White guilt as a political tool seems counter-intuitive to me.
Awwwww, Podargus, PLEASE don't be
that guy.
Again, blacks are convicted more easily and sentenced longer. I'm not sure what part of that suggests "white guilt", but as someone who used to work in the criminal justice system, I saw zero evidence of white guilt. I remember having to sell sentences to black people that white people recently convicted of the exact same crime got probation for as though it was a good deal. I was quite sure we, as a site, had settled on the undeniable fact that blacks are routinely shafted in the U.S. criminal justice system.
I'm asking you what EVIDENCE there is that more scrutiny is applied when the victim is white - a question you have yet to answer.
I've been doing some reading on the Dallas case. The prosecutor, the city, the state of Texas, are making lots of efforts to argue that it wasn't a hate crime. I've seen, and I'm sure you have, written statements of what he said to police during the standoff. I've seen his social media postings. This question is purely seeking your opinion. Why would Obama (you know that guy who supports BLM?) make a public statement declaring it a hate crime?
What is his motivation, do you think? Considering that the prosecuting DA has made declararions that she won't be pursuing it as a hate crime.
Obama is on his way out, little more than a figurehead at this point. He was using the term "hate crime" in a figurative manner, and I don't necessarily disagree. But, when it comes to the letter of the law, securing a hate crime is, again, difficult... Especially in a state like Texas. You see, Texas kind of bites itself in the ass by making hate crimes especially difficult to prosecute. Mostly, they're protecting a white person's right to be a hood-wearing bigot. But, the tables occasionally turn, and you have to be consistent.
Not all of the officers killed were white. That makes the prosecutor's job exceedingly difficult. And, the defendant is dead, thus he has lost his right to... everything. The DA can't really pursue
anything, given that fact. But, if she's not calling it a hate crime, it's only because she knows she'd have a hard time proving it in court.
Good point. Those hate crimes will probably never be processed by the courts. We've seen one young guy who was shot in the neck, but nobody apparently even saw the shooter. The people we see on video being attacked in their cars probably have no idea who got them either.
Now you're just being dramatic. Yes, the police have to investigate and find the individual responsible. In our new world of video everywhere, that's hardly an impossibility. But, yeah, they do have to find the person.
I just don't accept that as true. Sorry. The political climate over there, which is reported by the dominant left media is all about white guilt now. The mindset is almost as bad as racism. It makes sense to me (from my obvioous position as a foreigner, I admit) that the judicial system is being cautious in this climate.
You don't need to apologize. I know young earthers. I've met denial that eclipses yours.
Let me tell you about capitalism. It knows no color, no guilt. In the context of the media, it only knows ratings. And drama = ratings. It's why true crime does so well, as it happens. It gives the market what the market wants. And the market wants these police shootings. Look at all the discussion it's whipped up on this site alone! I can't easily run metrics here, but in my experience, police shootings have generated more posts than any other politicized topic. That translates into dollars for networks.
You know what doesn't? Black kids that go missing. That was a
running joke on this site for a great many years. The way
black suspects of crime are treated compared to white suspects. Intentionally or not, the media perpetuates the ambiguous boogeyman that is the black male.
When the media depicts "poor people",
they display black people with weighty disproportion. And, with FOX's undisputed reign in the news world, it is
without a ton of merit that one argues the mainstream media has a pronounced liberal bias anymore. That is a relic of the past. In fact,
one university study has theorized that the media creates and/or exacerbates racial bias.
This is kinda getting to my point. A member of a white supremacy group, is going to be charged for a hate crime against black people. A member of the Black Panthers, or other "Black Power" group, not neccessarily so. There needs to be more evidence.
Yes, there needs to be evidence. That is how any civilized justice system works. It is not court bias that white supremacists tend to make it easier to convict them.
Association with a hate group has never been considered enough in and of itself, anywhere. Here in Washington, we recently had
a white supremacist with brilliant and undeniable tattoo work kill three people and maim a fourth. He's not being charged with a hate crime, because it probably wasn't a hate crime.
In fact,
you can assault some Muslims outside of a mosque while yelling that they're all terrorists, and you still don't get charged with a hate crime if hate didn't motivate the attack. And in 2009, a few cops got charged with
covering up a hate crime in Pennsylvania. That chief actually went to prison.
But, overall, hate crimes are difficult to prove and
rarely prosecuted. This angers all races (and other protected classes), which is one of the reasons I don't support hate crime legislation. It has the potential to be applied inconsistently, or downright insufficiently, which maybe spurs more resentment than the crimes themselves.