Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Sign in to follow this  
copper123

Proof there is no god

Recommended Posts

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2020 at 7:09 PM, 1949threepence said:

I agree with demonstrating peacefully. In fact I'd join them.

But vandalism, looting and desecration of monuments will instantly distract from the gigantic cause the demonstrators have, and cause them to lose sympathy from the masses. It also hands ammunition to Trump. They've even vandalised and looted black owned businesses, and a black security guard was killed by them. 

The truth is that the trigger happy US police are out of control. Bear in mind it's not just African Americans and Hispanics they shoot dead/otherwise kill or brutalise for spurious reasons, it's also white people. Although, proportionately, it's mostly black. The Guardian ran a year long article 2015/16, citing every single person shot dead by the US police in those 2 years. Obviously some were reasonably justified, but what struck me was the number of people stopped for the most trivial of reasons, like a defective back light, and who then were shot dead in the subsequent exchange with the Officer. I truly think some of them are looking for an excuse to shoot people. 

That's what needs looking at folks, and it shouldn't be lost in rioting. That's a total distraction from the cause, which actually includes everybody. It's not solely a race issue. George Floyd shouldn't have died for a nil end result. 

No, the police are getting stitched up completely. And we're getting totally misled by a crafty little trick in the statistics. Leaving aside the murder, which is statistically irrelevant (and it's the rarer white on black type), the bigger picture offered by black lives matter and accepted uncritically by the media and everyone else presumably hinges at least partly on the following statistics that I see quite often:

Unarmed shootings, armed shootings and deaths in custody are all about 2:1 white to black. OK, factor in the demographic that the black population is one sixth of the size of the white population, and this changes it to about 3:1 black to white over-representation. These figures are what all the media are quoting.

Fine, what's the problem with that you say? Well, they're missing out the other factor completely, which is the relative proportions of criminals in each demographic. This makes all the difference but how do we arrive at this figure? Just check the US prison population percentages. These are the figures from 2013, I don't expect they've changed significantly since:

Black 37%

White 32%

(The remainder are Hispanics and others).

Call them equal for simplicity. And of course these percentages will reflect the active criminal percentages as well. So what does this tell us, considering the demographic proportion is 1:6? Either up to 5 out of 6 blacks are getting framed for crimes they didn't commit, even after going through due process with a court, a jury etc. Or else the percentage of black criminals in the black community is six times that of the comparative white percentage.

This disparity thus completely cancels out the demographic effect, as there are six times more black criminals per million blacks, say, than white criminals per million whites. So police interactions in all these scenarios, as they are mainly with criminals (such as someone fleeing from the police without stopping when warned, storming of a suspect's house maybe involving similar-race associates), are directed at a criminal population consisting of 50% white and 50% black. So looking at these shooting or death in custody figures again, and as the police are dealing with an equal number of black and white criminals, one would expect the ratios to be 1:1 black : white.

But they're not, they're actually all about 2 to 1 against whites, so in fact the police are twice as likely to shoot an armed or unarmed white criminal or let him die in custody than a black criminal. No-one is pointing out this simple fact, which I find deeply disturbing, this is truly Orwellian manipulation of thought that is being hammered into us, and we're supposed to live in a free and open society. And all this dishonesty to placate BLM, who have not got our best interests at heart, to put it mildly.

 

Share this post


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

No, the police are getting stitched up completely. And we're getting totally misled by a crafty little trick in the statistics. Leaving aside the murder, which is statistically irrelevant (and it's the rarer white on black type), the bigger picture offered by black lives matter and accepted uncritically by the media and everyone else presumably hinges at least partly on the following statistics that I see quite often:

Unarmed shootings, armed shootings and deaths in custody are all about 2:1 white to black. OK, factor in the demographic that the black population is one sixth of the size of the white population, and this changes it to about 3:1 black to white over-representation. These figures are what all the media are quoting.

Fine, what's the problem with that you say? Well, they're missing out the other factor completely, which is the relative proportions of criminals in each demographic. This makes all the difference but how do we arrive at this figure? Just check the US prison population percentages. These are the figures from 2013, I don't expect they've changed significantly since:

Black 37%

White 32%

(The remainder are Hispanics and others).

Call them equal for simplicity. And of course these percentages will reflect the active criminal percentages as well. So what does this tell us, considering the demographic proportion is 1:6? Either up to 5 out of 6 blacks are getting framed for crimes they didn't commit, even after going through due process with a court, a jury etc. Or else the percentage of black criminals in the black community is six times that of the comparative white percentage.

This disparity thus completely cancels out the demographic effect, as there are six times more black criminals per million blacks, say, than white criminals per million whites. So police interactions in all these scenarios, as they are mainly with criminals (such as someone fleeing from the police without stopping when warned, storming of a suspect's house maybe involving similar-race associates), are directed at a criminal population consisting of 50% white and 50% black. So looking at these shooting or death in custody figures again, and as the police are dealing with an equal number of black and white criminals, one would expect the ratios to be 1:1 black : white.

But they're not, they're actually all about 2 to 1 against whites, so in fact the police are twice as likely to shoot an armed or unarmed white criminal or let him die in custody than a black criminal. No-one is pointing out this simple fact, which I find deeply disturbing, this is truly Orwellian manipulation of thought that is being hammered into us, and we're supposed to live in a free and open society. And all this dishonesty to placate BLM, who have not got our best interests at heart, to put it mildly.

 

Which is all well and good if you ignore the history of black peonage in the Southern States ante-bellum. Anti vagrancy and begging laws were introduced in the South as early as 1860 that specifically targeted recently freed slaves and put them into the prison farm system whereby their labour was once again free, These are the Jim Crow Laws that are being used to criminalise a huge swathe of the US population.

Now, in our more enlightened times we have the school to prison pipeline whereby a percentage of deliberately under educated people are siphoned off into the school-to-prison-pipeline.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline

Just have a guess as to the ethnicity of the people involved. Slavery in all but name is current in 18-20 states and is subject to legal challenge in 13.

Share this post


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

Which is all well and good if you ignore the history of black peonage in the Southern States ante-bellum. Anti vagrancy and begging laws were introduced in the South as early as 1860 that specifically targeted recently freed slaves and put them into the prison farm system whereby their labour was once again free, These are the Jim Crow Laws that are being used to criminalise a huge swathe of the US population.

Now, in our more enlightened times we have the school to prison pipeline whereby a percentage of deliberately under educated people are siphoned off into the school-to-prison-pipeline.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline

Just have a guess as to the ethnicity of the people involved. Slavery in all but name is current in 18-20 states and is subject to legal challenge in 13.

Interesting article, it basically says that black children react worse to a disciplinary environment than white children, there are more infractions and they have higher levels of delinquency. They're not "deliberately" undereducated, they're breaking the rules more often and getting suspended more often. In theory a strong disciplinary environment should be in their favour, creating a more robust structure often missing at home.

Tony Blair and Diane Abbot blamed gang culture as disadvantaging young blacks. Of course one of the main problems is fatherless families, the young black boy, like all boys, needs some strong fatherly influence and it's not there in 70% of black homes. As a consequence it's more likely they'll join gangs with all the problems that brings.

I think the article describes the symptoms more than a cause; there's a similar racial disparity in London in crime and prison populations, and we have different education environments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_London

https://news.sky.com/story/black-murder-victims-and-suspects-london-v-uk-11443656

Sky news say the murder rate outside London reflects the national demographics. Well, no it doesn't, it's nearly 5 times higher for blacks than whites (13/3 vs 81/86).

Actually the point of my earlier comment were that the US police were not to blame for any general discrimination.

Share this post


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

No, the police are getting stitched up completely. And we're getting totally misled by a crafty little trick in the statistics. Leaving aside the murder, which is statistically irrelevant (and it's the rarer white on black type), the bigger picture offered by black lives matter and accepted uncritically by the media and everyone else presumably hinges at least partly on the following statistics that I see quite often:

Unarmed shootings, armed shootings and deaths in custody are all about 2:1 white to black. OK, factor in the demographic that the black population is one sixth of the size of the white population, and this changes it to about 3:1 black to white over-representation. These figures are what all the media are quoting.

Fine, what's the problem with that you say? Well, they're missing out the other factor completely, which is the relative proportions of criminals in each demographic. This makes all the difference but how do we arrive at this figure? Just check the US prison population percentages. These are the figures from 2013, I don't expect they've changed significantly since:

Black 37%

White 32%

(The remainder are Hispanics and others).

Call them equal for simplicity. And of course these percentages will reflect the active criminal percentages as well. So what does this tell us, considering the demographic proportion is 1:6? Either up to 5 out of 6 blacks are getting framed for crimes they didn't commit, even after going through due process with a court, a jury etc. Or else the percentage of black criminals in the black community is six times that of the comparative white percentage.

This disparity thus completely cancels out the demographic effect, as there are six times more black criminals per million blacks, say, than white criminals per million whites. So police interactions in all these scenarios, as they are mainly with criminals (such as someone fleeing from the police without stopping when warned, storming of a suspect's house maybe involving similar-race associates), are directed at a criminal population consisting of 50% white and 50% black. So looking at these shooting or death in custody figures again, and as the police are dealing with an equal number of black and white criminals, one would expect the ratios to be 1:1 black : white.

But they're not, they're actually all about 2 to 1 against whites, so in fact the police are twice as likely to shoot an armed or unarmed white criminal or let him die in custody than a black criminal. No-one is pointing out this simple fact, which I find deeply disturbing, this is truly Orwellian manipulation of thought that is being hammered into us, and we're supposed to live in a free and open society. And all this dishonesty to placate BLM, who have not got our best interests at heart, to put it mildly.

 

Well actually, if you read my post, I pretty much said exactly that. In absolute terms more white people have been shot dead by the American police, but pro rata, it's more African American and Hispanic folk.  

I'm not going into attributing the race blame game regarding crime. What I am saying, however, is that there is a huge problem with the United States police, which urgently needs addressing. Not by defunding, as police are still very much needed, but by root and branch reform of an organisation that is undoubtedly trigger happy - against all individuals. As you say, many white people have also been shot, and many of them, unreasonably. 

I return once again to the point I made in my original post regarding the sheer triviality of the reasons for stopping/arresting people, and them subsequently being shot dead. Quite how they escalate so dramatically is a bit of a mystery, but they do. The latest case, post George Floyd, is Rayshard Brooks, who was arrested for going to sleep in his car in a drive thru. Apparently he resisted arrest, grabbed one of the officer's tasers, and was shot dead whilst running off. Again a shooting dead, and two families lives ruined over an incident of everyday banality - you can read the details here      

I can't imagine such a thing happening in the UK, either over that, or apparently attempting to pass on a fake $20 bill.    

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The strange thing in statistics is the black and asian citizens are more prone to covid19 it's often mooted as a fact.

Are not black and asians more prone to be diabetic as well.

Being diabetic make you more prone to covid19 this fact  is never mentioned in the media , its alway "why are black and asian folks so prone to it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, copper123 said:

The strange thing in statistics is the black and asian citizens are more prone to covid19 it's often mooted as a fact.

Are not black and asians more prone to be diabetic as well.

Being diabetic make you more prone to covid19 this fact  is never mentioned in the media , its alway "why are black and asian folks so prone to it"

Not much on the main news outlets I bet, as everything must be done to stoke the grievance. The logical conclusion to all this will be more equality of outcome though they still occasionally pay lip service to equality of opportunity. But let's face it, if any group is under-performing in a multicultural society, they must be given public sector jobs, university places etc at the expense of applicants with much better qualifications, and it'll be even more so than happens at present. 

My daughter said to me the other day that black people get longer prison sentences than whites for similar offences. Oh dear, I had to explain that that is certainly true in the UK, not due to racism funnily enough, but due to the fact that a higher percentage of black people plead not guilty than white people (the latest figure form the Office of Justice is 70% to 57%). So when they are found guilty (and they have often been given legal advice to have pleaded guilty) they get a longer jail sentence. 

But this is what young people are learning.

1949 - sorry, I'll reply to you tomorrow. This home computer is hard work to operate!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2020 at 12:34 PM, 1949threepence said:

Well actually, if you read my post, I pretty much said exactly that. In absolute terms more white people have been shot dead by the American police, but pro rata, it's more African American and Hispanic folk.  

I'm not going into attributing the race blame game regarding crime. What I am saying, however, is that there is a huge problem with the United States police, which urgently needs addressing. Not by defunding, as police are still very much needed, but by root and branch reform of an organisation that is undoubtedly trigger happy - against all individuals. As you say, many white people have also been shot, and many of them, unreasonably. 

I return once again to the point I made in my original post regarding the sheer triviality of the reasons for stopping/arresting people, and them subsequently being shot dead. Quite how they escalate so dramatically is a bit of a mystery, but they do. The latest case, post George Floyd, is Rayshard Brooks, who was arrested for going to sleep in his car in a drive thru. Apparently he resisted arrest, grabbed one of the officer's tasers, and was shot dead whilst running off. Again a shooting dead, and two families lives ruined over an incident of everyday banality - you can read the details here      

I can't imagine such a thing happening in the UK, either over that, or apparently attempting to pass on a fake $20 bill.    

Well, unlike you, I read your post, but it doesn't seem as if you have read or understood mine at all from your first paragraph. I'll condense it:

There are roughly equal numbers of blacks and whites in the US prison system, so that means, unless conviction rates are massively, and I mean massively skewed against blacks, there are a similar ratio of the races in the criminal justice system and thus in the population as a whole. The 1:6 demographic of blacks to whites is thus cancelled out by the six-fold disparity in the number of criminals between the demographics. 

So if there are two whites who die in custody to every one black, and there are the same number of whites and blacks in the system, that is a 2:1 bias against whites in custody. In armed and unarmed shootings, the police will generally be interacting with criminals so the same proportions apply. Hence whites are over-represented in all of these categories.

Let me know if there's any part of that you don't agree with.

In Brook's case, if the police tell him to stop, and he carries on running, their procedure may well be to shoot in special cases, and running off with a police weapon (which could be used against them in the future) may have been one of those cases. If he had stopped, whether with hands up or down, then it's a case of murder and the policeman should be fully liable of course. However, if he's was running fast, the policeman will only have a very short window when he's still in range, so may make an impulsive wrong decision. If so, he'll be suitably punished I'm sure. But once again, all the media show us is one-off incidences of the rarer form of inter-racial killing so to make any larger point is going to be difficult. Black and Hispanic police shoot unarmed blacks at the same rate pro-rata apparently.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U. S. 2010 census, African Americans when including Multiracial African Americans form 14% of the total U S population. White Americans make up 63% of the U S population (2012 figures), that's 4.5 times the black population. So if that ratio is not present in prison inmate figures then we are forced to believe either that African Americans are inherently criminal or that the society that criminalises them is inherently fucked up. At the end of 2017, federal and state prisons in the United States held about 475,900 inmates who were black and 436,500 who were white. Near parity. Bear in mind that this is in a country that incarcerates a larger percentage of its citizens than any other nation on earth.

Convict labour is an economic necessity in many rural parts of the South. In addition to being forced to labour directly for the government on a prison farm or in a penal colony, inmates may be forced to do farm work for private enterprises by being farmed out through the practice of convict leasing to work on private agricultural lands or related industries (fishing, lumbering, etc.). The party purchasing their labor from the government generally does so at a steep discount from the cost of free labour

Share this post


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

Well, unlike you, I read your post, but it doesn't seem as if you have read or understood mine at all from your first paragraph. I'll condense it:

There are roughly equal numbers of blacks and whites in the US prison system, so that means, unless conviction rates are massively, and I mean massively skewed against blacks, there are a similar ratio of the races in the criminal justice system and thus in the population as a whole. The 1:6 demographic of blacks to whites is thus cancelled out by the six-fold disparity in the number of criminals between the demographics. 

So if there are two whites who die in custody to every one black, and there are the same number of whites and blacks in the system, that is a 2:1 bias against whites in custody. In armed and unarmed shootings, the police will generally be interacting with criminals so the same proportions apply. Hence whites are over-represented in all of these categories.

Let me know if there's any part of that you don't agree with.

In Brook's case, if the police tell him to stop, and he carries on running, their procedure may well be to shoot in special cases, and running off with a police weapon (which could be used against them in the future) may have been one of those cases. If he had stopped, whether with hands up or down, then it's a case of murder and the policeman should be fully liable of course. However, if he's was running fast, the policeman will only have a very short window when he's still in range, so may make an impulsive wrong decision. If so, he'll be suitably punished I'm sure. But once again, all the media show us is one-off incidences of the rarer form of inter-racial killing so to make any larger point is going to be difficult. Black and Hispanic police shoot unarmed blacks at the same rate pro-rata apparently.

 

I think we are completely at cross purposes. I was referring to death by police shootings across the ethnic divide, and what I said is supported by quantitative hard fact. Per million of the population shot by US police, 30 are black, 23 Hispanic, 12 white and 4 "other" - source   

But my main point is not the ethnicity of those shot, it is the fact that so many of them (of various ethnicities) have been unreasonably shot. I mentioned this after the George Floyd killing, citing the fact that so many of those shot were originally stopped for very trivial reasons - Floyd himself apparently stopped for allegedly passing on a fake $20 bill. A few weeks later I back that up with another killing of someone who ended up being shot dead after going to sleep in a drive thru. I supplied a link to that case. Both these instances would be laughingly trivial, if it hadn't resulted in two deaths. Hence my conclusion that the US police are essentially out of control, and need reining in on shooting and their often fatal restraint techniques.      

As far as Rayshard Brooks, the officer who shot him, Garrett Rolfe, has (rightly in my opinion) been charged with felony murder. You may think that shooting someone as they run away, having left their car behind, is justified, but I'm afraid I don't - and whether with or without a grabbed taser. At that point he was not a threat to the lives of the officers involved.    

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

I think we are completely at cross purposes. I was referring to death by police shootings across the ethnic divide, and what I said is supported by quantitative hard fact. Per million of the population shot by US police, 30 are black, 23 Hispanic, 12 white and 4 "other" - source   

But my main point is not the ethnicity of those shot, it is the fact that so many of them (of various ethnicities) have been unreasonably shot. I mentioned this after the George Floyd killing, citing the fact that so many of those shot were originally stopped for very trivial reasons - Floyd himself apparently stopped for allegedly passing on a fake $20 bill. A few weeks later I back that up with another killing of someone who ended up being shot dead after going to sleep in a drive thru. I supplied a link to that case. Both these instances would be laughingly trivial, if it hadn't resulted in two deaths. Hence my conclusion that the US police are essentially out of control, and need reining in on shooting and their often fatal restraint techniques.      

As far as Rayshard Brooks, the officer who shot him, Garrett Rolfe, has (rightly in my opinion) been charged with felony murder. You may think that shooting someone as they run away, having left their car behind, is justified, but I'm afraid I don't - and whether with or without a grabbed taser. At that point he was not a threat to the lives of the officers involved.    

 

Fair point on Brooks, if police procedure was not to shoot someone fleeing, he's a goner, but if it is, that may be different, and we do have the luxury of being armchair policemen.

You did describe George Floyd's death as "not solely a race issue" which implies you thought part of it was. I have shown that in fact, the racial injustice is the other way round, but of course no-one's interested in that as it doesn't fit the agenda. These marches and demonstrations you mentioned weren't primarily about police brutality, they were about "racism" unfortunately.

So, if deaths in custody are 2:1 white to black, it is not the demographic difference which should be a factor, it should be the ratio of blacks to whites in police custody. And extrapolating from the prison populations tell us that is one to one. So a white prisoner is twice as likely to die in custody than a black prisoner. That should be easy to understand and it is surely critically important to dispel the current destructive and false grievance if possible.

The trouble is these false analogies are being used to prop up a campaign feeding off the notion that whites are intrinsically bad, and that is the cause of all the problems in the black community. Now that is a massive issue.

Edited by oldcopper

Share this post


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

Fair point on Brooks, if police procedure was not to shoot someone fleeing, he's a goner, but if it is, that may be different, and we do have the luxury of being armchair policemen.

You did describe George Floyd's death as "not solely a race issue" which implies you thought part of it was. I have shown that in fact, the racial injustice is the other way round, but of course no-one's interested in that as it doesn't fit the agenda. These marches and demonstrations you mentioned weren't primarily about police brutality, they were about "racism" unfortunately.

No. No, you haven't.

So, if deaths in custody are 2:1 white to black, it is not the demographic difference which should be a factor, it should be the ratio of blacks to whites in police custody. And extrapolating from the prison populations tell us that is one to one. So a white prisoner is twice as likely to die in custody than a black prisoner. That should be easy to understand and it is surely critically important to dispel the current destructive and false grievance if possible.

The trouble is these false analogies are being used to prop up a campaign feeding off the notion that whites are intrinsically bad, and that is the cause of all the problems in the black community. Now that is a massive issue.

No. Not INTRINSICALLY bad, just as Germans aren’t intrinsically bad because of Hitler. The campaign is far more about the wrongs and injustices and evils done to blacks, mostly by whites. You can cite the slave trade, apartheid in S Africa and elsewhere, the extermination of the Australian Aborigine and American Indian ways of life, the lynchings and 'justice' system of the American Deep South before MLK, the list goes on. To isolate the 2020 (and earlier) protest movements without putting them in their proper context, is a failure to understand history.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2020 at 11:54 AM, Peckris 2 said:

 

Peckers, yes, yes I have, and we're talking about the police here. It 's just you haven't, like 1949, read or understood what I've written. Police interactions adversely affect whites by the original numerical ratio of circa 2:1, because the demographic effect (timesing the black figure by 4.5) is cancelled out by the 5:1 greater proportion of black criminals per capita, which is revealed in the relative prison populations of each demographic. But, don't worry, you won't understand that either. It's just that funnily enough, the media and everyone else is forgetting to factor in the last bit. And do I have to give you lot a maths lesson every time?

"White privilege" implies we have an unearned superior status due to our ancestors oppressing BAME people's ancestors. It affects all whites, You're right, all Germans aren't Nazis, but "white privilege" is a universal property of white people, however rich or poor, hard working or otherwise deserving. And here's a couple of comments from Van Jones, a black CNN pundit, talking about racism:

Even the most liberal and well-intentioned white person has a virus in his or her brain that can be activated in an instant

and:

White people are always innocent and that innocence constitutes their crime.

Now, those words may possibly have been a quote or taken out of context. I've seen the clips, but he hasn't been censured in any way for saying these things, so these views are allowable and unchallenged. So this white privilege or racism sounds pretty intrinsic to white people wouldn't you say. And do you not see where all this now "justified" envy of a whole race might lead? There is a certain parallel from the past.

Your last list perfectly sums up the weirdly selective cultural marxism of your world view. It's the left's agenda of outrage and agenda of compassion. These emotions can only be felt provided the politics of the situation fit in with the left wing narrative. Otherwise it's crickets and tumbleweed. I'll expand on this tomorrow if you want! But guess what ideology  has been responsible for more deaths and suffering than any other? I'll leave you with that one to ponder.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, oldcopper said:

Peckers, yes, yes I have, and we're talking about the police here. It 's just you haven't, like 1949, read or understood what I've written. Police interactions adversely affect whites by the original numerical ratio of circa 2:1, because the demographic effect (timesing the black figure by 4.5) is cancelled out by the 5:1 greater proportion of black criminals per capita, which is revealed in the relative prison populations of each demographic. But, don't worry, you won't understand that either. It's just that funnily enough, the media and everyone else is forgetting to factor in the last bit. And do I have to give you lot a maths lesson every time?

No time to address this fully just before bedtime, sorry

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/deaths-police-custody-united-states/

"White privilege" implies we have an unearned superior status due to our ancestors oppressing BAME people's ancestors. It affects all whites, You're right, all Germans aren't Nazis, but "white privilege" is a universal property of white people, however rich or poor, hard working or otherwise deserving. And here's a couple of comments from Van Jones, a black CNN pundit, talking about racism:

Even the most liberal and well-intentioned white person has a virus in his or her brain that can be activated in an instant

and:

White people are always innocent and that innocence constitutes their crime.

Now, those words may possibly have been a quote or taken out of context. I've seen the clips, but he hasn't been censured in any way for saying these things, so these views are allowable and unchallenged. So this white privilege or racism sounds pretty intrinsic to white people wouldn't you say. And do you not see where all this now "justified" envy of a whole race might lead? There is a certain parallel from the past.

Your last list perfectly sums up the weirdly selective cultural marxism of your world view. It's the left's agenda of outrage and agenda of compassion. These emotions can only be felt provided the politics of the situation fit in with the left wing narrative. Otherwise it's crickets and tumbleweed. I'll expand on this tomorrow if you want! But guess what ideology  has been responsible for more deaths and suffering than any other? I'll leave you with that one to ponder.

I'm actually stunned by your thinking this is 'Marxist', let alone a 'left agenda'. I grew up in the 60s when most right minded people were "with" MLK and so were most Western governments except the obvious exception of S Africa. So basically, everyone from centre right (Conservatives) to the far left. This is definitely not some kind of 'left agenda' unless you subscribe to some kind of historical revisionism? Find me a mainstream news article from the 60s arguing against civil rights for blacks?

 

Edited by Peckris 2
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2020 at 9:00 AM, oldcopper said:

Fair point on Brooks, if police procedure was not to shoot someone fleeing, he's a goner, but if it is, that may be different, and we do have the luxury of being armchair policemen.

You did describe George Floyd's death as "not solely a race issue" which implies you thought part of it was. I have shown that in fact, the racial injustice is the other way round, but of course no-one's interested in that as it doesn't fit the agenda. These marches and demonstrations you mentioned weren't primarily about police brutality, they were about "racism" unfortunately.

So, if deaths in custody are 2:1 white to black, it is not the demographic difference which should be a factor, it should be the ratio of blacks to whites in police custody. And extrapolating from the prison populations tell us that is one to one. So a white prisoner is twice as likely to die in custody than a black prisoner. That should be easy to understand and it is surely critically important to dispel the current destructive and false grievance if possible.

The trouble is these false analogies are being used to prop up a campaign feeding off the notion that whites are intrinsically bad, and that is the cause of all the problems in the black community. Now that is a massive issue.

Well part of it pretty obviously is, as far more African American and Hispanic people (per million of the population) are shot and otherwise killed by police, than white people. That's hard fact.

You seem to have completely missed the main thrust of what I'm saying though, which is that the United States police in general, are trigger happy and there are a disturbingly high number of people (of all ethnicities) who are being stopped by the police for spurious reasons. The situation then escalates massively, and the "suspect" is shot dead. These are situation in which absolutely no other person would be adversely affected if the police hadn't got involved at all. For example in the case of Floyd, why was he suspected, and why was a presumption made that even if he had passed on a fake $20 note, that it was deliberate - how many fake £1 coins were passed on unwittingly in this country? In the Brooks case, can you imagine that happening here in the UK? Most normal, civilized people would have gone up to the guy and just asked if he was OK, and tried to help him, including our own police.

I think the US police need re-educating on their priorities and to be made aware of their responsibilities as that pertains to the safety and well being of the public they purport to protect.

Although my political instincts are conservative with a small c, I cannot countenance, nor keep quiet, if innocent people are the subject of needless killings by representatives of the state, especially one which describes itself as the "land of the free and the home of the brave". There's nothing brave or free about these dreadful occurrences. Moreover, although I can't prove it, I do get the overriding impression that some of these police officers are looking for any excuse to shoot those they stop. The slightest false move and you're blown away, not even knowing whether you were following the officer's orders or not. That comes across very strongly. 

It's nasty. it's cowardly and it's breathtakingly idiotic. I make no apology whatever for speaking out against it.  

       

     

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep coming back to this one phrase and its obvious implications:

"the 5:1 greater proportion of black criminals per capita, which is revealed in the relative prison populations of each demographic"

 

This does nothing to support your claim of inherent racial criminality, it simply demonstrates the overwhelming racial bias that prevails within American policing.  A black/Latino/Hispanic person is up to five times more likely to be stopped and questioned * than a Caucasian. The stop and search is used as a basis for Probable Cause further investigation. They are more likely to face a misdemeanour charge than a white person and if it goes to court the disparity in sentencing can be seen in the two attached links.

 

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/racial-disparity-sentencing#:~:text=type of crime-,Key findings%3A,sentenced than similarly-situated whites.

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

 

 

* this is a geographic variable, not simply South vs North

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I keep coming back to this one phrase and its obvious implications:

"the 5:1 greater proportion of black criminals per capita, which is revealed in the relative prison populations of each demographic"

 

This does nothing to support your claim of inherent racial criminality, it simply demonstrates the overwhelming racial bias that prevails within American policing.  A black/Latino/Hispanic person is up to five times more likely to be stopped and questioned * than a Caucasian. The stop and search is used as a basis for Probable Cause further investigation. They are more likely to face a misdemeanour charge than a white person and if it goes to court the disparity in sentencing can be seen in the two attached links.

 

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/racial-disparity-sentencing#:~:text=type of crime-,Key findings%3A,sentenced than similarly-situated whites.

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

 

 

* this is a geographic variable, not simply South vs North

So how come there's a pretty similar over-representation in the UK - see "Crime in London" Wikipedia and go to the section on race. I've given you that link before, but you obviously haven't read it. So I think it's a red herring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Well part of it pretty obviously is, as far more African American and Hispanic people (per million of the population) are shot and otherwise killed by police, than white people. That's hard fact.

You seem to have completely missed the main thrust of what I'm saying though, which is that the United States police in general, are trigger happy and there are a disturbingly high number of people (of all ethnicities) who are being stopped by the police for spurious reasons. The situation then escalates massively, and the "suspect" is shot dead. These are situation in which absolutely no other person would be adversely affected if the police hadn't got involved at all. For example in the case of Floyd, why was he suspected, and why was a presumption made that even if he had passed on a fake $20 note, that it was deliberate - how many fake £1 coins were passed on unwittingly in this country? In the Brooks case, can you imagine that happening here in the UK? Most normal, civilized people would have gone up to the guy and just asked if he was OK, and tried to help him, including our own police.

I think the US police need re-educating on their priorities and to be made aware of their responsibilities as that pertains to the safety and well being of the public they purport to protect.

Although my political instincts are conservative with a small c, I cannot countenance, nor keep quiet, if innocent people are the subject of needless killings by representatives of the state, especially one which describes itself as the "land of the free and the home of the brave". There's nothing brave or free about these dreadful occurrences. Moreover, although I can't prove it, I do get the overriding impression that some of these police officers are looking for any excuse to shoot those they stop. The slightest false move and you're blown away, not even knowing whether you were following the officer's orders or not. That comes across very strongly. 

It's nasty. it's cowardly and it's breathtakingly idiotic. I make no apology whatever for speaking out against it.  

       

     

The figures I've seen for armed shooting and unarmed shooting are ~ 2:1 white to black (465:234 armed) and unarmed 20:9, latest Washington Post data 25:14 white to black. Where are you getting your figures from? To be fairly representative, the ratio should be circa 1:1 based on the relative criminal populations of both demographics. Or with Hispanics, 37b to 32w to 22h, if I remember rightly from one year's prison statistics. So the ratio of black and Hispanic incidents with police to white incidents with police should be 59:32 if there is a fair representation. But I'm still waiting for someone to attempt or want to engage with the argument, maybe because that simple factor of criminal proportionality destroys the agenda of racial victimhood being peddled here.

I have understood what you've said and I haven't disagreed with you on the brutality. I will say it can't be a picnic policing a high number of armed criminals and in some areas there must be a concentration of extremely dangerous people, so mistakes and over-reaction are bound to happen, though fortunately the US has quite a good justice system, so if police are found out to have acted unlawfully, then they will be facing the music. No-one's got a problem with that. But I have said, and you can't dispute this, that the marches mainly have the agenda of race, which I've shown is completely bogus as there is effectively a 1:1 ratio of black to white criminals, extrapolating from the prison populations. If you disagree with that comment, look at the argument and tell me why. I've have asked you before and I'm still waiting.

I wonder if this lauding of the dishonest BLM and their narrative is an establishment approved tactic to guilt-trip the resident population into accepting millions of African migrants via the UN Global Migration Pact by 2050. Hopefully I'm wrong there, but it's strange that no-one's questioning the uniform and easy-to-spot deception here.

Edited by oldcopper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

 

You've had a good sleep, perhaps you can engage with my points.

Of course it's all cultural Marxism, because all the examples you give are of the white oppression/black victimhood type. Let's take the blood bath that's been post-Colonial Africa, for one. Rhodesia, at the time known as the breadbasket of Africa and one of the most affluent sub-Saharan countries. The Liberal West was only interested in getting rid of the white ruling class, who funnily enough had the ability to run a good economy and a productive farm system.

They must have thought - we know what to do, let's stick a tin-pot Marxist psychopath in charge instead, but that doesn't matter, because he's....black and lots of blacks support him, apparently, well those from his own tribe anyway. Problem solved, nasty white racists not in charge any more. Byeeeee! Another moral victory.

Result: tribal war, mass murders, 4000 plus white farmers murdered plus hundreds of thousands of blacks. Farms were given to soldiers form Mugabe's army who had no idea how to run them, after dispatching the original inhabitants, and Zimbabwe quickly turned into a failed state, life expectancy had decreased by about 15 years at one stage and it had become one of the poorest and most brutal countries in Africa with massive abject poverty. What a hellhole and what a tragedy. Who's to blame?

So the Ruandan genocide (800K +), the incredible violence in South African, also turning also into a failed state with some politicians singing and talking about murdering Boers, and I haven't even mentioned the Congo yet, Uganda or Somalia etc etc. Apparently vigilante necklace killings in SA are still happening, maybe several hundred a year. Winnie Mandela was a firm advocate. One was caught on film in 1986 of an African woman, whom, after being burnt alive, had her head caved in with rocks, and glass shards were then put to use in a sexual mutilation. And I expect a certain chunk of the local townsfolk would have been looking on, taking in the spectacle.

So it's all relative, isn't it. Anyway, Peckris avers that African suffering has mainly been caused by whites - well, firstly we have no idea of the body counts when African tribes displaced others, a common enough occurrence and judging from modern Africa, extremely brutal and also involving brutalising the women and children, Add the massive slave trade to the Middle East as well as ours and this all implies that the local rulers weren't swayed very much by Liberal ideals. I think Britain probably killed far less black people than at least Belgium or Germany, who were much more brutal, but overall, it is all completely dwarfed by the titanic black on black carnage. So I don't think whites are mainly to blame for African suffering.

And this is the same in the US. You're only interested in a couple of cop murders of blacks because they might fit your agenda, but the 7000 black on black murders every year you ignore. As I said, the agenda of compassion, the agenda of outrage.

 

Edited by oldcopper

Share this post


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

The figures I've seen for armed shooting and unarmed shooting are ~ 2:1 white to black (465:234 armed) and unarmed 20:9, latest Washington Post data 25:14 white to black. Where are you getting your figures from? To be fairly representative, the ratio should be circa 1:1 based on the relative criminal populations of both demographics. Or with Hispanics, 37b to 32w to 22h, if I remember rightly from one year's prison statistics. So the ratio of black and Hispanic incidents with police to white incidents with police should be 59:32 if there is a fair representation. But I'm still waiting for someone to attempt or want to engage with the argument, maybe because that simple factor of criminal proportionality destroys the agenda of racial victimhood being peddled here.

I have understood what you've said and I haven't disagreed with you on the brutality. I will say it can't be a picnic policing a high number of armed criminals and in some areas there must be a concentration of extremely dangerous people, so mistakes and over-reaction are bound to happen, though fortunately the US has quite a good justice system, so if police are found out to have acted unlawfully, then they will be facing the music. No-one's got a problem with that. But I have said, and you can't dispute this, that the marches mainly have the agenda of race, which I've shown is completely bogus as there is effectively a 1:1 ratio of black to white criminals, extrapolating from the prison populations. If you disagree with that comment, look at the argument and tell me why. I've have asked you before and I'm still waiting.

I wonder if this lauding of the dishonest BLM and their narrative is an establishment approved tactic to guilt-trip the resident population into accepting millions of African migrants via the UN Global Migration Pact by 2050. Hopefully I'm wrong there, but it's strange that no-one's questioning the uniform and easy-to-spot deception here.

I posted a link in my post of 22nd June above, which you've already replied to, so you've seen it.

As far as the rest, I'm not engaging with you on it, as it's not and never was part of the point I was making. I said several posts ago I wasn't getting involved in the race:crime argument. I'll leave that to you. 

 

Share this post


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

The figures I've seen for armed shooting and unarmed shooting are ~ 2:1 white to black (465:234 armed) and unarmed 20:9, latest Washington Post data 25:14 white to black. Where are you getting your figures from?

Excuse me, where are YOU getting your figures from? Even if it's true, the ratio of gun owners white:black is overwhelmingly predominantly white. So if the police are - understandably - more trigger happy towards armed suspects, that's going to be white most times.

Share this post


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

You've had a good sleep, perhaps you can engage with my points.

Of course it's all cultural Marxism, because all the examples you give are of the white oppression/black victimhood type. Let's take the blood bath that's been post-Colonial Africa, for one. Rhodesia, at the time known as the breadbasket of Africa and one of the most affluent sub-Saharan countries. The Liberal West was only interested in getting rid of the white ruling class, who funnily enough had the ability to run a good economy and a productive farm system.

They must have thought - we know what to do, let's stick a tin-pot Marxist psychopath in charge instead, but that doesn't matter, because he's....black and lots of blacks support him, apparently, well those from his own tribe anyway. Problem solved, nasty white racists not in charge any more. Byeeeee! Another moral victory.

Result: tribal war, mass murders, 4000 plus white farmers murdered plus hundreds of thousands of blacks. Farms were given to soldiers form Mugabe's army who had no idea how to run them, after dispatching the original inhabitants, and Zimbabwe quickly turned into a failed state, life expectancy had decreased by about 15 years at one stage and it had become one of the poorest and most brutal countries in Africa with massive abject poverty. What a hellhole and what a tragedy. Who's to blame?

So the Ruandan genocide (800K +), the incredible violence in South African, also turning also into a failed state with some politicians singing and talking about murdering Boers, and I haven't even mentioned the Congo yet, Uganda or Somalia etc etc. Apparently vigilante necklace killings in SA are still happening, maybe several hundred a year. Winnie Mandela was a firm advocate. One was caught on film in 1986 of an African woman, whom, after being burnt alive, had her head caved in with rocks, and glass shards were then put to use in a sexual mutilation. And I expect a certain chunk of the local townsfolk would have been looking on, taking in the spectacle.

So it's all relative, isn't it. Anyway, Peckris avers that African suffering has mainly been caused by whites - well, firstly we have no idea of the body counts when African tribes displaced others, a common enough occurrence and judging from modern Africa, extremely brutal and also involving brutalising the women and children, Add the massive slave trade to the Middle East as well as ours and this all implies that the local rulers weren't swayed very much by Liberal ideals. I think Britain probably killed far less black people than at least Belgium or Germany, who were much more brutal, but overall, it is all completely dwarfed by the titanic black on black carnage. So I don't think whites are mainly to blame for African suffering.

And this is the same in the US. You're only interested in a couple of cop murders of blacks because they might fit your agenda, but the 7000 black on black murders every year you ignore. As I said, the agenda of compassion, the agenda of outrage.

 

And there you have it. An equating of 'liberalism' with 'Marxism'. If that is really what you believe, then there's no arguing with you, as you're coming from a position that is demonstrably and provably false, despite certain sections of the American right holding it.

As for deflecting culpability for the slave trade by putting all the blame on local tribal rulers ... yes, you can safely argue those rulers don't come out smelling of roses but you're not asking WHY they handed over rival tribesmen to the slavers : if the slavers hadn't rocked up on the West African coasts offering goodies in exchange for bodies, there wouldn't have been a slave trade in the first place.

When you talk about modern Africa, e.g. the genocide in Rwanda, yes that was unspeakably awful, but what point are you making? That people of African origin commit crimes or even atrocities? Of course. Human nature good and bad doesn't change with skin colour. But when you look at the so-called civilised West, the preponderance of white on black violence dwarfs any other kind. And when you look at Africa, where is the generalised racial violence of black on white? Yes, it's there, but it isn't institutionalised as it is in America and, to a lesser extent, in Europe.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

And there you have it. An equating of 'liberalism' with 'Marxism'. If that is really what you believe, then there's no arguing with you, as you're coming from a position that is demonstrably and provably false, despite certain sections of the American right holding it.

As for deflecting culpability for the slave trade by putting all the blame on local tribal rulers ... yes, you can safely argue those rulers don't come out smelling of roses but you're not asking WHY they handed over rival tribesmen to the slavers : if the slavers hadn't rocked up on the West African coasts offering goodies in exchange for bodies, there wouldn't have been a slave trade in the first place.

When you talk about modern Africa, e.g. the genocide in Rwanda, yes that was unspeakably awful, but what point are you making? That people of African origin commit crimes or even atrocities? Of course. Human nature good and bad doesn't change with skin colour. But when you look at the so-called civilised West, the preponderance of white on black violence dwarfs any other kind. And when you look at Africa, where is the generalised racial violence of black on white? Yes, it's there, but it isn't institutionalised as it is in America and, to a lesser extent, in Europe.

No, you said that black suffering was mostly caused by whites, I was showing you that in fact, both in terms of magnitude and brutality, it is mainly caused by other blacks. Where was the falseness in any of my examples? I'd love to know.

As for "deflecting blame" form the slave trade I was showing you that other parties who were actively involved in the slave trade and placed no value on African lives, were both African and Arab. And it continues today - apparently a slave in Libya costs ~$200, so I've read. I know nothing must interfere with the narrative of purely white evil against others without original sin.

You are obviously absolutely not bothered by the easily understandable fact that the whole argument of over-representation with the police is a lie. I watched  YouTube Christo Foufas on Talk Radio smugly try and dismiss a woman who dared support the "white lives matter" banner with his oh so unchallengeable "police stats form the US show they are over-represented. I know the statistics". If only she'd known the truth! Luckily there didn't seem to be any comments that stood up for him. But no-one has spotted the big lie in the comments, or perhaps they had - you'll be glad to know I've posted these facts on 2 youtube channels, but guess what, the posts had mysteriously been removed next time I've checked. 

I bet you still haven't tried to understand it, have you?

Share this post


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

Excuse me, where are YOU getting your figures from? Even if it's true, the ratio of gun owners white:black is overwhelmingly predominantly white. So if the police are - understandably - more trigger happy towards armed suspects, that's going to be white most times.

The figures are FBI figures from 2015/2016 I think. I will check, though they are definitely government figures. 

Interesting, so the statistic that blacks are responsible for 50% of US gun crime, despite being 14% of the population, is a myth? And your statistic, if it exists, is obviously legal gun owners, which I would expect to be predominantly white. So in the UK, compare the percentage of whites owning gun licences with the demographic of gun crime. Do you think these figures are going to be proportional? I don't think so, what a silly argument.

Share this post


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

The figures are FBI figures from 2015/2016 I think. I will check, though they are definitely government figures. 

Interesting, so the statistic that blacks are responsible for 50% of US gun crime, despite being 14% of the population, is a myth? And your statistic, if it exists, is obviously legal gun owners, which I would expect to be predominantly white. So in the UK, compare the percentage of whites owning gun licences with the demographic of gun crime. Do you think these figures are going to be proportional? I don't think so, what a silly argument.

Actually, the figures are from Washington Post data, which is taken from official data. Pop "465 white 234 black police shootings" into Google and it should come up with "Law-Enforcement - Perpetrated Homicides: Accidents to Murder" click on that and it will give you p68 where the figures are for the last few years. I saw these figures elsewhere which is why I've got 2016 data, but the other years' ratios are pretty similar.

Share this post


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

Actually, the figures are from Washington Post data, which is taken from official data. Pop "465 white 234 black police shootings" into Google and it should come up with "Law-Enforcement - Perpetrated Homicides: Accidents to Murder" click on that and it will give you p68 where the figures are for the last few years. I saw these figures elsewhere which is why I've got 2016 data, but the other years' ratios are pretty similar.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/08/study-claims-white-police-no-more-likely-shoot-minorities-draws-fire

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2020/05/28/police-shootings-black-americans-disproportionately-affected-infographic/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×