Trayvon Martin all over again.

[Vic]

Want to see a flaming member of that group, check the posts of @HumblePie on the last few pages, my response to him and his deflection

Ah yes... the clown saying Alec Baldwin should be charged for not duplicating gun safety practices delegated to a professional in a work environment, but who also apologizes for an armed assailant who chased people down and shot them in the back.

 

[Vic]

And the same people will, in the same breath, tell us how we are the greatest country in the world.

We are the greatest country in the world. Because despite all of our flaws, of which there are many, every other country is even worse. Especially with regards to racism and bigotry, believe it or not.
That's not to apologize for those things, far from it. I'm just saying that here we still have the right to speak out against these violent nationalist thugs, even if they do try to suppress that free speech with labels like "woke" and "cancel culture."
Most other countries OTOH have fully embraced violent nationalism, and in many cases (ie Brazil and the Phillipines) have unleashed right-wing death squads on their minority populace.

What I'm trying to say is that instead of hating on America for not living up its lofty ideals, you should instead hate upon the flag-waving douchebags who call themselves "Patriots" while actively and deliberately trying to turn America into being just like every other "shithole" country on earth.

 

[rmacd02]

I don't hate on the U.S. I just think that we have rested on our greatness for too long. We are not as great as we thought we were, and are now less great than that.

 

[pcgeek11]

Mark Twain once wrote, "It is better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You did not know this, though.

Then in that case you should hush...

 

[pcgeek11]

All that, and yet somehow it's still okay to hunt another human being down and kill them, and pieces of shit will still go to desperate lengths to apologize for that by pointing at far how far we've come.

No, it isn't OK.

But to say we have gone backwards from where we were in the 1960's is laughable.

 

[rmacd02]

Whoops, you did it again. Doh!

 

[rmacd02]

No, it isn't OK.

But to say we have gone backwards from where we were in the 1960's is laughable.

We have gone forward a little. One step forward and two steps back.

 

[pcgeek11]

We have gone forward a little. One step forward and two steps back.

You contradict yourself. One step forwards and then two back is going backwards. Duh

Were you alive in the 1960's?

 

[Vic]

No, it isn't OK.

But to say we have gone backwards from where we were in the 1960's is laughable.

It's not laughable to point out that every single one of those milestones of progress since the 1960s has been made in the face of the apathetic opposition of people just like you.
That should be a wake up call to you. Somehow I know it won't. Your feels and all.

 

[rmacd02]

You contradict yourself. One step forwards and then two back is going backwards. Duh

Were you alive in the 1960's?

We went forward a little. Then we went one step forward and two steps back. Hope this clarification is understood.

 

[pcgeek11]

It's not laughable to point out that every single milestone of progress since the 1960s has been made in the face of the apathetic opposition of people just like you.
That should be a wake up call to you. Somehow I know it won't. Your feels and all.

Speaking of laughable.

You don't know me from Adam and have no idea.

 

[pcgeek11]

We went forward a little. Then we went one step forward and two steps back. Hope this clarification is understood.

Nonsense.

 

[Vic]

You contradict yourself. One step forwards and then two back is going backwards. Duh

Were you alive in the 1960's?

Were you ever in active support of any of those progressive advancements while they were happening?

 

[Vic]

Speaking of laughable.

You don't know me from Adam and have no idea.

Moral cowardice is no laughing matter.

 

[pcgeek11]

Were you ever in active support of any of those progressive advancements while they were happening?

Actually I did not I was in the military and spending a lot of time punching holes in the ocean. That doesn't make me a promoter of racism, regardless of how you want to classify it.

 

[pcgeek11]

Moral cowardice is no laughing matter.

Typical insults that are uncalled for.

Feel better?

 

[Vic]

Actually I did not I was in the military and spending a lot of time punching holes in the ocean. That doesn't make me a promoter of racism, regardless of how you want to classify it.

I wasn't calling you a promoter of racism. But I do find it interesting that you appear to be trying to claim credit for progress that you admittedly took no part in. And for which, if such advances were to be presented today, there is reason to doubt you would support. Except retroactively.

 

[pcgeek11]

I wasn't calling you a promoter of racism. But I do find it interesting that you appear to be trying to claim credit for progress that you admittedly took no part in. And for which, if such advances were to be presented today, there is reason to doubt you would support. Except retroactively.

Where the heck did I try and take credit? You obviously can't seem to follow along very well.

Let me help.
1. Some butthole stated that the US has gone backwards since the 60's.

Snip~

We have gone backwards from the 1960's.
Snip ~

2. I corrected him that we have come quite a way since the 1960's.

Then you chime in. Nowhere did I say that I was responsible for the advances. The US as a whole has made huge advances in race relations since the 1960's. To deny this is just insane. I remember watching TV back in my early childhood for a small example the only black people you saw were either in "The Little Rascals" or "Amos and Andy".

No we are not anywhere close to where we could be, but better IMO than many and a far cry from the 1960's.

I'm done now.

 

[HurleyBird]

Prosecution opening was absolutely devastating, and if even half of their opening was true (and it's hard to see how it wouldn't be), the defense is going to have one hell of an uphill battle. Haven't watched defense opening yet, but allegedly defendants were told by the property owner that Arbery wasn't the guy stealing things, and that he suspected a white couple. Also, defendants allegedly made many compromising statements to authorities. Either one of these should be more than enough for a conviction if the evidence plays out.

 

[HomerJS]

You contradict yourself. One step forwards and then two back is going backwards. Duh

Were you alive in the 1960's?

I was. To me electing an openly racist President is going backwards. Is that a good look for the United States? I know you probably call that progress.

I went to an elementary school where I was 1 of 3 black people. I remember being beat up for being black. My mother had me transferred out of that school. Black kids are still being abused for being black and when they stand up for themselves they get punished and nothing happens to the white kids. (there are examples in this forum) I would have hoped after almost 50 years we would have improved but we haven't.

What had changed during that time was it became unpopular to be openly racist. That all changed in 2016.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't even know why you guys engage with him, he's been proven wrong so many times on this forum it's almost impressive. He doesn't argue in good faith.

People are just trying to learn from him as he has a law* degree.

 

[Jaskalas]

We went forward a little. Then we went one step forward and two steps back. Hope this clarification is understood.

The step back we have taken is social media driving partisanship and hatred throughout the nation / world. We suffer from a recent human phenomena born of the technological advances of our time. Where some backwater hate groups managed to lure large numbers of people in under false pretenses / propaganda and make it seem cool to march to their beat.

Much of society throughout the nation has made considerable advances, but the opposition to those advances is growing louder, having been enabled by social media.

 

[sportage]

Well the thing is… say everything the defendants and their lawyers are saying happen and are suggesting happened was all true, does that warrant the taking of a life or setting the stage for tragedy to occur? If Arbery was sneaking around peeking in garages and poking around at night in the dark, where does that become punishable by death? And the judge, jury and executioner coming down to these three guys?

We pretty much know what happened here. You have a black guy and these three white guys, and the three white guys want to believe the worst about the black guy, and these three white guys are hell bent on this black guy being guilty of something, anything simply because he is a black guy who dare invade their white neighborhood. I don’t need to see the video or hear their excuses on the stand, we know exactly what these three guys were thinking and assuming and determined in believing. How do we know this? Because we see it every day in the society around us.

It didn’t matter if the black guy was poking around or playing loud music in his car or tossing a used pack of cigarettes onto the ground. It didn’t matte. The three white guys seen an opportunity to teach a black guy a lesson and they wanted this opportunity. And better yet, they thought that if the black guy resisted then they could kill him…. thus the reasoning for bringing their guns. If your going hunting and you know that your going hunting, you bring your guns. You bring your guns because you intend to shoot something.

 

[HomerJS]

Well the thing is… say everything the defendants and their lawyers are saying happen and are suggesting happened was all true, does that warrant the taking of a life or setting the stage for tragedy to occur? If Arbery was sneaking around peeking in garages and poking around at night in the dark, where does that become punishable by death? And the judge, jury and executioner coming down to these three guys?

We pretty much know what happened here. You have a black guy and these three white guys, and the three white guys want to believe the worst about the black guy, and these three white guys are hell bent on this black guy being guilty of something, anything simply because he is a black guy who dare invade their white neighborhood. I don’t need to see the video or hear their excuses on the stand, we know exactly what these three guys were thinking and assuming and determined in believing. How do we know this? Because we see it every day in the society around us.

It didn’t matter if the black guy was poking around or playing loud music in his car or tossing a used pack of cigarettes onto the ground. It didn’t matte. The three white guys seen an opportunity to teach a black guy a lesson and they wanted this opportunity. And better yet, they thought that if the black guy resisted then they could kill him…. thus the reasoning for bringing their guns. If your going hunting and you know that your going hunting, you bring your guns. You bring your guns because you intend to shoot something.

I've seen a response that demanded the black man acquiesce to the 3 white guys. What makes them some sort of fucking authority figures? The same attitude was expressed in the murder trial where Jordan Davis was killed because he wouldn't take orders from a white man.

 

[HumblePie]

So evidence came out in court that Travis pointed his gun first. Turns out there was some additional camera footage showing an angle we, the public, hadn't seen before and the defense lawyer admits in court. So basically the McMichael's escalated the use of deadly force first. Their only prayer is that they had a right to citizen's arrest which allowed them to use force first because they were stopping someone who they reasonably believed to have done a felony. Since they didn't witness anything directly, or even get info from someone else about one they are done for. They can't reasonably infer from someone pointing at Ahmaud running down the street that he committed a felony even if they knew there had been burglaries in the area previously. That is not a reasonable deduction to make at that moment. The defense is resting on convincing a jury that somehow that inference was reasonable for anyone to come to that conclusion and I just don't see that happening at all.