Kaepernick Nike

Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AunBear89 said:

Oh, and clicking through their web site to see the list of Officers and Directors hardly makes you an expert on the organization.

Nice try, trumpkin. Nobody is buying your righteous flag waving.
I didn't say I was an expert, but I obviously knew more about them than you did. You knew absolutely nothing about them, and yet you made outlandish conclusions about their membership. Now, stop your leftist banner waving.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AunBear89 said:

Golden One said:

AunBear89 said:

You already posted their response. Pay attention.
I knew you would say that. Just goes to show that you know nothing about the National Association of Police Organization, Inc. and its membership. But then, I'm not surprised. You often post about subjects you know nothing about.

You might be interested to know that their Vice President at Large is black, as is their chaplain.
"I'm not racist; some of my friends are black."
You have friends??!! Wow, that's surprising.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

Golden One said:

Anarchistbear said:

See your cops and raise you cops

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4829342-National-Black-Police-Association-Letter-to-Nike.html#document/p1
I wonder what the position of the National White Police Association is. Oh, that's right, there is no such organization, and it would be politically incorrect for there to be one.


Their position is the one you posted. You can't afford to be this clueless.
It would help you if you read the previous posts before making clueless statements. The National Association of Police Organization is not an all-white group. In fact, two of its leaders are black. Sorry to have spoiled your narrative.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

Anarchistbear said:

Golden One said:

Anarchistbear said:

See your cops and raise you cops

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4829342-National-Black-Police-Association-Letter-to-Nike.html#document/p1
I wonder what the position of the National White Police Association is. Oh, that's right, there is no such organization, and it would be politically incorrect for there to be one.


Their position is the one you posted. You can't afford to be this clueless.
It would help you if you read the previous posts before making clueless statements. The National Association of Police Organization is not an all-white group. In fact, two of its leaders are black. Sorry to have spoiled your narrative.


Please, this is ridiculous. Why do you think there is an Association of Black Police Officers if there is already an Association of Police Officers? And why do they support Kaepernick? And despite the leaders you cite what would you guess the demographics of the Association you support is? And why do they not support Kaepernick?

Kaepernick's protests are all about race. Always have been. That doesn't make one side legitimate and the other politically correct so don't be posting some cop bulls$it and pretend it's the view of all cops-because I showed you it isn't. You guys are such snowflakes.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

Golden One said:

Anarchistbear said:

Golden One said:

Anarchistbear said:

See your cops and raise you cops

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4829342-National-Black-Police-Association-Letter-to-Nike.html#document/p1
I wonder what the position of the National White Police Association is. Oh, that's right, there is no such organization, and it would be politically incorrect for there to be one.


Their position is the one you posted. You can't afford to be this clueless.
It would help you if you read the previous posts before making clueless statements. The National Association of Police Organization is not an all-white group. In fact, two of its leaders are black. Sorry to have spoiled your narrative.


Please, this is ridiculous. Why do you think there is an Association of Black Police Officers if there is already an Association of Police Officers? And why do they support Kaepernick? And despite the leaders you cite what would you guess the demographics of the Association you support is? And why do they not support Kaepernick?

Kaepernick's protests are all about race. Always have been. That doesn't make one side legitimate and the other politically correct so don't be posting some cop bulls$it and pretend it's the view of all cops-because I showed you it isn't. You guys are such snowflakes.
And are you so naive to believe that the National Black Police Officer Association bull**** represents the view of all black cops? I showed you that it isn't. You libs are so shallow and blind.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"All black cops"is a straw man. Not every black cop may support Kaepernick and not every white cops may oppose him but when two associations-one black and the other predominantly white- because law enforcement is predominately white- come down on totally different sides of this issue it should be obvious even to you that this is about race not police so don't pretend that black police are against Kaepernick when their union says otherwise.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You still aren't listening.




Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

"All black cops"is a straw man. Not every black cop may support Kaepernick and not every white cops may oppose him but when two associations-one black and the other predominantly white- because law enforcement is predominately white- come down on totally different sides of this issue it should be obvious even to you that this is about race not police so don't pretend that black police are against Kaepernick when their union says otherwise.
All issues are about race to those who want to make everything about race to suit their political agenda.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This issue is all about race and policing and all race issues have political agendas but you only see one. How else do you explain how two groups in the same profession have diametrically opposed views of the same issue?
mikecohen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

This issue is all about race and policing and all race issues have political agendas but you only see one. How else do you explain how two groups in the same profession have diametrically opposed views of the same issue?
You guys keep trying being reasonable. What makes you think that Golden One et al. could in any way be amenable to such?
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.








Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
Not a single liberal has tried to claim that black people killing black people is "okay." Please find me one who does.

What we WILL say is that pointing out one thing does not have to distract from dialogue about another thing, like you're trying to do.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
Not a single liberal has tried to claim that black people killing black people is "okay." Please find me one who does.

What we WILL say is that pointing out one thing does not have to distract from dialogue about another thing, like you're trying to do.
You miss the point. I see no outcry about the black on black violence in Chicago from Kaepernick or any other "celebrity" or liberal. It seems that black lives only matter when a cop is involved and not when one black kills another black. I happen to believe that ALL black lives matter. When a black kid kills another black, that's still a black life that has been lost, and it's tragic. That's a much bigger problem than an infrequent killing by a cop, yet you and others seem to want to ignore it.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
Not a single liberal has tried to claim that black people killing black people is "okay." Please find me one who does.

What we WILL say is that pointing out one thing does not have to distract from dialogue about another thing, like you're trying to do.
You miss the point. I see no outcry about the black on black violence in Chicago from Kaepernick or any other "celebrity" or liberal. It seems that black lives only matter when a cop is involved and not when one black kills another black. I happen to believe that ALL black lives matter. When a black kid kills another black, that's still a black life that has been lost, and it's tragic. That's a much bigger problem than an infrequent killing by a cop, yet you and others seem to want to ignore it.
https://www.theroot.com/why-we-never-talk-about-black-on-black-crime-an-answer-1819092337

Quote:

The reality is, in neighborhoods and cities across America, there are countless organizations, activists and movements dedicated to curbing violence in black communities. The number of "Stop the Violence" marches dwarfs the demonstrations against police brutality. Unity rallies and peace picnics happen every day. Scared Straight programs for at-risk youths, gang counseling, neighborhood watches, intervention specialists, youth counselors, and too many other people and groups to name all lead the charge against crime and violence.

But those efforts don't make the evening news because they aren't as salacious as people blocking traffic and protesting; nor do they serve the preconceived white confirmation bias. Besides, there's no way white people would know about this unless they stopped deflecting with trite questions and instead actually went into a minority neighborhood to selflessly join the effort to address the problems plaguing ...
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The problem with you liberals on here: you make a huge and probably asinine assumption that every Cal grad on here is willing to process new information and believes in objective truth.

Quote:

According to the FBI's uniform crime-reporting data for 2016, 90.1 percent of black victims of homicide were killed by other blacks, while 83.5 percent of whites were killed by other whites. While no life is inconsequential, the statistical evidence shows thatjust as for blacks when it comes to black-on-black crimewhites are mostly victimized by other whites, with the vast majority of white murders committed by whites. This is because most victims of crime personally know their assailants. And while this is a truth across racial boundaries, no one ever talks about "white-on-white crime."

Furthermore, the Bureau of Justice Statistics' arrest data analysis tool shows that less than 1 percent of blacks overall (about 2 percent of black men) commit a violent crime in any given year. This means, factoring in interracial violent offenses, 99 percent of black men do not commit black-on-black crime.
AunBear89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
Not a single liberal has tried to claim that black people killing black people is "okay." Please find me one who does.

What we WILL say is that pointing out one thing does not have to distract from dialogue about another thing, like you're trying to do.
You miss the point. I see no outcry about the black on black violence in Chicago from Kaepernick or any other "celebrity" or liberal. It seems that black lives only matter when a cop is involved and not when one black kills another black. I happen to believe that ALL black lives matter. When a black kid kills another black, that's still a black life that has been lost, and it's tragic. That's a much bigger problem than an infrequent killing by a cop, yet you and others seem to want to ignore it.
Are you willfully ignorant or do you come by it naturally? You don't see the outcry because the sources you choose for information do not show them to you. Nobody does, really. But the outcry is there - see the linked Root article elsewhere in this thread.

You gripe a lot about libs ignoring facts and going with emotion, but really that's all we have ever seen from you and many of your fellow cons. But I'm guessing all these sources of information that contradict your closely held beliefs are just "fake news"...
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Irony
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cause it is all they have ,they say the same things over and over ... it's mind games and have we seen this before yep
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AunBear89 said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
Not a single liberal has tried to claim that black people killing black people is "okay." Please find me one who does.

What we WILL say is that pointing out one thing does not have to distract from dialogue about another thing, like you're trying to do.
You miss the point. I see no outcry about the black on black violence in Chicago from Kaepernick or any other "celebrity" or liberal. It seems that black lives only matter when a cop is involved and not when one black kills another black. I happen to believe that ALL black lives matter. When a black kid kills another black, that's still a black life that has been lost, and it's tragic. That's a much bigger problem than an infrequent killing by a cop, yet you and others seem to want to ignore it.
Are you willfully ignorant or do you come by it naturally? You don't see the outcry because the sources you choose for information do not show them to you. Nobody does, really. But the outcry is there - see the linked Root article elsewhere in this thread.

You gripe a lot about libs ignoring facts and going with emotion, but really that's all we have ever seen from you and many of your fellow cons. But I'm guessing all these sources of information that contradict your closely held beliefs are just "fake news"...
LOL! Your posts are increasingly hilarious and full of nonsense. You should re-read them after you write them; you'd probably have a good laugh also!
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AunBear89 said:

Irony
You would know, since you epitomize the word.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
going4roses said:

Cause it is all they have ,they say the same things over and over ... it's mind games and have we seen this before yep
Hard to deal with the truth, isn't it.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AunBear89 said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

sycasey said:

Golden One said:

You mean like the hypocrisy in your crowd which doesn't seem to be bothered when over a hundred black people are killed each month in Chicago by other blacks but goes nuts when one cop shoots a black person?
Yeah, you go ahead and preach to me about hypocrisy!
Oh, good. "Chicago."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#d10f9881fad8

Quote:

Lie #6: Chicago has tight gun restrictions and mass gun violence. Ergo, gun laws don't work.

Chicago's seemingly intractable problem with gun violence is one of America's fondest fascinations. It's also a myth. Chicago has more gun murders than other large cities like New York and Los Angeles, thanks mostly to its long, unsecured border with North Alabamastan (sometimes called Indiana). However, Chicago's murder rate still lags far behind the nation's leaders, many of which are in red states with loose gun restrictions.

America's capital of gun violence is in deep-red Louisiana. New Orleans suffers from four times the rate of gun murders as Chicago. Such terrifying urban hellscapes as Kansas City, Memphis and Atlanta all rack up much higher rates of gun violence than Chicago. Expand the inquiry beyond crime, to include accidental gun deaths and suicide, and Chicago simply recedes from the frame. The obvious conclusion also happens to be an empirical fact: states with high levels of gun ownership have higher levels of gun death.

With its supposedly restrictive gun regulations, why should Chicago even show up on the list? Only through a determination to avoid the obvious can one struggle with this question.

A Chicagoan can walk across a street into Indiana and purchase firearms from an unlicensed seller with no tracking of that transaction. That person can then walk back across the street into Chicago and commit a crime. This is a common practice. Most of the guns used in a crime in Chicago are originally purchased in Indiana or Mississippi. And of course, Indiana's rate of gun deaths is roughly a third higher than in Illinois.

In a strictly technical sense, most of those untracked transactions are illegal. However, our gun laws have been crafted to make enforcement virtually impossible, a fine introduction to the next lie.
Why do conservative commentators seem to have such a fascination with murder and gun violence statistics in Chicago? It couldn't possibly be because their chief political opponent for eight years was a black guy from Chicago.
Nice try, but you can't deny the murder statistics of Chicago or the lack of liberal criticism of black on black violence. Apparently, blacks killing hundreds of blacks in one city each year is OK, but one cop (white or black) killing a black anywhere in the country is cause for uproar and violence. Makes a lot of sense.
Not a single liberal has tried to claim that black people killing black people is "okay." Please find me one who does.

What we WILL say is that pointing out one thing does not have to distract from dialogue about another thing, like you're trying to do.
You miss the point. I see no outcry about the black on black violence in Chicago from Kaepernick or any other "celebrity" or liberal. It seems that black lives only matter when a cop is involved and not when one black kills another black. I happen to believe that ALL black lives matter. When a black kid kills another black, that's still a black life that has been lost, and it's tragic. That's a much bigger problem than an infrequent killing by a cop, yet you and others seem to want to ignore it.
Are you willfully ignorant or do you come by it naturally? You don't see the outcry because the sources you choose for information do not show them to you. Nobody does, really. But the outcry is there - see the linked Root article elsewhere in this thread.

You gripe a lot about libs ignoring facts and going with emotion, but really that's all we have ever seen from you and many of your fellow cons. But I'm guessing all these sources of information that contradict your closely held beliefs are just "fake news"...
Please give me some examples where Kaepernick has protested against black on black violence in Chicago, the murder capital of the U.S. I know you won't, because none exist. Not even MSNBC or CNN have been able to find any. Sad, isn't it, Auny.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

The problem with you liberals on here: you make a huge and probably asinine assumption that every Cal grad on here is willing to process new information and believes in objective truth.


Very true. Most libs would rather protest and preach talking points rather than process new information and deal with objective truth. Sad.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
But that is the rub none of it is true
AunBear89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Keep moving those goalposts, onenote. That's what you cons are best at. When confronted with evidence you don't like you shout "Fake news!" or you change your point. So now it is specifically Kap and black on black crime - not the rest of us "libs"?

At our next meeting in our super-secret clubhouse, I'll let the other libs know that we need to run our protests by Golden Onenote for approval before we start to protest any injustice. "Hey, guys, Onenote sez if we gonna protest one injustice we gotta protest them all!"
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Wing Nut Playbook

A) Change the topic, divert attention...move the goal posts
B) Lie, make shtt up
C) Attack, attack, ATTACK
D) Repeat, rinse
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AunBear89 said:

Keep moving those goalposts, onenote. That's what you cons are best at. When confronted with evidence you don't like you shout "Fake news!" or you change your point. So now it is specifically Kap and black on black crime - not the rest of us "libs"?

At our next meeting in our super-secret clubhouse, I'll let the other libs know that we need to run our protests by Golden Onenote for approval before we start to protest any injustice. "Hey, guys, Onenote sez if we gonna protest one injustice we gotta protest them all!"
I hope your posts make sense to you when you're sober and not hallucinating.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

The Wing Nut Playbook

A) Change the topic, divert attention...move the goal posts
B) Lie, make shtt up
C) Attack, attack, ATTACK
D) Repeat, rinse
You've got the liberal game plan down pat! Well done!
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
going4roses said:

But that is the rub none of it is true
Doubt if you'd recognize "truth" if it slapped you in the face.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

The Wing Nut Playbook

A) Change the topic, divert attention...move the goal posts
B) Lie, make shtt up
C) Attack, attack, ATTACK
D) Repeat, rinse
Don't forget:

E) Constant personal insults
AunBear89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Another Bear said:

The Wing Nut Playbook

A) Change the topic, divert attention...move the goal posts
B) Lie, make shtt up
C) Attack, attack, ATTACK
D) Repeat, rinse
Don't forget:

E) Constant personal insults
F) When called on your bullshyte, scream the following: "I know you are but what am I?" OR "I am rubber, you are glue; bounces off me and sticks to you!" These are super effective at shutting down conversations and winning!
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

The problem with you liberals on here: you make a huge and probably asinine assumption that every Cal grad on here is willing to process new information and believes in objective truth.
The problem with you people; you make a huge and probably asinine assumption that everybody on here is a Cal grad.
Page 3 of 4
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.