, mind you: USA  White homicides 11.9/100k/ USA  Black homicides 21.6/100k. Just take white homicide numbers and amplify them 81%, and you get black homicide numbers.

About "immaturity": violence is immature, and fulfilled humans in civilized setting usually rise above it during childhood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, are you proud of your monument you built to yourself in PA, Tom?

Hint: It's not the lefties who did this......

-DSK

Tom is his own man. He doesnt mind his name hooked firmly to race-baiting, for three years. Jeffie is just the wingman here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Au contraire, mon chere.  I label it as racism because its racism and because I WANT to discuss it.  Besides we get the added bonus of exposing the hypocrisy of the SJWs, so win win.

It's nice that you admit that you're an attention whore troll, trying to lay a 'gotcha' trap.  

Recognition is the first step. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

Asked and answered, mate. See my two posts before yours. Why are you insatiable on this subject? 

About context The context of the original discussion is unambiguous. You see, a trite little fellow, @Uncooperative Tom, just took a dump on MLK's spiritual beliefs, right on Political Anarchy, where I exist. It was fight or flight.

I had challenged Tom about MLK in no uncertain terms on Mar 25. It triggered a week of race-baiting. The red ink was typed in anger, and became nine months of Southern Frind Racebaiting, then thirteen months of it, and now, Tom has vented, lo, these three long years.

About "amplified". Adam Wikler's is my source here, mind you: USA  White homicides 11.9/100k/ USA  Black homicides 21.6/100k. Just take white homicide numbers and amplify them 81%, and you get black homicide numbers.

About "immaturity": violence is immature, and fulfilled humans in civilized setting usually rise above it during childhood.

Civilized setting?

Joe, its time for you to follow the first rule of holes. When you are in one, stop digging. You're making an ass of yourself with your explanation. As if to suggest my friends in Detroit are less civilized then you or I. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

58 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

About "immaturity": violence is immature, and fulfilled humans in civilized setting usually rise above it.

As stated, this is true. There are many developed societies which nevertheless see violence as solution. Armies are predicated on it, the US has been inflicting death on innocent Iraqis and Afghanis with ours for 17+ years now... can we still get away with calling these deaths “accidental” or explain away our responsibility and acceptance of their deaths as somehow necessary? At some point, we have to acknowledge the pattern as established and our chosen policy as brutal.

Gang warfare in the 30s introduced Anerica to gun violence, and use of lethal force by our cops to resolve tension filled encounters with civilians is well documented and is tied to the prevalence of guns in our society. 

Yet we choose to glorify the heroism of our troops and LEOs, and romanticize the (white) mob warfare with movies like The Godfather. Why do we consider black on black violence so different?

Perhaps labeling blacks using guns and resorting to voilence as “immature” or somehow different than Italian mafia types should be better justified else be considered based on prejudice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

You haven't noticed a distinctly lefty chorus doing exactly what you're talking about? They've taken to singing about canine testicles recently in pretty much every thread. Don't know how you missed it.

 

2 hours ago, phillysailor said:

There’s a lot of truth in this. I will start calling shmucks on it. I spoke lukewarmedly about Dogs points in another thread, by way of showing understanding, but should probably chastise unnecessary piling on. 

Oh! You’re talking about dogballs! That’s just funny as hell:D 

You should be proud to deserve such singular attention, plus you’ve brought happiness and joy to so many!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

read my edit.

Those on the bottom of the compost heap in any city are more prone to crime, for bloody obvious reasons.. add guns into the mix? hey presto..you're going to get more violent crime..skin colour is just a lovely easy way to not fix the problems..blame the victims and you can be all cosy and pat yourselves on the back..we are not them!

Thank you.  You've just validated perfectly my stance on gun control I've been saying for the last 10 years or so on this forum.

I've been saying all along, for those that ever bothered to fucking pay attention, which are few - that this is not a skin color problem or a gun problem.....  its a CLASS problem.  The war on drugs, poverty, dense crowding into inner city environs, etc are what are all causal issues in the US murder rate, among many other complex issues.  And then there's mental health issues among the predominantly white mass shooter population.  But they are a blip in the overall numbers.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, are you proud of your monument you built to yourself in PA, Tom?

Hint: It's not the lefties who did this......

-DSK

I'm not sure which one you're referencing. I guess I'm most proud of this one at the moment.

If there's a post I should be ashamed of, quote it and tell me why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Jeff gets bored, can't be much fun living in a compound...Is he really a mercenary? 

Living in a compound???  Hahahahahaa!  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

When ownership of guns becomes so great and so unregulated

So unregulated????  HAHAHAHAHAHAH!  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, Tom is fixated on dogballs, but has really good legal instincts and can tap a fund of irreverent logical concerns regarding governmental overreach. 

A valuable voice here in PA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Hey guys, Tom is fixated on dogballs, but has really good legal instincts and can tap a fund of irreverent logical concerns regarding governmental overreach. 

A valuable voice here in PA

@Uncooperative Tom. Hmmm. "A valuable voice here in PA"? Yes. Agreed.

But the voice needs a track record of honesty. Tom's creds suffer: he denies vetted gun violence research,  and, separately, the value of vetted history. He has denied the factual federal ban on gun research without retraction. Let's factor that in.

Do we smell a rat? Mr. Philly, as you openly credit Tom's reflections on The Federalist, you need to ask why our colleague  can't begin to discuss The Standard Model version of history written by his elk. How does it sort out that Tom can neither accept nor reject the scholarship of Joyce Malcolm and her Libertarian cadre of writers.

You're plenty sharp. That is the smell of a rat. His voice is quite valuable, as we agree, but his road map will be sketchy.

Not a bad thread, IMO     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

So unregulated????  HAHAHAHAHAHAH!  :lol:

Chris Cox, the main legal counsel for the NRA,  was quoted on our boards, directly, by another anarchist. As of 2018, this year, Cox's position is that the NRA wants zip for gun regulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, chinabald said:

Civilized setting?

Joe, its time for you to follow the first rule of holes. When you are in one, stop digging. You're making an ass of yourself with your explanation. As if to suggest my friends in Detroit are less civilized then you or I. 

What brought me to your hood was violence interruption. There,  I bought me a whole street gang with a few packs of smokes. I chose the KOOLs. 

Don't make me tell the story again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

What brought me to your hood was violence interruption. There,  I bought me a whole street gang with a few packs of smokes. I chose the KOOLs. 

Don't make me tell the story again.

You "bought them"???  Really?  Did they call you Massa after you handed out the kools?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jocal505 said:

What brought me to your hood was violence interruption. There,  I bought me a whole street gang with a few packs of smokes. I chose the KOOLs. 

Don't make me tell the story again.

Just tell me the part of the story where you recall the gangs name.

But since you skirted the question I am left to believe that you think of minorities as less civilized. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

You "bought them"???  Really?  Did they call you Massa after you handed out the kools?  

Good catch Jeff.

Kools Joe? whats the matter you couldn't find any shiny beads to trade with the "natives"? Was the store out of newports? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chinabald said:

Just tell me the part of the story where you recall the gangs name.

Long after I had forgotten the Black Gangster Disciples, a fella named @chinabald filled me in.  (By PM, making the conversation somewhat off limits.)

Quote

But since you skirted the question I am left to believe that you think of minorities as less civilized. 

If you want me to either volunteer or deny that "minorities are less civilized," then you have joined the three jolly race-baiters.

cb, I was studying the armpits of the USA at the time. That part of our society is broken down civilization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2018 at 5:28 PM, jocal505 said:

Secondly, violent reactions are immaturity itself. And violent philosophies based on them are, to be nice, sophmoric. The logic displayed within Jeff's forty gansta pics is not mature, is it? Being fixated on that crowd, and planning to challenge it or chenge it with gunz,  isn't particularly mature, either.

Joe, I agree with you on this and the rest of that post.  Violent reactions are not mature.  But my 40 gangsta pics are just a reflection of the truth, pointing out the immaturity you agree with me on.  

And I AM fixated on that crowd, because that crowd is the primary source of murder in the US - as a demographic compared to their representation in the population.  Its not racist to point out facts.  So yes, I do challenge it.  But my "chenge" for it does not involve gunz.  My chenge for it is to address the underlying root causes of why blacks murder other blacks in such huge numbers.  And I continually bring up the 40 gangsta pics to contrast that with the common myth that the NRA is responsible for that.  White gun culture as promoted by the NRA, by and large, are the boy scouts at the range, the young girls shooting skeet and olympic dogballs rifles and soccer moms arming themselves to protect them and their family from rape and assault.  

The majority of white gun deaths is suicide.  The majority of black gun deaths is murder by other blacks.  Those two cultures rarely cross streams.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites