IGX

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

Sua Sponte wrote:I asked two questions-no statements, no assertions, no comparisons-they were real questions. How do you know 'the vast majority' or factors of 3? Honestly.

Don't know where your factor of 3 came from. I have lived in or adjacent to these communities for a long time, and it's pretty apparent to anybody who is even close to what is going on, that you have more people working against violence than you have actual shooters. The last time they did a gang member audit in my area on the far North side of Chicago, it was 17 gang factions with 249 members (not all of them shooters, obviously). In that area, there many times that number in in black cops, teachers, clergy, volunteers, etc. The number skews so obviously the other way that it's bizarre to ask the question.

Why do you think there is so much more violent crime, very serious violent crime, among the black males? What's wrong with all this effort you describe that it's so ineffective?

No idea. It's clearly a culture problem on their part. It really has no bearing on the author's central questions though:

Q: Why are black people so much more outraged unjustified killing of black kids by cops than black-on-black crime?
A: Because it's much more outrageous.

Q: Why don't they invest more effort on reducing black on black crime than they do protesting Trayvon?
A: They do, by an enormous margin.

I'm not aware of Sharpton speaking out against the described crimes or others like the recent beating to death of an 88 year old WWII combat veteran by two black youths.

This is the the white conservative victim mentality. A) Sharpton does not speak out against black on white violence, just as Limbaugh does not speak out against white on black violence. They professional race baiters, and introducing them into the conversation is silly. B) You are missing the key distinction: the black youths are being aggressively arrested and charged. The system is working as it should, so there's nothing to protest. There wouldn't have been protests had Zimmerman been immediately arrested and charged.

Do you think there will be a 20-on-1 beating of a black kid in the name of this killing?

Again, the system is already providing justice.

I grew up in Phila in the 60s and 70s. Your experiences don't square with mine or the friends and family I have there now. Nor friends in DC and other areas. We can just disagree but the arithmetic doesn't square, either. By you, a very small minority is engaged in the violence and the vast majority detest the violence, most are deeply involved in addressing it, mentoring and coaching, and the police are aggressively locking them up and the jails are overflowing-yet the violence continues and increases in both the number of incidents and their intensity.

And in that dogged, unflinching determination to stop the violence by black leaders nobody is willing to speak out against the crimes described on this thread and demand of their own community that it be brought to a halt, if I understand you again here, because the police have made some arrests. 'Cause as long as that happens there is, as you say, nothing to protest. Except maybe for the guy who authored this article but he's just good for a LOL.

The first question is why black people are more upset with white-on-black violence than black-on-white or black-on-black, not what you wrote. The second question may be a real one but still leaves open why, with your answer, this near 100% effort fails to yield results.

You can insist that Sharpton does not represent the black community, I certainly know black people that would agree with that sentiment, but then where does he get the clout to have the state and federal governments override the judgement of the police on site? Again, I'm not aware of Limbaugh having such sway. Oh, I know why. Because it had already been decided that this was a racist killing by a racist with a gun and covered up by racist police by this guy Sharpton that does not have a real following. Note that the system worked here too, the first time, when the police made the right call and the second time when the jury decided there was nothing in favor of the prosecution's case-the guy made an ass of himself. It never went to grand jury and it didn't result in a conviction despite Sharpton's and his follower's racism. Now raising Limbaugh is a red herring.

There is no white victimization in my statement but the view that unless Zimmerman was arrested, tried and convicted in the court of "we all know what happened there, we don't need no fucking facts", the system had failed the black man smacks of left wing victimization and bigotry.

Grandpa's Spells wrote: Q: Why don't they invest more effort on reducing black on black crime than they do protesting Trayvon?
A: They do, by an enormous margin.

Chicago has reduced crime by concentrating it in the black areas. Little hard for the locals to combat that, especially with the black middle class getting out. Chicago is not alone in this.

Sua Sponte wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

Sua Sponte wrote:I asked two questions-no statements, no assertions, no comparisons-they were real questions. How do you know 'the vast majority' or factors of 3? Honestly.

Don't know where your factor of 3 came from. I have lived in or adjacent to these communities for a long time, and it's pretty apparent to anybody who is even close to what is going on, that you have more people working against violence than you have actual shooters. The last time they did a gang member audit in my area on the far North side of Chicago, it was 17 gang factions with 249 members (not all of them shooters, obviously). In that area, there many times that number in in black cops, teachers, clergy, volunteers, etc. The number skews so obviously the other way that it's bizarre to ask the question.

Why do you think there is so much more violent crime, very serious violent crime, among the black males? What's wrong with all this effort you describe that it's so ineffective?

No idea. It's clearly a culture problem on their part. It really has no bearing on the author's central questions though:

Q: Why are black people so much more outraged unjustified killing of black kids by cops than black-on-black crime?
A: Because it's much more outrageous.

Q: Why don't they invest more effort on reducing black on black crime than they do protesting Trayvon?
A: They do, by an enormous margin.

I'm not aware of Sharpton speaking out against the described crimes or others like the recent beating to death of an 88 year old WWII combat veteran by two black youths.

This is the the white conservative victim mentality. A) Sharpton does not speak out against black on white violence, just as Limbaugh does not speak out against white on black violence. They professional race baiters, and introducing them into the conversation is silly. B) You are missing the key distinction: the black youths are being aggressively arrested and charged. The system is working as it should, so there's nothing to protest. There wouldn't have been protests had Zimmerman been immediately arrested and charged.

Do you think there will be a 20-on-1 beating of a black kid in the name of this killing?

Again, the system is already providing justice.

I grew up in Phila in the 60s and 70s. Your experiences don't square with mine or the friends and family I have there now. Nor friends in DC and other areas. We can just disagree but the arithmetic doesn't square, either. By you, a very small minority is engaged in the violence and the vast majority detest the violence, most are deeply involved in addressing it, mentoring and coaching, and the police are aggressively locking them up and the jails are overflowing-yet the violence continues and increases in both the number of incidents and their intensity.

And in that dogged, unflinching determination to stop the violence by black leaders nobody is willing to speak out against the crimes described on this thread and demand of their own community that it be brought to a halt, if I understand you again here, because the police have made some arrests. 'Cause as long as that happens there is, as you say, nothing to protest. Except maybe for the guy who authored this article but he's just good for a LOL.

The first question is why black people are more upset with white-on-black violence than black-on-white or black-on-black, not what you wrote. The second question may be a real one but still leaves open why, with your answer, this near 100% effort fails to yield results.

You can insist that Sharpton does not represent the black community, I certainly know black people that would agree with that sentiment, but then where does he get the clout to have the state and federal governments override the judgement of the police on site? Again, I'm not aware of Limbaugh having such sway. Oh, I know why. Because it had already been decided that this was a racist killing by a racist with a gun and covered up by racist police by this guy Sharpton that does not have a real following. Note that the system worked here too, the first time, when the police made the right call and the second time when the jury decided there was nothing in favor of the prosecution's case-the guy made an ass of himself. It never went to grand jury and it didn't result in a conviction despite Sharpton's and his follower's racism. Now raising Limbaugh is a red herring.

There is no white victimization in my statement but the view that unless Zimmerman was arrested, tried and convicted in the court of "we all know what happened there, we don't need no fucking facts", the system had failed the black man smacks of left wing victimization and bigotry.

Hey Sue! Are you saying that all the number crunching Americans are brainwashed into believing as gospel is an unadulterated crock of shit? Well I believe just that.