Minny at it again. Black man shot at traffic stop

[listen2me 23 1,544]

A quick wiki search has WV 46th and Kentucky 48th in poverty rate.  1st being thr least poverty.

A quick violent crime rate ranking via usa today has WV 31st and kentucky 44th.  1st being the most violent.

What do we make of these numbers

[bostonlager 2,465]

1 minute ago, listen2me 23 said:

A quick wiki search has WV 46th and Kentucky 48th in poverty rate.  1st being thr least poverty.

A quick violent crime rate ranking via usa today has WV 31st and kentucky 44th.  1st being the most violent.

What do we make of these numbers

This article sums it up perfectly. Poverty is nothing but an excuse. 
https://www.nonstatusquo.com/what-is-the-most-predictive-variable-for-the-us-murder-rate/

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

10 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I’m not sure if it’s the democrats’ fault, but I agree black people and white people aren’t very different at all. 
 

As for the history of the Democrats and Republicans, try to look at it a bit more honestly. The anti-segregation Dems all flipped to GOP when LBJ embraced civil rights. They haven’t flipped back yet. The Democrats should rightfully be ashamed of their history. However, Republicans should be ashamed of theirs too.

You do realize that while more Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act (only because they had the numbers), the Republican party by percentage, was higher.  Democrats in the House voted 61%-39% in favor of while Republicans were at 80%-20%.  In the Senate, the ratios are similar.  Democrats had more votes, but there was better backing by the Republicans.  Dems were 62%-38% while Republicans were at 82%-18%.  Republicans by percentage were more in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Democrats were.

As a closer look at the history, the Republican party was founded in the North to oppose the Democrat South.  They were against slavery and the KKK.  The North/Republican's did have indentured servants.  Definitely not perfect, but actually paying the servants and granting them eventual freedom was light years better than what the Democrats were doing in the South.

I'm not saying the Republican party is perfect... just the better option.

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

1 hour ago, Fireballer said:

And, they are continuing to vote Dem while the Dems are openly making them 2nd rate minorities.  Dems will give zero fuks about black people if they can secure enough of votes from other minorities they're packing in the country.  

They've been "Institutionalized".  Black people suffer from Stockholm syndrome.  We have to wait and hope they break out of it.  For all the pandering that Democrats do to black people, you'd have to find it interesting that when you have black people like Ben Carson, Tim Scott, Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell, and Jason Whitlock who speak out to help black people, the Democrats try to silence them.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,657]

23 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

They've been "Institutionalized".  Black people suffer from Stockholm syndrome.  We have to wait and hope they break out of it.  For all the pandering that Democrats do to black people, you'd have to find it interesting that when you have black people like Ben Carson, Tim Scott, Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell, and Jason Whitlock who speak out to help black people, the Democrats try to silence them.

Some Black Lives Matter. 

[jerryskids 5,206]

42 minutes ago, dogcows said:

This is LITERALLY the stuff the Nazis believed.

This discussion has been had, many decades ago, and studied and shown to be completely false, and I thought it died with the Third Reich. People like me definitely aren’t going to be fooled into believing in the master race; you’re right my brain doesn’t fire in a way stupid enough to believe that. This is Nazi-level racist . Period. Black people aren’t genetically predisposed to committing crime, and even suggesting it shows all that anybody needs to know about you. Nice of you to pretend to be reasonable for a while, but you’re flying that freak flag high now, for all to see.

I guess the sun does revolve around the earth. 

To paraphrase Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven:  Believing's got nothing to do with it.  You are a scientific expert; there are hypotheses which can be tested.  But as I expected, you dove head first to the racist card.  That's grade school level debate: next, do you go with "I know you are but what am I?"

Addressing tough topics leads to information, information leads to improvement.  You don't have what it takes to address tough topics.  I'll leave you with a few questions:

- Are there physical differences between ethnicities; e.g., do some have more melanin, or do some have more fast-twitch muscles which lend to improved performance in things like sprinting?

- Is the brain a physical organ?

- If the brain is a physical organ, is it possible that there are differences between the ethnicities?

- Have there been differences in selection criteria between the different ethnicities for the better part of the past 400 years (e.g., intelligence vs. physical prowess)?

- Do those differences continue to some extent today, where gangster life and behavior is celebrated and traditional American success considered "Uncle Tom" by some?

On this last point, I don't view physiological differences in a vacuum, they can certainly be influenced over time through evolution.  I believe we need to address these influencing factors and view the issue as multi-generational.  Or we can just keep throwing blame, money, and excuses around like we have the past 50 years and see how that goes.

 

[dogcows 1,029]

7 hours ago, jerryskids said:

I guess the sun does revolve around the earth. 

To paraphrase Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven:  Believing's got nothing to do with it.  You are a scientific expert; there are hypotheses which can be tested.  But as I expected, you dove head first to the racist card.  That's grade school level debate: next, do you go with "I know you are but what am I?"

Addressing tough topics leads to information, information leads to improvement.  You don't have what it takes to address tough topics.  I'll leave you with a few questions:

- Are there physical differences between ethnicities; e.g., do some have more melanin, or do some have more fast-twitch muscles which lend to improved performance in things like sprinting?

- Is the brain a physical organ?

- If the brain is a physical organ, is it possible that there are differences between the ethnicities?

- Have there been differences in selection criteria between the different ethnicities for the better part of the past 400 years (e.g., intelligence vs. physical prowess)?

- Do those differences continue to some extent today, where gangster life and behavior is celebrated and traditional American success considered "Uncle Tom" by some?

On this last point, I don't view physiological differences in a vacuum, they can certainly be influenced over time through evolution.  I believe we need to address these influencing factors and view the issue as multi-generational.  Or we can just keep throwing blame, money, and excuses around like we have the past 50 years and see how that goes.

 

Dude, this crap was already covered in trash like “The Bell Curve” in the 90s , and rightfully panned by many evolutionary biologists as “scientific racism” - pseudo-science geared to try and bring some legitimacy to racist ideas. Do some reading on the people who put forth the same ideas you’re espousing, and how hundreds of actual scientists debunked it all. Nothing original in your post, just the same old racist claptrap. 

[Casual Observer 597]

18 hours ago, dogcows said:

Dude, this crap was already covered in trash like “The Bell Curve” in the 90s , and rightfully panned by many evolutionary biologists as “scientific racism” - pseudo-science geared to try and bring some legitimacy to racist ideas. Do some reading on the people who put forth the same ideas you’re espousing, and how hundreds of actual scientists debunked it all. Nothing original in your post, just the same old racist claptrap. 

Debunked what, Newbie.  Which scientists debunked what? 

[dogcows 1,029]

7 hours ago, Casual Observer said:

Debunked what, Newbie.  Which scientists debunked what? 

Here’s a primer on famous (or should I say infamous) attempts to use science to advance racist ideas, and how they were discredited.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism

 

[Fireballer 2,383]

17 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Here’s a primer on famous (or should I say infamous) attempts to use science to advance racist ideas, and how they were discredited.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism

 

So we're gonna have a strong believer in these theories as the 2nd in command at the DOJ-Civil Rights Division?  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,657]

1 minute ago, Fireballer said:

So we're gonna have a strong believer in these theories as the 2nd in command at the DOJ-Civil Rights Division?  

He doesn’t know who you’re talking about. Don Lemon hasn’t mentioned her. 

[Voltaire 4,562]

23 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Here’s a primer on famous (or should I say infamous) attempts to use science to advance racist ideas, and how they were discredited.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism

 

There's no research on this at all. This subject is toxic to the billionth degree and everyone with a lick of sense stays away from the subject entirely knowing full well that doing so will end their career.

[jerryskids 5,206]

On 4/20/2021 at 4:52 PM, dogcows said:

Dude, this crap was already covered in trash like “The Bell Curve” in the 90s , and rightfully panned by many evolutionary biologists as “scientific racism” - pseudo-science geared to try and bring some legitimacy to racist ideas. Do some reading on the people who put forth the same ideas you’re espousing, and how hundreds of actual scientists debunked it all. Nothing original in your post, just the same old racist claptrap. 

Sorry for the delay, I’ve had medical issues.  Not that I should apologize to a person as closed-minded as yourself.  You are a caricature of what I predicted in my posts above.

I am sorry though that you leap so quickly to the gun-throwing “racist” card.  Perhaps you should read the Wiki page on the Bell Curve; it is quite well written and presents both sides evenly IMO.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve

Quote

According to Herrnstein and Murray, the high heritability of IQ within races does not necessarily mean that the cause of differences between races is genetic. On the other hand, they discuss lines of evidence that have been used to support the thesis that the black-white gap is at least partly genetic, such as Spearman's hypothesis. They also discuss possible environmental explanations of the gap, such as the observed generational increases in IQ, for which they coin the term Flynn effect. At the close of this discussion, they write:^[1]

If the reader is now convinced that either the genetic or environmental explanation has won out to the exclusion of the other, we have not done a sufficiently good job of presenting one side or the other. It seems highly likely to us that both genes and environment have something to do with racial differences. What might the mix be? We are resolutely agnostic on that issue; as far as we can determine, the evidence does not yet justify an estimate.

The authors also stress that regardless of the causes of differences, people should be treated no differently.^[1]

...

Herrnstein and Murray argued the average genetic IQ of the United States is declining, owing to the tendency of the more intelligent having fewer children than the less intelligent, the generation length to be shorter for the less intelligent, and the large-scale immigration to the United States of those with low intelligence. Discussing a possible future political outcome of an intellectually stratified society, the authors stated that they "fear that a new kind of conservatism is becoming the dominant ideology of the affluent—not in the social tradition of an Edmund Burke or in the economic tradition of an Adam Smith but 'conservatism' along Latin American lines, where to be conservative has often meant doing whatever is necessary to preserve the mansions on the hills from the menace of the slums below."^[5]Moreover, they fear that increasing welfare will create a "custodial state" in "a high-tech and more lavish version of the Indian reservation for some substantial minority of the nation's population." They also predict increasing totalitarianism: "It is difficult to imagine the United States preserving its heritage of individualism, equal rights before the law, free people running their own lives, once it is accepted that a significant part of the population must be made permanent wards of the states."^[6]

The authors recommended the elimination of welfare policies which they claim encourage poor women to have babies.^[7]

...

There is much more; it is a very good read.  Especially that first quote, which is essentially what I have been saying.  

In closing, you once again use false logic as follows:  others who are racists have put forward similar ideas, ergo the Bell Curve is racist.  Again I lack confidence in your ability to see this distinction, so carry on thinking you’ve uncovered me as a closet racist.  

 

[tanatastic 2,061]

Here’s the difference with the races. The baseline you expect for every race except black is a normal, average, mostly law abiding person who acts civilized and is moderately polite and respectful. It’s noteworthy when they are not. You would say to yourself “Oh he’s one of the bad ones.”, the bad apples stick out when they act poorly. 
 

With black people it’s the opposite. The baseline you expect is the rude, violent, aggressive, criminal who doesn’t act civilized. You expect that from them and when they are normal like described above it’s noteworthy. You would say to yourself “Oh hes one of the good ones.”. Like when they are just a normal well spoken average person they stick out from the crowd (and are shunned by their own community for it.).

[dogcows 1,029]

On 4/22/2021 at 7:06 PM, jerryskids said:

Sorry for the delay, I’ve had medical issues.  Not that I should apologize to a person as closed-minded as yourself.  You are a caricature of what I predicted in my posts above.

I am sorry though that you leap so quickly to the gun-throwing “racist” card.  Perhaps you should read the Wiki page on the Bell Curve; it is quite well written and presents both sides evenly IMO.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve

There is much more; it is a very good read.  Especially that first quote, which is essentially what I have been saying.  

In closing, you once again use false logic as follows:  others who are racists have put forward similar ideas, ergo the Bell Curve is racist.  Again I lack confidence in your ability to see this distinction, so carry on thinking you’ve uncovered me as a closet racist.  

 

If you want to buy into this stuff, fine. However…

Scientific American pointed out multiple flaws in the book shortly after it was released:

https://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/sciam1.htm

It’s not too long of a read, and shows the book for what it really is. I cannot imagine a scientist believing in the conclusions of The Bell Curve after reading the flaws in their sources of data as well as multiple other flawed assumptions in their reasoning. It’s just another book using “science” (a term I use loosely in its case) to advance an agenda, which for the authors, was to make a claim that affirmative action was a “poison.”

Many other serious social scientists have pilloried the book as well, mostly shortly after it was written. One of the most clear repudiation of the book’s supposed findings was a study of adopted children, showing that upbringing was the issue, NOT race. This was detailed in “Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth” written by a group of scientists led by Claude Fischer, where they analyzed the actual data The Bell Curve used and showed the flaws in Herrnstein and Murray’s analysis.

[Utilit99 4,099]

On 4/20/2021 at 11:12 AM, bostonlager said:

This article sums it up perfectly. Poverty is nothing but an excuse. 
https://www.nonstatusquo.com/what-is-the-most-predictive-variable-for-the-us-murder-rate/

 

Gee, I remember back in my early 20's, I was broke, heavily in debt, not in school, no college degree, working 2 jobs that didn't pay much, had a crappy car, and living in a ghetto neighborhood because that was the best I could afford. 

Oh my, how ever did I become successful in life and not have to beg, steal, kill and feel sorry for myself while not doing those things? Well, I put the task of getting out of it all on my own shoulders. I enjoyed life even when I was broke even though there were a lot of hardships and struggles. I didn't go out and hang with corrupt violent dlckheads. I stayed the fock away from trouble and focused on making the right friends and most of all stayed off the streets of that shlt city I lived in.

That's too much to ask for those who feel sorry for themselves, enjoy violence as a way to express themselves and gain quick fixes that don't last, and hate the world around them.

People can get the hell out of poverty if they truly want to. 

 

[dogcows 1,029]

On 4/22/2021 at 7:27 PM, tanatastic said:

Here’s the difference with the races. The baseline you expect for every race except black is a normal, average, mostly law abiding person who acts civilized and is moderately polite and respectful. It’s noteworthy when they are not. You would say to yourself “Oh he’s one of the bad ones.”, the bad apples stick out when they act poorly. 
 

With black people it’s the opposite. The baseline you expect is the rude, violent, aggressive, criminal who doesn’t act civilized. You expect that from them and when they are normal like described above it’s noteworthy. You would say to yourself “Oh hes one of the good ones.”. Like when they are just a normal well spoken average person they stick out from the crowd (and are shunned by their own community for it.).

I don’t expect black people to be the way you characterize them. My guess is that you don’t spend a lot of time with black people. Your attitude is highly prejudiced and not at all reflective of the reality. If you spent time getting to know people different than yourself, you’d quickly find out how flawed your assumptions are. The statement that a “nice” black person would be shunned by their community truly shows that you have no clue what you are talking about.

[jerryskids 5,206]

16 hours ago, dogcows said:

If you want to buy into this stuff, fine. However…

Scientific American pointed out multiple flaws in the book shortly after it was released:

https://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/sciam1.htm

It’s not too long of a read, and shows the book for what it really is. I cannot imagine a scientist believing in the conclusions of The Bell Curve after reading the flaws in their sources of data as well as multiple other flawed assumptions in their reasoning. It’s just another book using “science” (a term I use loosely in its case) to advance an agenda, which for the authors, was to make a claim that affirmative action was a “poison.”

Many other serious social scientists have pilloried the book as well, mostly shortly after it was written. One of the most clear repudiation of the book’s supposed findings was a study of adopted children, showing that upbringing was the issue, NOT race. This was detailed in “Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth” written by a group of scientists led by Claude Fischer, where they analyzed the actual data The Bell Curve used and showed the flaws in Herrnstein and Murray’s analysis.

Once again you don’t respond to my points; does it get tiring doing so, or have you honed it into a well-oiled machine?  You argue like my teenage daughter, hearing “blah blah blah” as I speak, instead readying your next super zinger for your original point.

Any regression analyses with many variables open themselves to criticism; there are no exact answers, rather layers of probabilities.  A social scientist like your Scientific American author can write all of the words he chooses to draw different conclusions.  Hence why the authors were quite careful in their conclusions, as seen in my posts above which you ignored.  

I’m increasingly wondering if you understand the concept of slightly overlapping bell curves?   I alluded to it earlier when I asked about fast twitch muscle for instance.  That doesn’t mean that every black man is faster than every white man.  But at the far end of the curve, the top elite end, most are.  That is why most Olympic sprinters are black.  That’s just fact.  Similarly, men have a slight statistical edge over women in spatial relationships, which is why elite mathematicians tend to be men.

[dogcows 1,029]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Once again you don’t respond to my points; does it get tiring doing so, or have you honed it into a well-oiled machine?  You argue like my teenage daughter, hearing “blah blah blah” as I speak, instead readying your next super zinger for your original point.

Any regression analyses with many variables open themselves to criticism; there are no exact answers, rather layers of probabilities.  A social scientist like your Scientific American author can write all of the words he chooses to draw different conclusions.  Hence why the authors were quite careful in their conclusions, as seen in my posts above which you ignored.  

I’m increasingly wondering if you understand the concept of slightly overlapping bell curves?   I alluded to it earlier when I asked about fast twitch muscle for instance.  That doesn’t mean that every black man is faster than every white man.  But at the far end of the curve, the top elite end, most are.  That is why most Olympic sprinters are black.  That’s just fact.  Similarly, men have a slight statistical edge over women in spatial relationships, which is why elite mathematicians tend to be men.

I don’t see the need to try and completely take apart The Bell Curve piece by piece because it’s already been done, many times, by people far more qualified than either of us.

If I were to point to one thing, that to me tells it all about the book, it is this statement: 

Quote

"Affirmative action, in education and the workplace alike, is leaking a poison into the American soul." 

Is that really the “quite careful in their conclusions” that you suggested? Maybe this is another “careful” conclusion:

Quote

"people diagnosed as borderline retarded graduate from the police academy."

Which was a random anecdote with no verification whatsoever, meant to drill home a point they’d decided before they wrote the first word of the book, in my opinion (and that of most social scientists).

BTW - I’d love to see your source for the claim that spatial perception is the reason that there are more male “elite” mathematicians… rather than other factors such as put forward in this study:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280495521_Gender_Gaps_in_Overestimation_of_Math_Performance

I haven’t ignored your posts btw. Perhaps I’m just not answering them in the way you’d prefer. 

[jerryskids 5,206]

6 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I don’t see the need to try and completely take apart The Bell Curve piece by piece because it’s already been done, many times, by people far more qualified than either of us.

If I were to point to one thing, that to me tells it all about the book, it is this statement: 

Is that really the “quite careful in their conclusions” that you suggested? Maybe this is another “careful” conclusion:

Which was a random anecdote with no verification whatsoever, meant to drill home a point they’d decided before they wrote the first word of the book, in my opinion (and that of most social scientists).

BTW - I’d love to see your source for the claim that spatial perception is the reason that there are more male “elite” mathematicians… rather than other factors such as put forward in this study:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280495521_Gender_Gaps_in_Overestimation_of_Math_Performance

I haven’t ignored your posts btw. Perhaps I’m just not answering them in the way you’d prefer. 

Yes, those authors have an opinion about affirmative action, much like your earlier authors did about police targeting black people.  Can’t you get past that and just look at their data?!

Oh, and easy google search on the math:  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217124430.htm

Quote

 

Summary:

Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks, including mental rotation, which is the ability to identify how a 3-D object would appear if rotated in space. A new study shows a connection between this sex-linked ability and the structure of the parietal lobe, the brain region that controls this type of skill.

 

[dogcows 1,029]

Just now, jerryskids said:

Yes, those authors have an opinion about affirmative action, much like your earlier authors did about police targeting black people.  Can’t you get past that and just look at their data?!

Oh, and easy google search on the math:  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217124430.htm

 

I did look at the data. I pointed out the flaws in it, including the authors coming to conclusions on IQ when administering tests that were not IQ tests, and failing to control for factors such as access to quality education. I get your point though. I understand why you’d be suspicious of the study I posted. But I also don’t recall you finding fault with its findings, whereas other scientists people have pointed out numerous flaws in The Bell Curve’s data and conclusions.

As for the math question, that study says nothing about how that affects performance of mathematicians. It also states:

Quote

The big question remains whether this is nature or nurture. On the one hand, boys, compared to girls, may have opportunities to cultivate this skill, but if we eventually see both a strong performance and parietal lobe structural difference in children, it would support a biological, not just environmental, effect

That study was only 76 people by the way. Maybe a good starter study if one wanted to examine things further, but the authors definitely didn’t make any conclusions such as the one you’ve drawn.

10 years later, here’s a more recent study that addresses the question directly:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-019-0057-x

[nobody 2,044]

On 4/12/2021 at 2:08 PM, peenie said:

Lies and more lies. 

Georgia is chock full of safe all-black neighborhoods. Black safe neighborhoods exist all over this country. Poor densely populated black neighborhoods combined with a bunch of other issues are why crime flourish.

I'd love to live in Ladera Heights. 

[jerryskids 5,206]

27 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I did look at the data. I pointed out the flaws in it, including the authors coming to conclusions on IQ when administering tests that were not IQ tests, and failing to control for factors such as access to quality education. I get your point though. I understand why you’d be suspicious of the study I posted. But I also don’t recall you finding fault with its findings, whereas other scientists people have pointed out numerous flaws in The Bell Curve’s data and conclusions.

As for the math question, that study says nothing about how that affects performance of mathematicians. It also states:

That study was only 76 people by the way. Maybe a good starter study if one wanted to examine things further, but the authors definitely didn’t make any conclusions such as the one you’ve drawn.

10 years later, here’s a more recent study that addresses the question directly:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-019-0057-x

Your more recent study had about 100 people, not exactly orders of magnitude larger.  And again we are discussing very small differences at the end of the curve.  And math ability in 3-10 year olds is entirely different than advanced complex math like spatial relations.  In fact your link discusses spatial relation, so clearly those authors tie it to math ability:

Quote

Any test of cognitive ability that shows gender differences faces the difficulty of disentangling biological factors from social ones. For instance, 4- to 7-year-old boys show an advantage over girls in tests of spatial skills, but parents also report more-spatial play with their boys compared with their girls,14 suggesting a possible sociocultural influence on gender differences in spatial cognition.

But if we dig down into reference 14, we find this:

Quote

Abstract

There is evidence suggesting that children’s play with spatial toys (e.g., puzzles and blocks) correlates with spatial development. Females play less with spatial toys than do males, which arguably accounts for males’ spatial advantages; children with high socioeconomic status (SES) also show an advantage, though SES-related differences in spatial play have been less studied than gender-related differences. Using a large, nationally representative sample from the standardization study of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence–Fourth Edition, and controlling for other cognitive abilities, we observed a specific relation between parent-reported frequency of spatial play and Block Design scores that was invariant across gender and SES. Reported spatial play was higher for boys than for girls, but controlling for spatial play did not eliminate boys’ relative advantage on this subtest. SES groups did not differ in reported frequency of spatial play. Future research should consider quality as well as quantity of play, and should explore underlying mechanisms to evaluate causality.

Multiple factors are speculated, including changes during puberty, which ties back to why I prefer to use physiological vs. genetic, as it is more-encompassing.

This has been an interesting discussion but here is how I see it.  I started with a premise that violence in the black community is part poverty, part culture, and part physiology.  I also said that the factors are intertwined and cannot be explained in a vacuum.  I also assigned 1/3 each as a starting point, which mea culpa I pulled out of my ass and am willing to change.  In fact you have provided some data which leads me to lower that number.

Your premise is that 0.0 of it is physiological.  Apparently also for advanced math abilities in men vs. women.  Unclear about sprinting abilities as you’ve never responded.  Since I can’t seem to get you off of zero, I think we are done.   

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

Interesting.  Minneapolis pays out the family of Daunte Wright... now victims of his are suing his estate.  I think this could be interesting.

https://www.policemag.com/610553/daunte-wrights-estate-sued-by-alleged-victims-of-his-violent-crimes

 

If these people win, you know that it's open season on any person who got payouts from white guilt government officials.  George Floyd could be next.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

1 minute ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Interesting.  Minneapolis pays out the family of Daunte Wright... now victims of his are suing his estate.  I think this could be interesting.

https://www.policemag.com/610553/daunte-wrights-estate-sued-by-alleged-victims-of-his-violent-crimes

 

If these people win, you know that it's open season on any person who got payouts from white guilt government officials.  George Floyd could be next.

Reparations? 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

1 minute ago, TimmySmith said:

Reparations? 

I'm willing to bet that most of the victims are black, so it does seem reasonable.

[Utilit99 4,099]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Interesting.  Minneapolis pays out the family of Daunte Wright... now victims of his are suing his estate.  I think this could be interesting.

https://www.policemag.com/610553/daunte-wrights-estate-sued-by-alleged-victims-of-his-violent-crimes

 

If these people win, you know that it's open season on any person who got payouts from white guilt government officials.  George Floyd could be next.

Focking awesome. Attack each other like the dems are doing now. 

[Strike 3,979]