1 Gay guy dead in NYNY=outrage, 40 blacks dead in 1 month in Chi= no big deal

You are correct but that is so people won't pay attention to it. Calling someone a racist is just a tactic to get them to not tell the truth.

 

it would force people to review the root cause of most of it and they won't be happy to see that the social programs designed to encourage Democrat votes also encouraged and even supported bad behavior

 

I think this is definitely a touchy subject, so please bare with me as I want to refrain from looking bad, in some regards. As some folks take things out of context. Considering this is an anonymous forum, I still don't wish to be labeled as one thing or the other.

However, to your point, I absolutely believe that the 'Civil Rights' acts have given more power to certain folks over the other. I believe that these folks should be respected, regardless of the law. No law will tell me how I should treat the other human being, as I firmly believe all human beings should be respected first. I believe the individuals themselves must take my respect away from them.

What I believe the law should be enacted are to protect our rights, as individuals. No person should be given the ability to perform a crime against the other, no matter what background. Furthermore, no law should be enacted that gives folks power over the others. No one person is greater than the other, as no one person is better than the other. Each of us has something to give to the greater good of the whole.

Where it becomes an issue, for me, is when laws are enacted that enables others to push their weight onto others. In the case of the 'Civil Rights' act and other bills just like it, it gives more power to certain folks and it can be used against the rest. I don't find that fair, but I also believe folks should be respected, without that law.

In the end, all of us, as individuals, should respect everyone. What happens is when too many folks begin to do disrespectful things to others, they push for legislation that will make folks respect them. There is a distinct difference in my wording. I believe folks should respect others, legislation states you will respect others. While I don't believe folks should have free reign to do as they please (IE: Enact slavery, kill others because of a particular background), I also don't believe folks should have power over the other.

 

Did you stop reading after I stated 'it's more of a 'hate' crime'? My post had a lot more sustenance than what you're giving me credit for. I responded to your entire post, I ask you to please do the same.

 

Gay people are NOT special... they have worked hard to have the same rights as everyone else. The are just "more equal" than most. Deal with it especially if you are not gay, or black.

 

nope

but I simply pointed out the flaw. Even with "quotes", to toss out the term "hate crime" devalues the lives of those not within the protected group.

I believe laws should be treated as being blind
I believe the govt should only address the individual and not create groups be they married, gays, plumbers, .00000002% Indian running for Senate; anything.

I do not support affirmative action and loathe the term "hate crime"

 

Not really. The media is blatantly biased in favor of progressive ideology and the majority of black crime happens in progressive cities like LA, Chicago, Detroit, DC, NYC, etc., which is why they try to avoid reporting on it as much as possible. It makes their ideological allies in those cities look bad.

 

That had nothing to do with what I said. However, if that's what you wish to believe, than go with it.

 

Odd how they also ignore rural black crime, which is the home of conservative policies. Funny that.

 

What flaw? You took one thing I said, provided your own analysis, and then made it seem like I was saying that's why one is covered over the other. The entire premise of my OP was that the media & politicians are lying in bed together, literally & figuratively. There is nothing to gain, politically, from Chicago. Hence, MSM needs to spin the gay man being killed, as there is something to gain from that. More folks hear about this gay man being killed, a group of folks push for legislation to punish those who kill gay man, then folks see why this is being spun. Again, the entire premise of my post.

What you're arguing is the exact same thing that I stated back to DonGlock. The only difference is you're trying to spin this around on me, like I'm on the other side. Sorry, it's just not going to work.

 

Conduct a comparative analysis between rural black crime and urban black crime and tell me what you find.

 

That more blacks live in cities?

 

You can control for differences in population size by analyzing percentages. Now, get to work.

 

that's not how this works. you made the claim, YOU get to work.

 

huh?

you used the term "hate crime", not me.

and what sides?

This thread is very topical because it clearly brings to light the double standard in the media and gay movement. For some reason, they do not value the death of black people the same as when a gay guy is killed.

 

If you read my entire post, you would've understood why the word hate was in quotation marks, as it dealt with the premise of my post.

The reason, the MSM covers one over the other, is essentially what I got at with my above posts. There is nothing to gain, politically, in Chicago, but there is in New York.

 

What claim was that? Weren't you the individual who brought up rural black crime, as if it were somehow relevant to the discussion? Oh, yes, that was you!

 

Hey. You made this post which seems uninformed and nonsensical.

Just what are the socio-governmental differences that would impact a "rural black" from an "urban black", and how are they differentiated by the geo-politics you reference ? How is it then "funny" ?

 

No, it was you who claimed that the liberal media is failing to report black crime in liberal cities. I pointed out they also aren't reporting the black crime in rural areas.

 

I forget which forum it was that I was on where a guy predicted that there would be some manufactured "violence on gays" as we approach the June SCOTUS decision on gay marriage. You know, a little "grease for the wheels of sympathy" when legal arguments that might usher in polygamists and others might fail...

No telling if this was one of those manufactured incidents. But certainly I think this guy was onto something; and look for more of it until the SCOTUS decision comes through.

Gays are masters of theater as a rule, especially the men tend to gravitate that way. And no little elements of the Agenda have been fabricated theatrics and artificially-heightened drama at just the right cue [but not when it comes to the sudden increase in boys ages 13-29 of 34% getting HIV in the same timeframe that gay marriage started getting pushed through].

On the wrong cue [see parentheses], the lights get really low and and the curtains rise on another stage as a distraction. This might be one of those.

 

Which they are, so why would I need to "get to work" on substantiating that claim? You even admitted as much yourself.

That's because there is far less crime in rural areas than in urban areas, or were you unaware of this fact?

(TABLE 5)(TABLE 6)(TABLE 7)(TABLE 11) http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/virtcdlib/index.cgi/5772776/FID2/pdf/usrv98.pdf

 

Hey. They are not reporting it in any of the major national news outlets. OBTW, can you name for me the largest "non-liberal" city in the US ?

 

http://www.quarterlifemag.com/2009/11/topliberalconservativecities/

1. Provo, Utah
2. Lubbock, Texas
3. Abilene, Texas
4. Hialeah, Florida
5. Plano, Texas
6. Colorado Springs, Colorado
7. Gilbert, Arizona
8. Bakersfield, California
9. Lafayette, Louisiana
10. Orange, California
11. Escondido, California
12. Allentown, Pennsylvania
13. Mesa, Arizona
14. Arlington, Texas
15. Peoria, Arizona
16. Cape Coral, Florida
17. Simi Valley, California
19. Corona, California
20. Clearwater, Florida
21. West Valley City, Utah
22. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
23. Overland Park, Kansas
24. Anchorage, Alaska
25. Huntington Beach, California

I did not look up the population on them all, but Mesa would probably one of the largest on that list.

As for the black crime (rather, crime against blacks) in rural areas -

Why do I need to provide proof they aren't reporting it on it, when they aren't (you're reasoning for backing up your claim).

Seems crime where blacks are the victims has FALLEN majorly in cities vice rural areas
Between 1993-2005, Crime in Urban areas where blacks were the victim has fallen from 86.7/1,000 to 37.3/1,000. In the same period, the rate in rural areas fell from 37.2/1,000 to 18.2/1,000

So not sure what data you want to see. There is crime in rural areas, in which blacks are the victim. While yes, the rate is higher in Urban areas, the rate has fallen much sharper than in rural areas - in which the rate has actually increase from 2001-2005.


http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bvvc.pdf

 

Plenty of people on the Left condemn the gun violence in Chicago and in Detroit.