Mob of Black Teens Attack Whites in Columbus After Fireworks

The way you all generalize and stereotype really does a disservice to the decent white people out there.

Progressive Ohioan wrote:

The way you all generalize and stereotype really does a disservice to the decent white people out there.

FBI statistics back us up, Bruce.

Of course the liberal rag owned by John F. Wolfe isn't going to cover it. The truth would be deafening to some yuppie or hipsters condominium dwelling ears.

After all, this is the same John F. Wolfe scumbag that forced a casino to the ghetto's with Mayor McDrunkenCheesehead.

African Americans are 39 times more like to commit a violent crime against a white person than vice-versa (Data from NCVS D.O.J. 2001-2003)

African Americans are 136 times more likely to commit armed robbery against a white person than vice-versa.(Data from NVCS D.O.J. 2001-2003)

Wait what wrote:

<quoted text>
I know lots of folks in 2012 who are struggling in a way they shouldn't have to. Give it a rest. Neither party really cares about the ones in the middle.

Many who are working hard and still need help to buy food, but one Party in particular wants to CUT food stamps and healthcare, so don't give me that jive about both parties doesn't care!

tip wrote:

<quoted text>
Liberate yourself.
Only you have the power to leave the plantation.
http://www.therightscoop.com/jerome-hudson-tw...

I vote for my economic and moral interest. The GOP have nothing of tax cuts or help for poor families, so WHY should I support them?

The Facts wrote:

African Americans are 39 times more like to commit a violent crime against a white person than vice-versa (Data from NCVS D.O.J. 2001-2003)
African Americans are 136 times more likely to commit armed robbery against a white person than vice-versa.(Data from NVCS D.O.J. 2001-2003)

Yeah, but even at random they are far more likely to rob a white person because there are so few of them and so many whites.

You failed statistics 101.

Jesus_H_Christ wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, but even at random they are far more likely to rob a white person because there are so few of them and so many whites.
You failed statistics 101.

So a black robbing a white is okay in your book as long as the stats aren't skewed.

You failed Morality and Ethics 101

Kramers Attorney wrote:

<quoted text>You really are a clueless dhimmi. And how can any woman defend the behavior of Muslims? Think Lara Logan has a new perspective a year later?
Here's Sharia in your UK paradise:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-an...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/jul/05/sha...
Let me tell you, when The Guardian and I are in agreement, you know how despicable the subject of our mutual loathing must be.

What I'm asking is how this is different from rabbinical courts. And how cases are assigned to these courts. How would your case wind up in a Shari court?

I'm really trying to gauge people's understanding of the structure.

GlitterSucks wrote:

<quoted text>
So a black robbing a white is okay in your book as long as the stats aren't skewed.
You failed Morality and Ethics 101

It's not ok! Those black youths committing the crimes against whites is not so much a racial reason, but more of a perception that whites obtain greater wealth and have more "expensive" things such as camcorders, jewelry, weapons, ipads, ect., than the average black living in their neighborhoods. This is a street mentality and culture alot of them have these days. Daddy's are in prison or felons, mom is pressed to working two jobs or get assistence, no financial help from the absent father, so these youngmen get involved with street crime to make fast money. They steal, rob, and sell drugs to live in their minds a better life than everyone around them. To try and understand it in terms of racial attacks, is very short sighted and off base. They steal from blacks also, and assaults but the media is less likely to report because alot of blacks won't call cops cause nothing gets done. Some would rather find out who did it, and bring justice another way.

The naughty list is rather long this year.

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>Many who are working hard and still need help to buy food, but one Party in particular wants to CUT food stamps and healthcare, so don't give me that jive about both parties doesn't care!

Jive, really? It was the DEMOCRATS who cut the COBRA subsidies which put more people in the 'uninsured' category. It was the DEMOCRATS who cut the vouchers to help people who got employer-based insurance pay for it. And Obama's Cat Food Commission was bipartisan. And it was the DEMOCRATS who have put chronically ill folks in a terrible position of having to buy the most expensive insurance policy (if they go through the exchanges) which don't qualify for any kind of subsidy, as only the lower coverage amounts through the exchanges will get subsidies.

Twice in my life and once as a single mom I applied for food stamps. Denied both times, despite having nothing in the bank. It was Republicans who reached into their personal pockets and kept me afloat until I could get back on my feet.

No jive, just reality learned the hard way.

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>Many who are working hard and still need help to buy food, but one Party in particular wants to CUT food stamps and healthcare, so don't give me that jive about both parties doesn't care!

Clueless. The last time the budget for food stamps was cut, Clinton was in office. You know, the same guy who sold us out to China? That guy? The Democrat, the party who cares sooooooooooooooooo much about us?

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>Many who are working hard and still need help to buy food, but one Party in particular wants to CUT food stamps and healthcare, so don't give me that jive about both parties doesn't care!

If you cut food stamps to all the 'single' moms whose income is used to determine qualification but who live with their boyfriends and get the benefits of both incomes PLUS government assistance, I wouldn't mind in the least. If you cut food stamps to women who can afford hair and nail appointments, I wouldn't mind in the least. If you cut food stamps to those who can afford smartphones and afford the upkeep of a $23K van, I wouldn't mind in the least.

Jesus_H_Christ wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, but even at random they are far more likely to rob a white person because there are so few of them and so many whites.
You failed statistics 101.

Even accounting for 8 times as many whites still leaves it almost 5 times as likely.

For rightwingers who claim no racism, you white folks sure do cling to the "blacks commit more crime" meme for eons. You don't study the economics issue, or the education issue -- nah, you just continue to look at the racial generalizations to make your conclusions.

YOU'RE ALL PATHETIC !! Keep on focusing and breathing life into the color divide, unobservant of the economic situation that we're all in ...

BTW ... by last census, it's becoming clearer and clearer that we're ALL a little bit brown .... where's your own "black" heritage and how much are you really one of "them"....OOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!

Done with this topic.....

b

Wait what wrote:

<quoted text>
I had rocks thrown at my car when I was in a predominantly black neighborhood looking at property. Needless to say, I didn't buy in that neighborhood (I wanted to rehab an old house to its former glory) and it wasn't because it was predominantly black.

I have had a different experience rehabbing in a predominantly black neighborhood.

But the question that I was asking was really about the specific incident under discussion, which is crowd behavior on East Broad Street following the Boom.

Wait what wrote:

<quoted text>
If you cut food stamps to all the 'single' moms whose income is used to determine qualification but who live with their boyfriends and get the benefits of both incomes PLUS government assistance, I wouldn't mind in the least. If you cut food stamps to women who can afford hair and nail appointments, I wouldn't mind in the least. If you cut food stamps to those who can afford smartphones and afford the upkeep of a $23K van, I wouldn't mind in the least.

And just tell us in all your wisdom, how will the government tell who's got a boyfriend or who's driving a $23k van paid for with foodstamps or $120 a month welfare check? Is the "boyfriend" helping pay her bills or is he satisfying a sexual want? I thought you people wanted "less" government intrusion?!

WiseAmerican wrote:

<quoted text>And just tell us in all your wisdom, how will the government tell who's got a boyfriend or who's driving a $23k van paid for with foodstamps or $120 a month welfare check? Is the "boyfriend" helping pay her bills or is he satisfying a sexual want? I thought you people wanted "less" government intrusion?!

At the end of the day we want you people to take responsibility for yourselves. I don't care if it's only 5 cents they take out of my pocket to support people like this, it's still MY five cents and if I can keep it I will.

If you want to have the same family trees they have in Africa or Saudi Arabia, then go back there!

tranpsosition wrote:

<quoted text>
What I'm asking is how this is different from rabbinical courts. And how cases are assigned to these courts. How would your case wind up in a Shari court?
I'm really trying to gauge people's understanding of the structure.

If you have to ask what the difference is in fairness and treatment of human beings between Sharia courts and Rabbinical courts, you are truly a lost cause.