Mount Holyoke students say ‘black on black’ crime doesn’t exist

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: Jamie1

You want to stir perceived racial tensions to insight argument and fan the flames of perceived racial hatred. What else is that besides race baiting?

There is no difference between black on black vs. black on white vs. Hispanic on white. Its all just human violence. Unless that violence is committed with the sole intent of harming an individual of another race, as in racial violence, such as that perpetrated by Neo Nazis skinheads or Klan members or extremely racist street gangs.

Are you 100% sure that's my intention? How do you know?

The theory you quote is idiotic and self-contradictory. Violence is violence, except if you don't like the reason for the violence. Then it's different. The old dude that got pummeled in the video. He was called "N***" by those who beat him. Should they have extra charges filed because it was a hate crime?

Is it ok for a black dude to beat a black guy and call him "N***" but if a guy with white skin does it, then the white skin guy gets a stiffer penalty?

a reply to: TinfoilTP

I don't seem to recall being offended, curious...

At any rate, all crime is equally abhorrent. That is and was my point. If, in your world view, this makes me a supporter of this "black agenda" then so be it.

a reply to: American-philosopher

Yes, really.

I can't believe there's people who think blacks can't be racist, that they shouldn't have to be responsible because they went through horrors years ago, that when they say racist things it's just a cultural thing....

Wow.
After reading some of the posts here, I think the students could have said that the Moon is made of green cheese.... and there would be members backing them up.

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: TinfoilTP

I don't seem to recall being offended, curious...

At any rate, all crime is equally abhorrent. That is and was my point. If, in your world view, this makes me a supporter of this "black agenda" then so be it.

You've gotten right to the heart of the problem.

All crime is abhorrent.

Dozens of black got killed in Chicago since the day Michael Brown was killed.

Zero protests have been staged in Chicago demanding justice for those kids that got killed.

Do you even know any of there names? Their murderers?

a reply to: Jamie1

I fear you have missed (or misconstrued) my point. I made no mention of crimes and/or punishments, simply intent. In that I mean violence committed with the sole intent of inflicting harm on a member of a perceived inferior race specifically when the aggressor harbors racial bias. I hope I have made my meaning more clear.

We're all just humans here.

a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

They can be and are, but not any more racist then anyone else

a reply to: Jamie1

No. I don't live in Chicago. I do know, however, that my sister was brutally murdered not even three months ago by a sick bastard named Lance Burning. I know her name, I know his and I repeat them both daily. Don't you DARE presume to lecture me regarding the face of crime, of murder. I know it all to well.

a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

okay I agree with that. But don't say black America is inherently racist. But treat people individually and not group them together. Do we both have the same working definition of inherently??

Al Sharpton is gonna be Al Sharpton he doesn't speak for me. I disagree with most everything he says and stands for,

a reply to: Jamie1

And who would do they protest??

Dying to street violence is not the same thing as being killed by a police officer.
Regardless of who is doing it more or less, cops killing people is an issue and when people that make up 13% of the pop is dying at the same rate as people that make up 77% of he pop, there might be an issue we should look at.

And of course the response will be they are all criminal animal thugs that deserve it...

Just don't get it. I on a 'sideband' agree there's no black on black crime. Imo its THUG on black crime. Most black people are no different than most white or asian or hispanic etc, in that they wish no harm to anyone regardless of color. Its the Thugs that are the problem. And they come in all colors. Why aren't there protests against THUG BRUTALITY?! If there were however, there would be much more violence against protesters than has ever been seen by cops. I believe a black person (or any person) would be a heck of a lot safer in a room full of 50 armed police officers than in a room full of 10 gun toting gangsta thugs whether they be white, black, asian, hispanic or whatever. Not to say the random psychopathic sadistic ex jock bully thug doest exist in law enforcement (I know this to be true), but its Thugs that are the reason for cops acting like troops in a wartime scenario. Plain and simple, but again, IMO. RIP ERIC GARNER

Wow Jamie, considering you were accusing others of race baiting the other day, You sure do like to partake in a little race baiting yourself. Surprised your getting away with it to be honest.
en.m.wikipedia.org...(Internet), just trying to work out who you are.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Wow Jamie, considering you were accusing others of race baiting the other day, You sure do like to partake in a little race baiting yourself. Surprised your getting away with it to be honest.
en.m.wikipedia.org...(Internet), just trying to work out who you are.

Wow, this thread is really hitting a nerve resorting to calling the OP a shill. That is a clear sign you are upset and cannot support your position.

a reply to: TinfoilTP
Your a funny guy or gal

a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat

Another race bait thread? Sure you have a point and whoever wrote those little signs is quite blind to the truth (that violence exist on all sides) but this is just fanning the flames. Do people like you want a race war to happen?

The media likes to use logical fallacies like poisoning the well to sensationalize a story. Particularly with headlines like "White Officer Murders Black Teenager." People have already made up their minds before they've even looked at evidence.

If anyone is trying to start a race-war it is America's media organizations.

The purpose of this OP was to highlight the poor reasoning of our media and the negative affect that it's having on our society.

My example of poisoning the well through headline titles perpetrated by the media is an example of race-baiting, this thread is not.

a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat

Don't you DARE presume to lecture me regarding the face of crime, of murder. I know it all to well.

It's a human face and that is all.

Nice appeal to authority, though.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

I have no problem admitting it was an emotionally charged reply. The point is, I don't need to be aware of every victim's name around the globe, I have seen it in my own life. To suggest otherwise is pointless.

For those that agree with OP's stance, did any of you read the source of the info the flash cards came from?
There is an article in there and it goes into much more detail then the 2 cards.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: Jamie1

I think the students have a point. The semantics and common usage of the term "black on black" is by and for a certain group of people to imply that "black on black" is a less important form of crime. It's also used in a horribly twisted way to morally offset LEO's murders and flockery.

But that's race baiting (i.e. a critical examination of authoritarian norms). Not strong on introspection. Go cheer on the sniper instead.

The people in this thread will tell you "black on black" is real, it's different than all other forms of crime. it's statistically important and it is ample reason to dehumanize blacks. As if you rally needed another reason. After all, they do it to themselves so why does it matter?

Morally and logically bankrupt. So you see. It's not good enough to ignore this cancer. It needs to be dissected.

Wow. Fantastically said. The biggest gripe I have when people cite "black on black" crime as a defense for racial profiling (and excessive police force) is that it's said in hopes that it will minimize the value of life. It's an evil man's argument.

It reminds me of my mother-in-law when she justifies the IDF indiscriminately killing Palestinian civilians with her experiences visiting Israel (on a tour guided by Israelis, mind you) and how the Israeli side of the streets are clean and the Palestinian ones are not therefore the Palestinians must not care if they live. She never bothers to find out why that is such as poverty and the funding of waste disposal.

The "black on black" argument is the same. It insinuates that black people must not care about other black people therefore it's okay for them to get murdered by police. Nobody seems to want to look at why the statistics look that way nor the history of it. It certainly doesn't mean they just want to die.

Again, awesome post. One of the best I've ever read on ATS.

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

I have no problem admitting it was an emotionally charged reply. The point is, I don't need to be aware of every victim's name around the globe, I have seen it in my own life. To suggest otherwise is pointless.

It's OK, I make emotionally-fueled replies all the time. We're human and emotion is just as much a part of us as logic and reason.

I do agree, though, that we need to stop hyper - focusing on the race aspect of crime. Or at least labeling every crime as being racially motivated, unless evidence exists that it was, in fact, racially motivated.