Kenosha

[Dan Druff]

So the killing of George Floyd was racially motivated?

The shooting of Jacob Blake was racially motivated?

I don't recall that ever being proven, or even circumstantial evidence being presented showing such a thing.

I thought the group name was "Black Lives Matter".

So black lives only matter if they're taken by white cops who are assumed to be racist just because the cop is white? I see. Thanks for clarifying in your usual gimmicky way.

Considering i said white cops being targeted often because of racial injustice and police brutality your questions are pointless. I never claimed they need to be racially motivated. Sweet strawman none the less.

Organization/movements have names. Literally never do they encompass everything they do or don't do. That's not how names work. Do i need to explain this to you as you were a toddler?

Leading causes of death with African-Americans in 2017 were heart diseases, cancer, accidents, strokes, diabetes, CLRD and then homicide. Why aren't you crying about them for not focusing on any of the 6 more common reasons of death? I though they were called BLM? Why aren't they on the frontlines battling against diseases of the heart? Do you see how fucking stupid that question is?

LOL

You talk about strawmen and then insert the last paragraph. Homicide is a major cause of death for young black men -- much, much, much higher per capita than young white men. 4 of the 6 causes of death you mentioned occur to older people. Everyone has to die, and there will always be a "most common cause of death" for any population group. We're talking about crime here, and how it disproportionately takes young black lives in the US. Try and keep up.

I don't know if you've been paying attention, but the narrative is that the police are an existential threat to black people in the US. The true numbers aren't being stated, because those numbers would make it look like an extremely minor problem. About 1 out of 3 million black people were killed by police while unarmed in 2018. Is that worth burning down our cities and making major changes to law enforcement policy everywhere?

Black Lives Matter isn't just a group name. It's also a social justice slogan. People shout it in the streets. It's painted onto Major League Baseball fields and NBA courts. The message is that we should start caring about black lives, and not just dismiss them as inconsequential. Yet Democrats have been doing exactly that for years -- ignoring the high murder rate in black communities, because they already have their votes.

Keep talking in circles like you always do, though. You're very good at avoiding taking on any direct issue, and just typing a lot of peripheral nonsense to make it look like you're keeping to the topic.

Ok, so you’ve established that young black men and the black community writ large are more prone to criminality than whites. What do you suggest we do to fix this problem? You certainly don’t accept the solutions that democrats have proposed over the years i.e. investing in education and injecting capital into these low income neighborhoods, which would improve the environmental/structural issues that perpetuate crime.

Or, you could man up and own your ACTUAL position. Conservatives, no matter how much you guys want to dress it up, fundamentally believe that blacks are genetically predisposed to violent behavior. Stop dancing around the issue ffs and just come clean already. Stop with whataboutisms regarding democrat run cities, crime rates (13/50) etc. Just fucking admit to the fact that you think genetics are the driving force in blacks being irredeemable thugs.

LOL at the projection going on here. It's clear that YOU think blacks are genetically predisposed to crime, but are ashamed of yourself for thinking that way, so you project those thoughts onto "conservatives".

Reminds me of how the biggest homophobes tend to be closet gays who hate themselves.

The solution isn't simple. It is true that a lot of the Democratic solutions -- throwing money at the problem and hoping it fixes itself -- have failed.

What has worked has been a strong police presence. If criminals don't think they can get away committing crime and intimidating neighborhoods, a lot of them give up and reluctantly live a more conventional life. Sure, the hardcore criminal types and psychos won't change, but a good number of violent criminals are on-the-fence types -- ones who are largely a product of what they see around them. If crime is the norm, they fall in with crime. If law and order is the norm, they stay on a straight path.

This is human nature in general. People will act worse when they believe there aren't consequences for bad behavior, and they'll especially do it if there's no consequences AND many others are doing it.

This is why so many people behave worse online than they do in real life. Online, they feel they can do it without consequence, and they see many others acting up, also without consequence.

I'm not just spouting theory. This was tried starting in the mid-1990s. It worked. Look at Times Square today and compare it to 1990. Today's version is tremendously safer. You may argue that Times Square is different because it's a business area and not very residential, but there are many less-famous examples from that time.

The fatherless home problem in the black community is a huge issue. That one isn't so simple to fix, but if there are going to be social programs aimed at anything, it should be that. Get at least semi-responsible black dads in the homes there, and crime will naturally decline.

The lazy solution is to blame "systemic racism" and "racist police" for the problems in the black community. Then you're told as a white (or Persian) person that a #BLM hashtag and a vote for Democrats is all that's needed to cure your privileged ills. Then you do that, feel great about yourself, and look down upon those damn ignorant conservatives who won't ignore facts, and who won't make these meaningless self-congratulatory gestures.

What a world.