I have to believe that a lot of it is gang and drug related and whether the person was white or black they'd be gunning them down for drug $$....but the violence is shocking in some of these communities....Over by the Citrus Bowl here in Orlando, its a freaking bad!.....even in broad daylight. This is why im for and also against gun control.....Cant believe so many of these young punks have guns and can wreck havoc....but damn, if i had to walk down that part of town at midnight, i'd want to be packing for protection!.
gun control would only make them stronger...do you think the guns they carry were bought at the gun store or from the back of a trunk?
Look at the brutality of those "x-box" murders in Deltona. With baseball bats! Even without guns they can be savage killers..... http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...092106,0,2267484.story?coll=sfla-news-florida
Do you really want to make that bet? I'm aware of research that shows blacks are more criminal across all socioeconomic classes. The rest of your post simply reminds us that whites, too, can be and have been violent - as if anyone would have denied it. The point is, holding environments as constant as can be done, blacks demonstrate more violence and more criminality. Personally, I've come to be quite convinced the basis for the difference is largely genetic. It's not an easy concept to wrap your head around and it did take me a couple of years of mulling over the same studies, but eventually I felt compelled to accept the evidence put to me. Genetic arguments are difficult to take to because they're just so seemingly...'final'. Environmental explanations are popular because they never cease to offer hope. Sadly, while environments do count, I can't see the heriditary gap every being really bridged. You can dismiss me as a racist crank if you like, if that makes you feel better. I really don't have the stamina to debate this issue. (It just gets too tiring to be called a racist and a bigot and a klansman an extremist etc etc every second post.) Just know that there are some very intelligent people out there making precisely the arguments I've only really touched on above and supporting them with detailed evidence (of a quality and relevance that environmentalist arguments never seem to approach). If you're really interested, take your case up with them. If you're not, then dismiss me as a racist and be done.
Speaking of correlations, there is strong evidence that white supremacists tend to be undereducated and that illiteracy is a predictor of race hate. In you and your discredited buddy, we have a textbook example, as your posts are filled with grammatical and spelling errors. Now, inasmuch as literacy is positively correlated with intelligence, we can assume that your bigotry is innate, right? By your argument? In the same way that violence is innate to blacks? Isn't that correct? By your own argument? You post in what you seem to believe is an academic manner, but your lack of critical thinking can't be disguised. But then, as a 19 year-old, you can be forgiven for believing that you know it all. I was a little like you when I was your age, but I never bought into the blame game. I'm done with your partner in hate-crime, the Hitler-worshipper, and I'm almost done with you. However, I do want to point out that I have been vocal here on ET in my denunciation of politically correct posturing and the academic chill that developed out of the intellectual movements of the late 1980s. I was in University at that time and it turned my stomach to realize that I could not speak out for fear of being hounded by the PC police. I am a determinist. It's just that I don't fall into the traps one can wander into if one takes a soft-minded approach to determinist theory, nor do I mistake statistics for a viable framework for social interaction. It is no coincidence that those who espouse eugenics attempt to build their monstrous edifice on the foundations of a valid science, namely genetics. Lastly, it's funny to think that Australia could produce you and a man of the calibre of Robert Hughes. No accounting for genes, huh? After all, don't most of you share a common ancestry?
No. Incorrect. Because you would have to first show that I hate blacks. Or that I am a white supremacist. You have not shown this. Merely assumed it. By your argument you would have to demonstrate this before we could even begin to examine the extent of my grammatical or spelling errors. What I "seem to believe is an academic manner". Christ, can you believe this kid? Nikkypoo, I simply wish to clearly communicate my ideas. If I've failed in that, so be it. Point it out. Laugh if you like. But why insist it's a 'cover' for something? Idiocy like this really makes me question your sanity. Nik, your rank stupidity doesn't particularly bother me. But I truly wonder how you can be content with it. What possible purpose does making up ridiculous lies about my age serve? Are you really that desperate? I mean, good Lord, even if I was 19 (and believe you me, I very much wish I was), that would still not materially affect the fact that you have completely avoided engaging any of the arguments I have made.
So what made you change sides? Why am I yet to hear one word of this 'viable framework'? If it could be substituted for my complacent statistics-based racism, why wouldn't you alert me to it? What is so monstrous about wishing to limit the procreation of the lowest classes, especially if such limiting is achieved by ceasing to subsidize it? One doesn't even require a genetic reason for advocating such a policy; the simple observation that children have a tendency to turn out like their parents is sufficient. The ultimate effect of a smaller underclass is eugenic. Simple. You need to read up on bell curves. Then maybe you think about intelligently engaging me. PS Let me know when you're done editing your posts.
Yes, Dan. Okay. With regard to your age, another member PM'd me and told me this. Of course I have no way of knowing whether you are in fact under 20, but it does explain your posts to some extent. I've often wondered what goes through the head of someone who knows, for certain, that he will die within the next few minutes or hours, but is capable of calm reflection in the time that remains. At least I have the solace of knowing that my thoughts would be peaceful and sentimental, while yours would be filled with hate and blame. A last comment... believe me, it was a total shock to me to see how many people spoke out in support of Pabst in his 'thread of shame'. I am not fool enough to believe that if I said I was leaving ET, anyone would post asking me not to go. Clearly, your racist views have a lot of support here on ET. Either that or these are people that don't wander into Chit Chat very often and thus aren't exposed to them. In the end, there are a lot of people who find comfort in your brand of delusion - that is, the delusion that statistics provide a basis for a theory of social interaction.