IGX

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote: IMHO one of the primary jobs of LEOs is to protect legitimate commerce and property values. Commerce does better in areas with low property and violent crime, and there is a definite correlation between crime and property values. By this logic, keeping violent and property crime rates low is what cops are paid to do.

Sloppy wording or sloppy thinking? There is a correlation between perceived crime and perceived value.

There is nothing Police can do to preserve Value. Value is a arbitrary marker assigned by a range of factors in the market. Perhaps you meant "Property Rights".

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/ ... ch-roundup

So you're covering your sloppy thinking with sloppy journalism? How typical.

Given that the Courts have found the police don't even have a constitutional duty to protect citizens, I seriously doubt your notion that the Police have a primary role in the protection of "legitimate commerce" and "property values." They uphold and enforce the law, regardless of what that does to property values. If the laws they uphold and enforce don't play well with others, they might be repealed or not. In many cases, the State's exercise of Police power diminishes property values...and ultimately you have it backwards. Property values are supported by public and private investment (quite often infrastructure investment) not by the number of cops. Police presence does not raise property values, large police presence is a good indicator property values are already shit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... otect.html

Blaidd Drwg wrote:What's shitty in this case is that Black is bit of a red herring. Race is a just a proxy for class. These dynamics are no different in Scotland, Manchester, Ipswich, or any other ghetto in the western world.

i wonder if prof louis gates would agree with your assertion

dead man walking wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:What's shitty in this case is that Black is bit of a red herring. Race is a just a proxy for class. These dynamics are no different in Scotland, Manchester, Ipswich, or any other ghetto in the western world.

i wonder if prof louis gates would agree with your assertion

I'm fairly certain that piece of shit would not agree...nor would Sharpton, or Jackson or ....which only emboldens me to suggest we do some more research on the subject.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote: IMHO one of the primary jobs of LEOs is to protect legitimate commerce and property values. Commerce does better in areas with low property and violent crime, and there is a definite correlation between crime and property values. By this logic, keeping violent and property crime rates low is what cops are paid to do.

Sloppy wording or sloppy thinking? There is a correlation between perceived crime and perceived value.

There is nothing Police can do to preserve Value. Value is a arbitrary marker assigned by a range of factors in the market. Perhaps you meant "Property Rights".

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/ ... ch-roundup

So you're covering your sloppy thinking with sloppy journalism? How typical.

Given that the Courts have found the police don't even have a constitutional duty to protect citizens, I seriously doubt your notion that the Police have a primary role in the protection of "legitimate commerce" and "property values." They uphold and enforce the law, regardless of what that does to property values. If the laws they uphold and enforce don't play well with others, they might be repealed or not. In many cases, the State's exercise of Police power diminishes property values...and ultimately you have it backwards. Property values are supported by public and private investment (quite often infrastructure investment) not by the number of cops. Police presence does not raise property values, large police presence is a good indicator property values are already shit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... otect.html

And you're trying to change the subject to cover for the fact you don't know what teh fuck you're talking about.

I presented a link to a summary of studies showing a correlation between property values and certain types of crime. This is just a sampling, there are more. Have I ever stated that there was a correlation between police presence and property values?

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote: IMHO one of the primary jobs of LEOs is to protect legitimate commerce and property values. Commerce does better in areas with low property and violent crime, and there is a definite correlation between crime and property values. By this logic, keeping violent and property crime rates low is what cops are paid to do.

Sloppy wording or sloppy thinking? There is a correlation between perceived crime and perceived value.

There is nothing Police can do to preserve Value. Value is a arbitrary marker assigned by a range of factors in the market. Perhaps you meant "Property Rights".

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/ ... ch-roundup

So you're covering your sloppy thinking with sloppy journalism? How typical.

Given that the Courts have found the police don't even have a constitutional duty to protect citizens, I seriously doubt your notion that the Police have a primary role in the protection of "legitimate commerce" and "property values." They uphold and enforce the law, regardless of what that does to property values. If the laws they uphold and enforce don't play well with others, they might be repealed or not. In many cases, the State's exercise of Police power diminishes property values...and ultimately you have it backwards. Property values are supported by public and private investment (quite often infrastructure investment) not by the number of cops. Police presence does not raise property values, large police presence is a good indicator property values are already shit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... otect.html

And you're trying to change the subject to cover for the fact you don't know what teh fuck you're talking about.

I presented a link to a summary of studies showing a correlation between property values and certain types of crime. This is just a sampling, there are more. Have I ever stated that there was a correlation between police presence and property values?

My god you're a dolt.

You can't keep up with you're own bullshit argument much less my response.
Sadly, Spells pretty much swept your ass better than anyone.

The role of the police is not preserving enhancing or affecting property values. Despite your clumsy attempt the obfuscate with correlations between crime and property values as if to have us infer the FIVE O have a fiduciary responsibility in reversing or altering that trend.

Every time you open your mouth, shit spills out... Then you tramp it around for 4 pages of rubbish thinking.. WITHLINKS!!!

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote: IMHO one of the primary jobs of LEOs is to protect legitimate commerce and property values. Commerce does better in areas with low property and violent crime, and there is a definite correlation between crime and property values. By this logic, keeping violent and property crime rates low is what cops are paid to do.

Sloppy wording or sloppy thinking? There is a correlation between perceived crime and perceived value.

There is nothing Police can do to preserve Value. Value is a arbitrary marker assigned by a range of factors in the market. Perhaps you meant "Property Rights".

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/ ... ch-roundup

So you're covering your sloppy thinking with sloppy journalism? How typical.

Given that the Courts have found the police don't even have a constitutional duty to protect citizens, I seriously doubt your notion that the Police have a primary role in the protection of "legitimate commerce" and "property values." They uphold and enforce the law, regardless of what that does to property values. If the laws they uphold and enforce don't play well with others, they might be repealed or not. In many cases, the State's exercise of Police power diminishes property values...and ultimately you have it backwards. Property values are supported by public and private investment (quite often infrastructure investment) not by the number of cops. Police presence does not raise property values, large police presence is a good indicator property values are already shit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... otect.html

And you're trying to change the subject to cover for the fact you don't know what teh fuck you're talking about.

I presented a link to a summary of studies showing a correlation between property values and certain types of crime. This is just a sampling, there are more. Have I ever stated that there was a correlation between police presence and property values?

My god you're a dolt.

You can't keep up with you're own bullshit argument much less my response.
Sadly, Spells pretty much swept your ass better than anyone.

The role of the police is not preserving enhancing or affecting property values. Despite your clumsy attempt the obfuscate with correlations between crime and property values as if to have us infer the FIVE O have a fiduciary responsibility in reversing or altering that trend.

Every time you open your mouth, shit spills out... Then you tramp it around for 4 pages of rubbish thinking.. WITHLINKS!!!

Spells made a good point, I laughed. You're an idiot. I'm done discussing this with you.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote: IMHO one of the primary jobs of LEOs is to protect legitimate commerce and property values. Commerce does better in areas with low property and violent crime, and there is a definite correlation between crime and property values. By this logic, keeping violent and property crime rates low is what cops are paid to do.

Sloppy wording or sloppy thinking? There is a correlation between perceived crime and perceived value.

There is nothing Police can do to preserve Value. Value is a arbitrary marker assigned by a range of factors in the market. Perhaps you meant "Property Rights".

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/ ... ch-roundup

So you're covering your sloppy thinking with sloppy journalism? How typical.

Given that the Courts have found the police don't even have a constitutional duty to protect citizens, I seriously doubt your notion that the Police have a primary role in the protection of "legitimate commerce" and "property values." They uphold and enforce the law, regardless of what that does to property values. If the laws they uphold and enforce don't play well with others, they might be repealed or not. In many cases, the State's exercise of Police power diminishes property values...and ultimately you have it backwards. Property values are supported by public and private investment (quite often infrastructure investment) not by the number of cops. Police presence does not raise property values, large police presence is a good indicator property values are already shit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... otect.html

And you're trying to change the subject to cover for the fact you don't know what teh fuck you're talking about.

I presented a link to a summary of studies showing a correlation between property values and certain types of crime. This is just a sampling, there are more. Have I ever stated that there was a correlation between police presence and property values?

My god you're a dolt.

You can't keep up with you're own bullshit argument much less my response.
Sadly, Spells pretty much swept your ass better than anyone.

The role of the police is not preserving enhancing or affecting property values. Despite your clumsy attempt the obfuscate with correlations between crime and property values as if to have us infer the FIVE O have a fiduciary responsibility in reversing or altering that trend.

Every time you open your mouth, shit spills out... Then you tramp it around for 4 pages of rubbish thinking.. WITHLINKS!!!

Spells made a good point, I laughed. You're an idiot. I'm done discussing this with you.

DROP THE MIKE, TURD!!!!

Nice comment by GW Bush at the memorial in Dallas

“Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions”

nafod wrote:Nice comment by GW Bush at the memorial in Dallas

“Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions”

Where's the LIKE button for this post? ^

Once again, Turd shows himself to be the least valuable player.

johno wrote:

nafod wrote:Nice comment by GW Bush at the memorial in Dallas

“Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions”

Where's the LIKE button for this post? ^

saw this. good for dubya.

but given the fucked up country in which we live, the former pres is being criticized for swaying during the battle hymn of the republic.

dead man walking wrote:

johno wrote:

nafod wrote:Nice comment by GW Bush at the memorial in Dallas

“Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions”

Where's the LIKE button for this post? ^

saw this. good for dubya.

but given the fucked up country in which we live, the former pres is being criticized for swaying during the battle hymn of the republic.

and the current president is getting crushed for admitting that racism exists as it always has....*shrug*

From Obama's speech (that had many good points, but not this one):

But even those who dislike the phrase “Black Lives Matter,” surely we should be able to hear the pain of Alton Sterling’s family. (Applause.) We should -- when we hear a friend describe him by saying that “Whatever he cooked, he cooked enough for everybody,” that should sound familiar to us, that maybe he wasn’t so different than us, so that we can, yes, insist that his life matters. Just as we should hear the students and coworkers describe their affection for Philando Castile as a gentle soul -- “Mr. Rogers with dreadlocks,” they called him -- and know that his life mattered to a whole lot of people of all races, of all ages, and that we have to do what we can, without putting officers' lives at risk, but do better to prevent another life like his from being lost.

This guy is a lawyer and a "constitutional law professor/lecturer"...Can't he learn to SHUT UP about cases that haven't even been investigated?
Did he learn nothing from his stupid comments about the Henry Gates, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown cases?

And was any of that appropriate at the service for the fallen officers?

johno wrote:From Obama's speech (that had many good points, but not this one):

But even those who dislike the phrase “Black Lives Matter,” surely we should be able to hear the pain of Alton Sterling’s family. (Applause.) We should -- when we hear a friend describe him by saying that “Whatever he cooked, he cooked enough for everybody,” that should sound familiar to us, that maybe he wasn’t so different than us, so that we can, yes, insist that his life matters. Just as we should hear the students and coworkers describe their affection for Philando Castile as a gentle soul -- “Mr. Rogers with dreadlocks,” they called him -- and know that his life mattered to a whole lot of people of all races, of all ages, and that we have to do what we can, without putting officers' lives at risk, but do better to prevent another life like his from being lost.

This guy is a lawyer and a "constitutional law professor/lecturer"...Can't he learn to SHUT UP about cases that haven't even been investigated?
Did he learn nothing from his stupid comments about the Henry Gates, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown cases?

Has no one learned anything about reading comments within the context of a broader speech?

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Once again, Turd shows himself to be the least valuable player.

Thanks.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

dead man walking wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:What's shitty in this case is that Black is bit of a red herring. Race is a just a proxy for class. These dynamics are no different in Scotland, Manchester, Ipswich, or any other ghetto in the western world.

i wonder if prof louis gates would agree with your assertion

I'm fairly certain that piece of shit would not agree...nor would Sharpton, or Jackson or ....which only emboldens me to suggest we do some more research on the subject.

as you well know, whether or not gates is a piece of shit is irrelevant.

saw this in the wa post:

Of the 100 senators in office right now, two are black. In a remarkable moment of raw honesty on the Senate floor Wednesday, one of those senators — GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina — said that even in the highest levels of governance, being black can still get you stopped by the police.

In a speech on the Senate floor on Wednesday, Scott shared that when he comes to Washington, he's sometimes felt more like a suspect than a member of the nation's most exclusive club. He said he's been stopped by police seven times in one year.

yes it's only a single anecdote, but . . .

dead man walking wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

dead man walking wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:What's shitty in this case is that Black is bit of a red herring. Race is a just a proxy for class. These dynamics are no different in Scotland, Manchester, Ipswich, or any other ghetto in the western world.

i wonder if prof louis gates would agree with your assertion

I'm fairly certain that piece of shit would not agree...nor would Sharpton, or Jackson or ....which only emboldens me to suggest we do some more research on the subject.

as you well know, whether or not gates is a piece of shit is irrelevant.

saw this in the wa post:

Of the 100 senators in office right now, two are black. In a remarkable moment of raw honesty on the Senate floor Wednesday, one of those senators — GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina — said that even in the highest levels of governance, being black can still get you stopped by the police.

In a speech on the Senate floor on Wednesday, Scott shared that when he comes to Washington, he's sometimes felt more like a suspect than a member of the nation's most exclusive club. He said he's been stopped by police seven times in one year.

yes it's only a single anecdote, but . . .

You can infer class wrongly....that changes nothing.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

johno wrote:From Obama's speech (that had many good points, but not this one):

But even those who dislike the phrase “Black Lives Matter,” surely we should be able to hear the pain of Alton Sterling’s family. (Applause.) We should -- when we hear a friend describe him by saying that “Whatever he cooked, he cooked enough for everybody,” that should sound familiar to us, that maybe he wasn’t so different than us, so that we can, yes, insist that his life matters. Just as we should hear the students and coworkers describe their affection for Philando Castile as a gentle soul -- “Mr. Rogers with dreadlocks,” they called him -- and know that his life mattered to a whole lot of people of all races, of all ages, and that we have to do what we can, without putting officers' lives at risk, but do better to prevent another life like his from being lost.

This guy is a lawyer and a "constitutional law professor/lecturer"...Can't he learn to SHUT UP about cases that haven't even been investigated?
Did he learn nothing from his stupid comments about the Henry Gates, Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown cases?

Has no one learned anything about reading comments within the context of a broader speech?

Reverse the races, and imagine the screaming & crying about it.

Of the 100 senators in office right now, two are black. In a remarkable moment of raw honesty on the Senate floor Wednesday, one of those senators — GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina — said that even in the highest levels of governance, being black can still get you stopped by the police.

In a speech on the Senate floor on Wednesday, Scott shared that when he comes to Washington, he's sometimes felt more like a suspect than a member of the nation's most exclusive club. He said he's been stopped by police seven times in one year.

yes it's only a single anecdote, but . . .[/quote]


And you have 2 senators per state, we have 50 states, they are between 10-14% of the population. He is stopped in a black run city. I want to know how many times it was DFC, Maryland or Va and what part because odds are , he driving in Liberalville so Ha Ha fucking Ha Ha ha. DC is black run, that part of Maryland bends to them and the county ajacent toDC in Va. is our most liberal.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:terrible, but very unsurprising.

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:The insane divisiveness pushed by the political parties is coming to rolling boil.

Ridiculous false equivalence

Early indications suggest a lot of NRA minutemen decided they'd rather be redcoats

I am not sure what you are getting at most of the so called minutemen or 3% had the same reaction to Eric Matthew Frein.

DARTH wrote:

Of the 100 senators in office right now, two are black. In a remarkable moment of raw honesty on the Senate floor Wednesday, one of those senators — GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina — said that even in the highest levels of governance, being black can still get you stopped by the police.

In a speech on the Senate floor on Wednesday, Scott shared that when he comes to Washington, he's sometimes felt more like a suspect than a member of the nation's most exclusive club. He said he's been stopped by police seven times in one year.

yes it's only a single anecdote, but . . .

And you have 2 senators per state, we have 50 states, they are between 10-14% of the population. He is stopped in a black run city. I want to know how many times it was DFC, Maryland or Va and what part because odds are , he driving in Liberalville so Ha Ha fucking Ha Ha ha. DC is black run, that part of Maryland bends to them and the county ajacent toDC in Va. is our most liberal.

what makes racism "ha fucking ha?" it occurs in the south and the north, in liberal towns and conservative ones. i don't see thoughtful people--on the left or right--laughing about it.

johno wrote:Reverse the races, and imagine the screaming & crying about it.

One of the most important lessons I learned working in a huge bureaucracy, is that the fallacy of equivalence. We treat everyone equally shitty here at Big Ass Government Inc. This line of thinking...."What's good for the goose is good for the gander. " is just pure delusion.

You cannot treat all people exactly the same because, in fact, people are NOT the same. People are inherently Un-Equal. This is not some argument in favor of affirmative action or political correctness, it';s a simple acknowledgement that if you want to say something useful ( as the Flim Flam man was trying to say) you have to recognize that the experience of blacks in this country is very different form the experience of many other subsets of the country. There would be howling if the roles were reversed because the narrative would be inherently bullshit. We don't have to agree on what to do about systemic racism, where it came from, how much progress has already been made, whether it's essentially a relic of 20th century angst. We don;t even have to agree on how to address it but pretending it doesn't exist...that's just pure stupidity.


What I mean is, right or wrong, rational or crazy, delusional or clear thinking, the experiences of groups of people in this country are very different and applying some intellectually imposed equity across all groups is a fruitless venture...as evidenced by the Ill-Logic of the Ayn Randian dipshits of the world and the ridiculous protosocialist shit bags that make up the Sandersnista vote who are dead set on applying universal standards to situations which are not universal.

Nothing encourages bullies like cowardice. There will be no end to the insanity if we treat black citizens like criminally-inclined retards who need endless coddling. IMO, political correctness is a large reason why so many people are attracted to Trump. People are fed up with the willful blindness and double standards that fragment our culture along ethnic & racial lines.

I stand by my previous post.

johno wrote:I stand by my previous post.

You really shouldn't...because as you know, one can't simple reverse the nomenclature (black/white) and be saying a useful or true thing in both directions. Whites as a subset experience racism, blacks experience racism..... but only the most foolhardy would suggest these two experience are interchangeable or equally felt.....they are so dissimilar as to warrant use of a different word altogether. We're talking about something super complex...so you're statement comes across simplistic and silly...because it is.

johno wrote:Nothing encourages bullies like cowardice. There will be no end to the insanity if we treat black citizens like criminally-inclined retards who need endless coddling. IMO, political correctness is a large reason why so many people are attracted to Trump. People are fed up with the willful blindness and double standards that fragment our culture along ethnic & racial lines..

This is the post you should stand by because it says a useful thing, a nuanced thing and a true thing.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

johno wrote:I stand by my previous post.

You really shouldn't...because as you know, one can't simple reverse the nomenclature (black/white) and be saying a useful or true thing in both directions. Whites as a subset experience racism, blacks experience racism..... but only the most foolhardy would suggest these two experience are interchangeable or equally felt.....they are so dissimilar as to warrant use of a different word altogether. We're talking about something super complex...so you're statement comes across simplistic and silly...because it is.

johno wrote:Nothing encourages bullies like cowardice. There will be no end to the insanity if we treat black citizens like criminally-inclined retards who need endless coddling. IMO, political correctness is a large reason why so many people are attracted to Trump. People are fed up with the willful blindness and double standards that fragment our culture along ethnic & racial lines..

This is the post you should stand by because it says a useful thing, a nuanced thing and a true thing.

would you be willing to elaborate on the second quotation, the one b.d. says is useful. i have difficulty understand what you're talking about specifically. for example, "political correctness" covers so much. some correctness requirements are stupid, whereas some are truly "correct," in my view. you have something in mind with your references to "willful blindness" and "double standards"; again, would you be specific.

thanx