Girl, 14, charged with murder in deadly attack of 73-year-old man

a reply to: TheRedneck

Pretty much. The only difference between white and black on this one is that the white is spread out more. White tends to live in smaller trailer communities all over the place, even in tiny towns, while black tends to aggregate in the larger urban projects, so we see the black as more of an issue because it's more concentrated.

a reply to: ketsuko

I think that's a great deal of the issue, but I will also point out that there are white folk in those inner cities as well. They just don't get the press when something happens to them. There are also hispanics, asians, etc. Poverty knows no race. As a matter of fact, when the film "West Side Story" was made, the gangs were depicted as mostly white kids. That tells me the stereotype of the black inner city youth is a recent development.

Unfortunately, that leads me to another very uncomfortable conclusion: the vast majority of those inner cities are strongly Democrat. Even in "red states" the cities themselves typically have Democratic leadership... look at Atlanta. Georgia, outside Atlanta Metro, is as "red" as it gets; it's really hard to tell an Alabamian from a Georgian based on politics. But Atlanta has become a mecca of inner city violence and is staunchly "blue." Atlanta also has more than its fair share of black folk living there.

So there is some sort of correlation between Democrat leadership, black population, and crime. I simply cannot get past that correlation. I don't know which one is driving the others, or even if it is something else driving them all, but the correlation stands.

I have also noticed the correlation between the urban jungles and the attitude in them that "whitey" is the problem. So whatever it is driving these issues is also driving actual racism upwards.

I wish I had an answer... but I really don't. I have posted a plan on here before to rejuvenate these inner cities, but it cannot work as long as the Democratic leadership is in charge. They would never go for it in a million years.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

West Side Story is a 1950s story. Things were more multi-racial. I think a lot of the aggregations started around the time of the Great Society.

I think prior to that you will absolutely find poverty, but you will also find the statistics will show that there were poor families instead of poor single parent homes. That may be part of it. I think the Great Society welfare programs hit the blacks sooner/harder than some others with family decay. I think there is a correlation there. I think a lot of the poor families who could started moving away from the more single parent communities because the kids were wild.

That's my private suspicion.

a reply to: ketsuko

West Side Story is a 1950s story. Things were more multi-racial.

That is probably the most profound statement on this issue I have ever heard.

What happened? We were on the track to eliminating racism... generation by generation, I have seen it dwindle and wither away. Then suddenly, about the time Obama was elected ironically, it seems that racism started to make a comeback. Only this time it was used to beat all people over the head, not any one race or skin color. Suddenly, every word ever uttered, regardless of how long ago or the context, was scrutinized and analyzed to find some hint of potential for racism... every action had to be completely unracial even if viewed through a racial lens... even things like the solar eclipse a few years back were deemed "racist" because it didn't occur along a path that was more multi-racial!

I think the result is that a lot of people just gave up. If there is no possible way to not be racist, why bother trying at all?

That's why I jumped on the "racist" allegation. It's nothing more than a desperate attempt to drag all of society back to the horrors of days long long, whether the one pushing that narrative knows it or not.

there were poor families instead of poor single parent homes.

Not only that, but the families were larger, and often there were also communities involved. The Great Depression gave us more, deeper poverty than has ever been experienced since, but crime did not skyrocket. People had families and friends who supported each other through hard times.

I think that also plays into the present divide between urban and rural life. Rural life by absolute necessity requires cooperation... without it, you die. With it, you prosper. City life (yes, I lived in a city for a few years, a very urban area) is completely different; there is no help unless it comes from a government program, and it seems everyone is out for themselves only.

People are social animals... even me, and I'm about one-half-click from certified hermit. When someone comes to see me, I am happy! I want the company! But in the city, walk to any door and you are greeted with alarm warnings, doors with multiple locks that remind one of San Quentin, and an accusatory tone when and if someone answers the knock: "Yeah? Whaddaya want?" Break down on the road out here and someone will still stop and ask if you need help... 20 years ago, it would be one of the first two cars that came by, but now it might take 20 or more. In the city, you better have your cell phone working or you'll get a ticket for blocking traffic while angry drivers zoom by shooting one-finger salutes.

I think that's our problem... now if someone could only figure out how to correct it.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

So it wasnt a true statement. Then by your rules of what is and what isnt, it would be racist.

Slow down there, haus!

Show me an example of it not being true, then we can talk about "is it a racist statement?" You are making a claim with no evidence whatsoever; I would like to know when another race has attacked its own people to a similar extent as we have today. Just claiming "It's not a true statement" without any further explanation is not quite enough.

Seems you have your cart in front of your horse. Don't work that way.

TheRedneck

You want an example of people attacking their own race? You really need me to do that for you?

a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

Yes, I do.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Probably something to do with how people during that time tried to help each other out knowing that all the rich people didn't give a damn about them, but now people are more than happy to take no part in their community and antagonize each other and make excuses for the upper classes.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

Yes, I do.

TheRedneck

Tick tock, tick tock...crickets.....
Says a lot.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

Yes, I do.

TheRedneck

Okay, so if we're going that route, how about anytime somebody over in china attacks people, who would be chinese, and kills many? Or how about people in the middle east killing their own race because of terrorism? I can go on and on. Using black people in a way that its like they are the only ones who attack their own kind is crazy to me. What a very, very dumb argument to use. Go back to the original quote. Reread it. Slowly.

There's your tick tock, Violater1.

originally posted by: Violater1

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

Yes, I do.

TheRedneck

Tick tock, tick tock...crickets.....
Says a lot.

Im just going to personally respond to this. You say tick tock and crickets because I didn't respond right away because I didnt go to this website until now? And you actually type out "says a lot" insinuating I had nothing?

This place is filled with people who just show some people do not have it.

a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

how about anytime somebody over in china attacks people, who would be chinese, and kills many? Or how about people in the middle east killing their own race because of terrorism?

See? That wan't so hard, was it?

Do you think those examples are on par with the black-on-black violence we see in the USA?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

how about anytime somebody over in china attacks people, who would be chinese, and kills many? Or how about people in the middle east killing their own race because of terrorism?

See? That wan't so hard, was it?

Do you think those examples are on par with the black-on-black violence we see in the USA?

TheRedneck

I shouldn't have had to state the obvious in the first place. Sorry I sound hostile, but I cannot fathom the way people think sometimes.

As for your question, do you think those examples are on par with the black on black violence we see in the USA? I say its even worse. If you're fixated on a black on black violence thing and want to use it as an argument against them, you are what's wrong. I said it. How, in your soul, can you even think that that is 1. the correct way of thinking and 2. appropriate. This is part of why racism wont die. People don't understand things and tunnel vision on one type of human. Step back, lose sight of "race". Look at the fact we are human. In our world, humans attack humans. If you're in an area with people of your own skin color, its highly likely you will attack your own skin color versus a different one.

a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

I asked a question; I made no judgement yet. You seem to fail to understand the difference between a statement and a question.

I accept your explanation. Especially this part:

If you're in an area with people of your own skin color, its highly likely you will attack your own skin color versus a different one.

And as a result, I admit the statement from the other poster was, indeed, false. Sorry if that interferes with your predetermination of my position.

Now that we have established one prerequisite for a statement being "racist," there is only one requirement left: What evidence (as in a pattern of previous statements or actions) makes you believe the statement was made out of racism and not ignorance? Is it possible that Violator1 actually believed his statement was true?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

I asked a question; I made no judgement yet. You seem to fail to understand the difference between a statement and a question.

I accept your explanation. Especially this part:

If you're in an area with people of your own skin color, its highly likely you will attack your own skin color versus a different one.

And as a result, I admit the statement from the other poster was, indeed, false. Sorry if that interferes with your predetermination of my position.

Now that we have established one prerequisite for a statement being "racist," there is only one requirement left: What evidence (as in a pattern of previous statements or actions) makes you believe the statement was made out of racism and not ignorance? Is it possible that Violator1 actually believed his statement was true?

TheRedneck

Okay, I can tell you aren't a bad guy. But the fact I even had to explain this bewilders me. It should be obviously silly to focus on black people and using black on black crime to help their original statement displaying obvious racism.

That is what baffles me, and why I get condescending. I find it extremely difficult to understand the train of thought.

a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

You weren't explaining it to me. I was letting you explain it to you. I hope you were listening.

I've been here a long time and I've seen many things happen in my lifetime. That includes the withering away of racism in the South and the resurgence of racism everywhere. Back in the 60s, black folk and white folk were just trying to figure out how to live under the new integration being forced on society. During the 70s we learned to get along... most of us, anyway. In the 80s we struggled side by side against the KKK. In the 90s, we made the KKK irrelevant and put most of their leaders behind bars.

In the 2000s, we started segregating again. In the 2010s we began to hate once more. Now in 2022, there are again tensions between the races. What changed?

You came along.

Not you specifically, but people who, like you, started throwing that "racist" tag around willy-nilly. Suddenly people were afraid to speak to each other, because every word was an invitation to be called "racist." Heck, in a lot of places now, just existing without dark enough skin will do for an excuse. When people do not talk together, when people are afraid to be together, actual racism flourishes. By throwing that term around when it is not applicable, you are encouraging the very thing you claim to be against... you are promoting racism.

Please, please, please...

I lived through racism. I was right there when a black guy couldn't buy a house in a white neighborhood. I had friends harassed because how did a black guy get enough money to buy that car? He obviously stole it. I have seen gang beatdowns, black guys beaten by a gang of white guys and white guys beaten by a gang of black guys because their skin wasn't the right shade. I lived in those times, haus, and before I go back I will oppose you at every single turn.

For a statement to be racist, it must first single out a race and be untrue. Beyond that, it must come from a place of actual belief in the inferiority of a race because of that race. Anything that does not meet those two qualifications is not racist. Stop trying to make it so; stop looking for racism. If it ever shows up on your doorstep, trust me, you'll have no problem recognizing it. But you will need help fighting it, and the way you're going, you won't have anyone left to help.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

You weren't explaining it to me. I was letting you explain it to you. I hope you were listening.

I've been here a long time and I've seen many things happen in my lifetime. That includes the withering away of racism in the South and the resurgence of racism everywhere. Back in the 60s, black folk and white folk were just trying to figure out how to live under the new integration being forced on society. During the 70s we learned to get along... most of us, anyway. In the 80s we struggled side by side against the KKK. In the 90s, we made the KKK irrelevant and put most of their leaders behind bars.

In the 2000s, we started segregating again. In the 2010s we began to hate once more. Now in 2022, there are again tensions between the races. What changed?

You came along.

Not you specifically, but people who, like you, started throwing that "racist" tag around willy-nilly. Suddenly people were afraid to speak to each other, because every word was an invitation to be called "racist." Heck, in a lot of places now, just existing without dark enough skin will do for an excuse. When people do not talk together, when people are afraid to be together, actual racism flourishes. By throwing that term around when it is not applicable, you are encouraging the very thing you claim to be against... you are promoting racism.

Please, please, please...

I lived through racism. I was right there when a black guy couldn't buy a house in a white neighborhood. I had friends harassed because how did a black guy get enough money to buy that car? He obviously stole it. I have seen gang beatdowns, black guys beaten by a gang of white guys and white guys beaten by a gang of black guys because their skin wasn't the right shade. I lived in those times, haus, and before I go back I will oppose you at every single turn.

For a statement to be racist, it must first single out a race and be untrue. Beyond that, it must come from a place of actual belief in the inferiority of a race because of that race. Anything that does not meet those two qualifications is not racist. Stop trying to make it so; stop looking for racism. If it ever shows up on your doorstep, trust me, you'll have no problem recognizing it. But you will need help fighting it, and the way you're going, you won't have anyone left to help.

TheRedneck

When you say people like me, I hope you know this isnt some movement. There's always been people willingly giving reality check and giving the harsh reality that yes, the things people say and the way they think is in fact racist and not good. Case in point, this violater guy. I dont care or know who he is as a person, but the reality is, the thing he said and his way of thinking that sprung the thought is, in fact, racist. And I decided to call it out. We dont look for racism. We just see it.

a reply to: ExiledSpirit777

When you say people like me, I hope you know this isnt some movement.

Yes, it is. You don't have to answer to someone to be part of a movement; you just need to do what a lot of others are doing. And that is exactly what you are doing here.

Case in point, this violater guy. I dont care or know who he is as a person, but the reality is, the thing he said and his way of thinking that sprung the thought is, in fact, racist.

I don't think there's racism there at all. This story is from the United States, as I'm pretty sure Violator1 is as well. Therefore, in the context of the United States, the statement he made is true: there has not been the kind of systemic white-on-white violence like we are seeing in the inner city. Black-on-black crime is a pretty damn big issue for anyone who isn't a racist... it's killing off people at a high rate, and the vast majority are black! The KKK in their heyday couldn't do any better!

Your examples were all from other countries, specifically countries which are not integrated. The United States is quite integrated... likely the single most diverse country on the globe. You even mentioned China and the Middle East... two of the most racist areas on the globe... as examples of why Violater1's statement was false.

Violater1 recognized the problem as a problem. You essentially tried to shut him up by accusing him of racism for doing so. Now, who has the black inner city dwellers best interests at heart? The one who recognizes there is a problem so it can maybe be addressed, or the one who wants no one to speak of it so it can continue unabated?

You have placed yourself in the latter category, whether you intended to or not, and whether you realized it or not.

And I decided to call it out. We dont look for racism. We just see it.

"We"? I thought you just said you weren't part of any movement. But you now admit there are others who actively seek out racism like you. Hey, maybe if we get enough of them together, we can make sure than no white person ever speaks to or comes in contact with a black person again! That seems to be your goal... why else would you make it so difficult to talk by jumping on every possible syllable as "racist"?

You see what you want to see, or perhaps what you expect to see. Either way, you initiate a self-fulfilling prophesy: more racism. Racism thrives in isolation, and the easiest way to isolate people into separate groups is to show them how much the other group must hate them.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I grew up in the United Colors of Benetton Days when we were all the same. I am old enough to remember seeing white only places into the 80's in Florida. I remember the words I would hear but we were from NY where everyone was the same. All one people. I just saw hate and ignorance. Suddenly there was division but I saw it change. Back when I was a kid you were grouped by ethnicity not color.

Now for some reason cops are hated, POC are entitled and White people are domestic terrorists. Insane. The decline to hate started around 06.

a reply to: Violater1

I only read your OP, but what struck me most about this, was that when I was 14, in a violent, council housing estate, in the 1980's, nobody EVER touched old or disabled people.
I think the same when I read every similar story in 21st century media here...but in my day, you would expect a beating from your own hard criminal peers, if you picked on old people.
That's the creeping change of society I kinda fear, now I'm getting older myself, but I'd still say the overwhelming majority of young folk are nice humans...so hopefully I'll be dead before that changes!

a reply to: angeltone

Truth. Old people were respected and then old people would also discipline kids without Karen coming and defending her children either.