Actually if you look, I didn't quote you, I paraphrased what you've lied for years, barely missing quoting your recent false claims....i accidentally switched the word "crime" and "killing".
Where's the meaningful difference?
It's still a blatantly racist lie of extreme exaggeration....But you're correct, you recently lied that 99% of black homicides are by other blacks and 1% by police...recently you only imply the lie that 99% of crime against blacks is black on black crime.
The real number if I recall topped out at about 91%, about 7% more than white on white crime at the maximum and falling since 2012 or so. In 2018, 81% of white homicides were white on white, 89% black on black. Claiming it was EVER 99% black on black and 1% police (so 0% white or non black on black) is a bold faced racist lie racists tell....you've been telling it for years despite being shown the real crime statistics from the FBI repeatedly. The slight discrepancy is easily explained by higher poverty rates among blacks and redlining, forcing blacks to live only in designated minority areas with other blacks while whites can buy property anywhere.

You never ask why white Karens are so disrespectful, do you.
We know why you think....because you think most black families don't include fathers, because you believe black men don't raise children, they abandon them.

Maybe it's because they've been disrespected, often to death, for 400 years and don't see a reason to respect their bullies....Just a guess.

No I don't, my pair are grown, I don't need to grow a second pair, nor do I need to show them to little girls like you. Funny, you subconsciously know I have a pair so you call me nutboy...because you imagine them so large they're the main focus of my appearance. Thanks for the unintended compliment.

But that’s the thing....they don’t have to prove his thoughts, nor his intent, only the results....because this isn’t a criminal trial and there are very different standards, they only have to show he didn’t preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, violating his oath and duty, because the only possible sentence is for him to be bared from office. His lack of action during the attack alone far exceeded that bar.

It’s becoming more likely (but still unlikely) they could get the votes because he’s barely putting up a defense. To me it seemed like a mockery of the senate, like they were just proving the point that his defense could be someone standing at the podium shouting “Bababoui, Bababoui, Howard Stern’s penis!” and still he would not be convicted...and I think that’s pissing off some Republican senators....but there are also many who are reading books and unrelated documents among other distractions and clearly not paying attention at all, proving the defense correct, they could say anything and still get him off without presenting any defense. A sad state.
On the contrary, the prosecution’s case is straight forward with video evidence and records of what Trump tweeted and did (or didn’t do like not calling in the national guard) during the attack on top of the horrific personal experiences of the same senators hearing the case....hard to forget a lynch mob looking for you and your family to hang less than a month ago.

Remember, there is no possible prison term here, no fine, nothing but baring him from office, that’s it. There should be a criminal trial for treason IMO, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. I think the standard isn’t what he meant, it’s what a reasonable person would think he meant. That’s not prosecuting thought crime, it’s prosecuting speech and actions that it’s plainly foreseeable will incite real crimes.

I barely remember the inauguration riots, the million pussy hat march made more news....Trump’s “biggest crowd ever” nonsense got more airtime, and damages and injuries were fairly minimal so, especially when faced with the fresh scars from 2020, they’re easy to forget. That said, I don’t disagree....by 2022 new scandals and a desire to forget will erase this from many people’s memories.

The real crime here is filming vertically.

Well, they hardened something...but I don't think it was his resolve.

I guess the untold wasted time, money, and effort they've squandered that could have been used more productively rather than driving across the country to be illegally squatting on public land, on top of wasting tens-hundreds of thousands MORE in extra costs to 'police' them, and the cost/value of the lost park doesn't matter, it's the $7 someone wasted shipping them a dildo that's the real crime, eh? His point's only mildly valid if you completely ignore his own (and his comrades') ridiculous, far more wasteful actions.

so then what is your response to the hundreds of other "face-punch" games?
featuring justin beiber,to hillary clinton,to even jack thompson who was making similar arguments that sarkesian was making.

where was the outrage in those cases?
those people received threats as well.
how come in those cases were viewed as either satirical or just in bad taste,but in sarkesians case it had the possibility of translating to actual violence?

even though there is absolutely zero evidence to substantiate that claim?
couldn't every single one of those face-punch games be viewed as indulgent fantasy?

and if they ARE all viewed as such,how come there was nary a peep in regards to those games,yet the sarkesian one is supposed to be taken as an actual threat of physical violence?

do you not see the hypocrisy here?

this is playing victim to a victimless crime.
it is political theater dressed up as "oppression" using fear as the main driving force.

and it draws attention away from real,actual womens grievances,and THAT my friend,is the real crime.

What I call "good" is acting according to the golden rule...treating others as I would have them treat me. That means always honestly, even when it's uncomfortable. You don't need to know the 'truth' to not lie. It also means thinking before acting of the possible consequence to others as well as myself.
I agree, if thought crime is the same as real crime, I'm a terrible person, but I prefer to judge people's actions as I think it gives better insight to who they are.
If judged by the 10 commandments, I'm still hosed simply by not believing in the unbelievable. I would guess that if thought crime counts on that front, heaven is an empty, lonely place filled only with Asperger's sufferers and other abnormaly brained people, as those requirements are not possible for normal humans.

Heaven is filled with people just like you and me, who absolutely cannot qualify to get into Heaven on account of their own righteousness. When you stand before God you will be judged one of two ways, either by your righteousness or the righteousness of Jesus Christ, which is credited to your account through faith. No one has what it takes..I screw up all the time but God is always there to help me. Through His help I am doing a lot better than I did, but I have a long way to go. I didn't and still don't deserve anything God has done for me. Put your trust and faith in Jesus and you will be prepared for eternity.

Your plane analogy doesn't hold water. Instead of jumping from a plane, I think it's more like being led, blindfolded and deafened, to a doorway, being told by dozens of people the differing things they are CERTAIN are on the other side of the door (but not one of them has ever seen it open) and deciding to trust one line of belief and putting that parachute on because your guy said you're on a cliff and need a parachute, but you might as easily be underwater and need scuba gear instead, then your parachute is a trap, or in space and it's just useless, etc.. Since there's no way to know what's beyond the door, many prefer to go unencumbered by anything, accepting it's likely there's absolutely nothing there, but ready for what may come. In the unlikely event that in the end there is a just god there judging my life, I feel I'll be fine unless ritual is more important than action. It's not a possibility I feel is likely.

Only God can reveal Himself to you. It won't be because you feel the possibility is likely that suddenly you will start to believe. I didn't believe it was likely either; the last thing in the world I imagined would happen was that I would become a Christian. It is only because God gave me personal revelation that He is real and Jesus is His Son that I became a Christian. God is knocking on your door right now, and if you choose to open yourself to what He wants to show you, He will reveal Himself to you as well. That's what happened to me; He didn't just make it clear, He made it crystal clear and He'll do the same for you too. Ask Him to show you what the truth is so that you do not have to deal with possibilities. Pray and ask God to show you whether He is there and Jesus is His Son. Read the gospel of John and pray and ask God to show you whether it is true or not. God isn't hiding from you, it is simply a matter of whether you are willing to repent of your sins and turn to Jesus, or not.

What I call "good" is acting according to the golden rule...treating others as I would have them treat me. That means always honestly, even when it's uncomfortable. You don't need to know the 'truth' to not lie. It also means thinking before acting of the possible consequence to others as well as myself.
I agree, if thought crime is the same as real crime, I'm a terrible person, but I prefer to judge people's actions as I think it gives better insight to who they are.
If judged by the 10 commandments, I'm still hosed simply by not believing in the unbelievable. I would guess that if thought crime counts on that front, heaven is an empty, lonely place filled only with Asperger's sufferers and other abnormaly brained people, as those requirements are not possible for normal humans.
Moral perfection is an impossibility. What's morally perfect from one viewpoint may not be from another.
Your plane analogy doesn't hold water. Instead of jumping from a plane, I think it's more like being led, blindfolded and deafened, to a doorway, being told by dozens of people the differing things they are CERTAIN are on the other side of the door (but not one of them has ever seen it open) and deciding to trust one line of belief and putting that parachute on because your guy said you're on a cliff and need a parachute, but you might as easily be underwater and need scuba gear instead, then your parachute is a trap, or in space and it's just useless, etc.. Since there's no way to know what's beyond the door, many prefer to go unencumbered by anything, accepting it's likely there's absolutely nothing there, but ready for what may come. In the unlikely event that in the end there is a just god there judging my life, I feel I'll be fine unless ritual is more important than action. It's not a possibility I feel is likely.

You're justifying your inability to spend time with people of other races because of "shared experiences" with other white people? Buuuuuuuull-shiiiiiiiiiit. I've found that I have common ground with just about anyone in the world, just involves me trying to be a good human being and not being afraid of disagreeing or having conversation with people of differing view points. Most of my friends are worlds apart and it doesn't matter. Birds of a feather -- die together. (Whoa, that was way more ominous than intended.)

But I do agree, the banning, and fining of Donald Sterling is akin to punishing someone for thought crime. I don't understand how a comment made in private could be used in such a way. I don't agree with his racist views, or in your justified segregation, but I don't think it's a wise decision, nor a justified one, to punish anyone for having such views or even for expressing them in public, let alone private.

If you don't like someone's you have the right to ignore them and to NOT give them your money, and to convince others to shun that person. But that should NOT givbe any institution the right to go after anything in your estate.

Our justice system is a sham of personal opinion blurred into pseudo civil rights.

Anyway, people shouldn't be afraid to express their views, even if it's offensive to others.

Being stuck between political correct asshats AND conservative christian fuckbags is the real crime -- and I should be able to collect money from racist bigots AND the NAACP. (Just kidding.)

Upvote for detectives dusting for prints and finding Charlie LeDuff's prints ALL OVER her place. "Ma'am, we have a suspect."

Detroit should setup a police academy where trainees from all over the country would go to get on-the-job training to fight real crime. Kinda like hospitals have unpaid internships.

Or Hollywood could just buy Detroit, and film all zombie/apocalypse/zombie-apocalypse movies there.

>> ^Engels:
He's a jackass. Put yourself in the cop's place, having to police every piddling homeless peer out there. That's gotta be a blast. Trolling a cop over THIS is just pathetic.


How about the cops spend more time dealing with real crime instead of using any opportunity to increase arrest numbers? And while we're at it, how about people stop being such prudes, if someone's gotta go, they've gotta go, and there's no arguing with nature when the nearest public toilets are either inconveniently far away or locked because some vandal causing real criminal damage has trashed them.

Video was damn funny, regardless of our opinions of what is worthy of police intervention. Even the police were smiling!

While it's nice to see someone on the other side of the tracks get his comeuppance. I still don't get why they need 4 cops to subdue one person. What happened to all that training?

Want to commit the perfect crime? Find a patsy to run a decoy with a high speed chase or something and draw off hundreds of cops, and while they're off chasing the patsy and looking good for the news helicopters, go off and commit the real crime with zero cops around to stop you.

>> ^SDGundamX:

He wasn't arrested for animal abuse, he was arrested for "willfully teasing a police K-9" which is an misdemeanor offense in Mason County (see this WSJ law blog). The reason for the law should be obvious--unlike your normal house pet, these dogs are actually trained to bite people and if you get them agitated enough they may attack without command and not respond to an officer's orders to stop biting.
From this web site on the behavioral nature of police dogs:
No matter how well-trained in suspect apprehension a police dog might be, all police dogs can easily make behavioral mistakes, such as attacking at the wrong time, attacking out of context, attacking a suspect when not commanded to do so, and failing to stop an attack after being commanded to do so by the handler. Because of the behavioral nature of aggressive responding in dogs, and despite the extensive training most police service dogs have been subjected to prior to being deployed in the field, they will make behavioral mistakes, thereby causing injury to a victim that was uncalled for or far beyond what was probably needed.
Teasing the dog increases the likelihood of that happening. The drunken dumbass who was barking at the dog was putting people at risk and got arrested for it. I love the 1st amendment but I have absolutely no problem with these charges sticking. First amendment rights don't mean you can say whatever you want to say whenever you want to say it. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater just for lulz and you can't intentionally agitate police dogs into a frothing rage.
I love how Judge Napolitano apparently made a snap judgment himself about the situation without bothering to look at the facts of the case (as reported in the WSJ link above). Upvoted to promote yet more awareness of the stupidity that airs on Fox News.


I agree with everything you said, except the part where you said stuff about the law. While there could be a case for civilly responsible for acts of speech (suing), the constitution on clear on criminal charges. I have been in a movie theater when a false alarm of the real system went off, we didn't send the alarm maker to jail...double standard. Two people were injured in that false alarm of the alarm system. It is pretty dubious to just start arbitrarily dissecting speech, even more so when no one was ACTUALLY harmed. We have enough problems and we take time to legislate theoretical ones, great. That is the only reason drugs are still illegal, because of all the theoretical stuff that could happen. Let real crime be punished, and let fake crime fall away as dodging a bullet.

</lunch rant>

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Jinx:
I don't really care that they made fun of Mexicans, and I have Mexican family. Its what they've always done, and I always thought it was pretty tongue in cheek. I think the real crime here is that it just isn't funny. That and the rest of Top Gear. I used to love that programme, but maybe I've grown up a little bit, or more likely its just got increasingly infantile. Its painful to watch at times such is their desperation to be edgy. The whole show is painfully scripted in what I can only imagine is an attempt to top the last seasons craziness, but its all become a bit too pantomime.
I honestly wouldn't mind if it was put out to pasture.

350 Million people would like you to Shut The Fuck Up!


Obviously only about 349,999,993 want that.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Jinx:
I don't really care that they made fun of Mexicans, and I have Mexican family. Its what they've always done, and I always thought it was pretty tongue in cheek. I think the real crime here is that it just isn't funny. That and the rest of Top Gear. I used to love that programme, but maybe I've grown up a little bit, or more likely its just got increasingly infantile. Its painful to watch at times such is their desperation to be edgy. The whole show is painfully scripted in what I can only imagine is an attempt to top the last seasons craziness, but its all become a bit too pantomime.
I honestly wouldn't mind if it was put out to pasture.

350 Million people would like you to Shut The Fuck Up!


http://videosift.com/video/Steve-Hughes-Political-Correctness-and-Offence