George Floyd (19 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

Yeah I just read that story. Doesn’t mean much without normalisation for type of offence IMO. If the cops are steaming in with knees on necks for unpaid parking tickets that’s one thing, if it’s black people are getting reported for more violent crimes that’s another (though also not necessarily proof the police are racist, might be proof the reporting is, might be proof black people in London are poorer on average).

 

---

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Tony ROS and David will be sharing their collective brain cell before responding

The police will be to blame
White racists will be to blame.
The end.
............after several pages of highly indulgent bollocks.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I think youve Got to look for patterns of behaviour with sneaky stuff. Take teaching again, Id let a kid go to the toilet, but some kids would take the piss. Rather than assume every kid was taking the piss I’d consider the history of the kid in question. Then you get “why can he but I can’t?” I guess.

I think this is the problem. There’s no real way of knowing someone’s intent.

Isn't the point of kids going to the toilet so they can take the piss?

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I read today on the BBC red button that the police have to use force more frequently when arresting black people (didn't specify which group) than white . One officer (didn't state who or rank) said it was because black people are more violent when arrested. You'd think that that would be the only possible reason, wouldn't you ?
I'm just putting it out there. Who's to blame for that ? Any thoughts anyone ?

Needs context on a case by case basis.

Is the belief that the police are so institutionally racist so pervasive in the black community that any attempt at arrest is assumed to be racially motivated and thus resisted. Leading to a more forceful police responsive which is seen as confirmation by the community they're being picked on and making it worse in the future?

Is it the belief in the police that black people are more likely to require force so go in more heavy handed to start with because they expect a problem? Resulting in more animosity and entrenching that view further?

Is it people getting fed up of being stopped all the time eventually losing their rag and thus the police become more heavy handed?

 

[covcity4life]

Needs context on a case by case basis.

Is the belief that the police are so institutionally racist so pervasive in the black community that any attempt at arrest is assumed to be racially motivated and thus resisted. Leading to a more forceful police responsive which is seen as confirmation by the community they're being picked on and making it worse in the future?

Is it the belief in the police that black people are more likely to require force so go in more heavy handed to start with because they expect a problem? Resulting in more animosity and entrenching that view further?

Is it people getting fed up of being stopped all the time eventually losing their rag and thus the police become more heavy handed?

Yeah lots of reasons WHY it could happen

Feels like ppl are still looking for case closed racism or not in this thread

If police say black ppl more violent when teying to arrest them then as long as thats a fact backed up by numbers it is not racist

However why draw a line under it there? Let's look at the reasons why. Maybe they are one of the ones you highlighted. Maybe not. Sometimes the criminals are Just outright in the wrong.

But we are not going to discover that racism isnt really a thing and eel also wont find that everyone is racist. So let's stop trying

 

[skybluetony176]

Tony ROS and David will be sharing their collective brain cell before responding

Could be worse, we could share ours with ADM & ESB like you.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Could be worse, we could share ours with ADM & ESB like you.

The irony being none of you lot have actually managed to formulate any argument against what I said.

 

[skybluetony176]

The police will be to blame
White racists will be to blame.
The end.
............after several pages of highly indulgent bollocks.

Don’t be silly. It’s clearly Idris Elba’s fault. A black man played a rogue cop in Luther/mumbles in Rock’n’Rolla (delete as applicable) so clearly all black people are asking for it.

 

[skybluetony176]

The irony being none of you lot have actually managed to formulate any argument against what I said.

You are the argument against yourself.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

You are the argument against yourself.

You know you are but what am I? How childish.

Still waiting for reasoned debate.

 

[skybluetony176]

You know you are but what am I? How childish.

Still waiting for reasoned debate.

I’m still waiting for you to make a reasoned argument in the first place.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I’m still waiting for you to make a reasoned argument in the first place.

Pathetic.

 

[skybluetony176]

Pathetic.

I must have been spending too much time in your company and you’re rubbing off on me.

 

[shmmeee]

This is worse than me and Nick. Come on guys.

 

[covcity4life]

This is worse than me and Nick. Come on guys.

I am realising I can't save the world lol

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Needs context on a case by case basis.

Is the belief that the police are so institutionally racist so pervasive in the black community that any attempt at arrest is assumed to be racially motivated and thus resisted. Leading to a more forceful police responsive which is seen as confirmation by the community they're being picked on and making it worse in the future?

Is it the belief in the police that black people are more likely to require force so go in more heavy handed to start with because they expect a problem? Resulting in more animosity and entrenching that view further?

Is it people getting fed up of being stopped all the time eventually losing their rag and thus the police become more heavy handed?

You can't make arrests on a case by case basis by thinking about it in this context. Perhaps give the aggressor a questionnaire before wacking them.

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Don’t be silly. It’s clearly Idris Elba’s fault. A black man played a rogue cop in Luther/mumbles in Rock’n’Rolla (delete as applicable) so clearly all black people are asking for it.

If you say so. He's a police officer though so he clearly needs to bludgeon black people at will.

 

[clint van damme]

You can't make arrests on a case by case basis by thinking about it in this context. Perhaps give the aggressor a questionnaire.

Probably not relevant to the point you're making but police decide whether to arrest people on a case by case basis all the time.

The amount of paperwork they're going to have to fill out measured being a major factor in their decision.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

This is worse than me and Nick. Come on guys.

I just asked for a reasonable counter-argument for my points and that's what I got.

 

[shmmeee]

I just asked for a reasonable counter-argument for my points and that's what I got.

And I just try and tease out fact from rumour and supposition but here we are

 

[skybluetony176]

I just asked for a reasonable counter-argument for my points and that's what I got.

You have to start with a reasonable point in the first place. Continually saying it’s their own fault because of this random black person or that random black person is not an argument.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

You have to start with a reasonable point in the first place. Continually saying it’s their own fault because of this random black person or that random black person is not an argument.

You cannot even remember what I said, you would just rather write on here like a 5 year old rather than going back to examine my points and debate them. It's easier just to shout racist and virtue-signal. Perhaps you should go the way of some of your counterparts on here?

Accept you cannot debate me and block me.

 

[RegTheDonk]

The argument put forward was that if Akinfenwa had taken it as racist then it has to be considered racist. By extension therefore if any person takes something as racist it has to be considered racist........

Believe the way the law works is as long as it's perceived by the victim as racist then it can be classed as a hate incident. Proving it to a jury I guess would be something else .... we haven't cracked it after 100 odd pages.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

You have to start with a reasonable point in the first place. Continually saying it’s their own fault because of this random black person or that random black person is not an argument.

Most people just ignore him now, they can see what he is.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Most people just ignore him now, they can see what he is.

Yes, easier to call someone racist with absolutely zero evidence than debate some uncomfortable truths.

I wouldn't mind if people could actually go through my list of points and counter argue or highlight certain things, but you don't.

It's easier to say:

You're racist
I'm blocking you
You never made any points
Other people said he is racist so he must be

It's getting really boring.

 

[shmmeee]

Believe the way the law works is as long as it's perceived by the victim as racist then it can be classed as a hate incident. Proving it to a jury I guess would be something else .... we haven't cracked it after 100 odd pages.

Not just the victim. Anyone can claim it had a hate element and it will be flagged by the CPS. For sentencing to take it into account obviously it has to be proven in court like anything else.

Racist and Religious Hate Crime - Prosecution Guidance | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

 

[djr8369]

That seems like an accusation of racism to be fair.

People need to start making up their minds because while it's OK for me to be called a Gammon or a Snowflake based on skin colour I have absolutely no fucking idea when I might be accused of racism for saying somebody is Hench as fuck or something equally innocent.

If the buffalo remark is so hurtful, don't refer to himself as like one then.

It really is just common sense, a lot of it.

Snowflake is nothing to do with skin colour. It means unique and fragile.

 

[Nick]

Snowflake is nothing to do with skin colour. It means unique and fragile.

What colour are snowflakes?

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Snowflake is nothing to do with skin colour. It means unique and fragile.

In your opinion.

As a white person I find it offensive and racist. It infers all white people are weak and fragile.

Sounds silly doesn't it? Thing is, if a black person can say something of the equivalent is racist and we all have to apologise and can't talk about it, white people should have the ability to do that too. Otherwise there are no equal rights. Unless of course it isn't equal rights, but actually special rights some people are looking for.

 

[shmmeee]

What colour are snowflakes?

Depends if you’ve pissed on them.

 

[djr8369]

In your opinion.

As a white person I find it offensive and racist. It infers all white people are weak and fragile.

Sounds silly doesn't it? Thing is, if a black person can say something of the equivalent is racist and we all have to apologise and can't talk about it, white people should have the ability to do that too. Otherwise there are no equal rights. Unless of course it isn't equal rights, but actually special rights some people are looking for.

White people do have the ability to do that. This just isn’t an example of racism and to claim it as such is just distracting from racist issues. An accusation some have levelled at black people.

It’s fine to question it and have a discussion about it though. As it is about the water buffalo comment. The difference is “snowflake” is an insult commentating on the mindset of individuals and suggesting they are too easily offended. It has nothing to do with race or skin colour and has no historical connection to racism. Referring to a black person as an animal can be done to infer they are of a lower species and has a long historical precedent.

To say these are the same and imply it’s about picking and choosing offence or give better rights to some over others seems wilfully obtuse or at the least ignorant of context and history.

 

[Grendel]

Yes, easier to call someone racist with absolutely zero evidence than debate some uncomfortable truths.

I wouldn't mind if people could actually go through my list of points and counter argue or highlight certain things, but you don't.

It's easier to say:

You're racist
I'm blocking you
You never made any points
Other people said he is racist so he must be

It's getting really boring.

The scroll down bar was invented due to ROS I think

 

[Alan Dugdales Moustache]

Snowflake is nothing to do with skin colour. It means unique and fragile.

But if someone considers it to be a reference to his or her skin colour, then it is, according to a lot of people Therefore it is racist to that person. I'd say snowflake is far more akin (fenwa) to skin colour than a fat bloody water buffalo.
Its a free for all on the "be racially abuse" front. Call Mr Plod .

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

White people do have the ability to do that. This just isn’t an example of racism and to claim it as such is just distracting from racist issues. An accusation some have levelled at black people.

It’s fine to question it and have a discussion about it though. As it is about the water buffalo comment. The difference is “snowflake” is an insult commentating on the mindset of individuals and suggesting they are too easily offended. It has nothing to do with race or skin colour and has no historical connection to racism. Referring to a black person as an animal can be done to infer they are of a lower species and has a long historical precedent.

To say these are the same and imply it’s about picking and choosing offence or give better rights to some over others seems wilfully obtuse or at the least ignorant of context and history.

Yes, your point makes a lot of sense. But that is not the reality of what's going on.

Without looking to sidestep this time, lets say the insult wasn't 'snowflake', but was 'polar bear', and let's say 'water buffalo' was a 'black rimmed television' - what would the outcome be?

It would be exactly the same as above. A black person could be allowed to get offended about the television comment, and the white person would be ignored for making such a nonsense accusation.

That is not equal. Until we have equal rules, there will be racism one way or another.

 

[Nick]

White people do have the ability to do that. This just isn’t an example of racism and to claim it as such is just distracting from racist issues. An accusation some have levelled at black people.

It’s fine to question it and have a discussion about it though. As it is about the water buffalo comment. The difference is “snowflake” is an insult commentating on the mindset of individuals and suggesting they are too easily offended. It has nothing to do with race or skin colour and has no historical connection to racism. Referring to a black person as an animal can be done to infer they are of a lower species and has a long historical precedent.

To say these are the same and imply it’s about picking and choosing offence or give better rights to some over others seems wilfully obtuse or at the least ignorant of context and history.

Buffalo is to do with build, size and strength as the snowflake is about mindset though, right?

As I have said, you can make anything racist if you want. It's interesting to see people shit themselves when I say Gammon or Snowflake is racist but then not allow the same thing to be said when you change things around a bit.

Just detracts from and dilutes actual racism.