Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Racism Alive and Well in USA

Yeah fair enough on the cheap shots but what do you expect when you patronise me like that? I, like most people, don't particularly enjoy being patronised so I was merely giving as good as I got.
 
Doctor Carrot said:
Yeah fair enough on the cheap shots but what do you expect when you patronise me like that? I, like most people, don't particularly enjoy being patronised so I was merely giving as good as I got.
Click to expand...

ok, next time you respond heatedly to something nobody said, I will just ignore it rather than patronize you by pointing it out.
 
I'm guessing you missed the bit about kids growing up in toxic environments then? Christ you even said yourself 'I feel sorry for her kids and her kids don't stand a chance.' Or the bit where I said 'whenever something like this happens there's a tendency to jump to mental illness?' Which there is and which there has been in this case (not just on Urban).
 
Awesome Wells said:
I haven't commented on the stop filming my kids comment; on that I agree with you, it's a cheap and crass thing to say. As are racial slurs. I'm suggesting she's a nice person, but it seems evident she had a lot of issues.bipolar or not, she is clearly damaged. I don't find her to be someone to fear, like doom racists, or even hatred. That's a waste of energy, I think she's pitiful.

If someone was on the phone to their husband to have him come and beat the snot of me I'd worry about that more than her attitude toward my ethnicity. Wouldn't you? I don't think she wants him dead Bette he's black, I think she wants him dead because of what she thinks he's done to her kids. She just also this he's a POS because he's black.

Its not about being forced to drive away, is about what's the most pragmatic course of action. Obviously he should be able to sit in his car and mind his business the same as her, but right now he's being threatens and assaulted verbally. Him not doing so isn't what I mean by provocation; him filming and interacting with a damaged aggressive and threatening woman is.

She is obviously highly agitated and aggressive, she could and should have expressed herself better. Knowing this what is he doing by further interacting with her and filming her? Do you think she's going to wake up to herself and apologise or continue down the path toward the dark side of the force?
Click to expand...

Wise words. Victims of racism - whatever you do don't stand up for yourselves - that might provoke a reaction.

I'm finding it very hard to square your bizarre attempts to defame a victim of racial abuse on this thread with your 'aaaaggghhh the Nazis are coming' posts relating to UKIP.
 
Awesome Wells said:
In cases like that I agree entirely, just not here.

And some folk just don't like having one stuck in their face, even in a public space.

He could have called the cops. I can't assume they would have been racist just because.
Click to expand...
He should have called the cops but not recorded any evidence about the racist abuse because the racist might not have liked it?
 
FridgeMagnet said:
He should have called the cops but not recorded any evidence about the racist abuse because the racist might not have liked it?
Click to expand...
It's the upload to the Supreme Court of Youtube that I have a problem with. Had he filmed it to show to the cops then i would have no problem; that's providing evidence with which i have no issue.
 
Awesome Wells said:
It's the upload to the Supreme Court of Youtube that I have a problem with. Had he filmed it to show to the cops then i would have no problem; that's providing evidence with which i have no issue.
Click to expand...

Make your fucking mind up - earIier on your were saying he shouIdn't have recorded it at aII because it might have provoked vioIence against him.

I'd stop digging if I were you.
 
Awesome Wells said:
It's the upload to the Supreme Court of Youtube that I have a problem with. Had he filmed it to show to the cops then i would have no problem; that's providing evidence with which i have no issue.
Click to expand...
You don't think social issues should be highlighted? That this is strictly a police issue and no one else's?
 
I'm sure Wells also thinks that if someone from UKIP says something racist that shouldn't be put on youtube either - if it's racial abuse it should be sent to the police to be dealt with. So he is at least consistent.
 
Awesome Wells said:
It's the upload to the Supreme Court of Youtube that I have a problem with. Had he filmed it to show to the cops then i would have no problem; that's providing evidence with which i have no issue.
Click to expand...
At what point is somebody's behaviour allowable to post on YouTube? Should he have not told any of his friends about it either perhaps?
 
Awesome Wells said:
I haven't commented on the stop filming my kids comment; on that I agree with you, it's a cheap and crass thing to say. As are racial slurs. I'm suggesting she's a nice person, but it seems evident she had a lot of issues.bipolar or not, she is clearly damaged. I don't find her to be someone to fear, like doom racists, or even hatred. That's a waste of energy, I think she's pitiful.

If someone was on the phone to their husband to have him come and beat the snot of me I'd worry about that more than her attitude toward my ethnicity. Wouldn't you? I don't think she wants him dead Bette he's black, I think she wants him dead because of what she thinks he's done to her kids. She just also this he's a POS because he's black.

Its not about being forced to drive away, is about what's the most pragmatic course of action. Obviously he should be able to sit in his car and mind his business the same as her, but right now he's being threatens and assaulted verbally. Him not doing so isn't what I mean by provocation; him filming and interacting with a damaged aggressive and threatening woman is.

She is obviously highly agitated and aggressive, she could and should have expressed herself better. Knowing this what is he doing by further interacting with her and filming her? Do you think she's going to wake up to herself and apologise or continue down the path toward the dark side of the force?
Click to expand...

The notion that she is 'damaged' and has 'issues' is just plain cant, in the same way that her response is a rational one based on what 'she thinks he's done to her kids'. All she ever claimed to begin was that he 'frightened them', though they look oddly unperturbed. However the fact that she is entirely indifferent to the effect she might have on them with her behavior gives lie to the notion that their welfare is anyway central to her motivation. She's venting. She gets off on it. Ultimately she's a bully.
Happily her victim, instead of scuttling away, was confident enough to call her bluff. It's that that really enraged her.
 
Joe Reilly said:
The notion that she is 'damaged' and has 'issues' is just plain cant, in the same way that her response is a rational one based on what 'she thinks he's done to her kids'. All she ever claimed to begin was that he 'frightened them', though they look oddly unperturbed. However the fact that she is entirely indifferent to the effect she might have on them with her behavior gives lie to the notion that their welfare is anyway central to her motivation. She's venting. She gets off on it. Ultimately she's a bully.
Happily her victim, instead of scuttling away, was confident enough to call her bluff. It's that that really enraged her.
Click to expand...
Which would suggest to me some sort of familiarity or expectation based on previous confrontations of this sort. I seriously doubt this was the first time, which would further undermine the kids welfare approach.
 
Doctor Carrot said:
I'm guessing you missed the bit about kids growing up in toxic environments then? Christ you even said yourself 'I feel sorry for her kids and her kids don't stand a chance.' Or the bit where I said 'whenever something like this happens there's a tendency to jump to mental illness?' Which there is and which there has been in this case (not just on Urban).
Click to expand...


I'm not sure what you mean by the first bit about toxic environments, and I'm totally uninterested in having a conversation about the second bit (again). That conversation is invariably overly-simplistic and goes nowhere, here or elsewhere.
 
Benning said that after his encounter with the woman, he hesitated to post the video online. But after realizing his children may one day end up in the same schools as the children in the video, he wanted to show that any hatred or prejudice the woman's children may end up harboring against minorities stems from the direct influence of their mother.

"It wasn't shocking to me," Benning added. "I've dealt with this all throughout life... But it was always more passing by, 'Oh you nigger' in the car driving by. It was never confrontational as how she displayed it, especially in front of her kids."
Click to expand...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/06/narvell-benning_n_5459899.html?ir=Black+Voices
 
FridgeMagnet said:
At what point is somebody's behaviour allowable to post on YouTube? Should he have not told any of his friends about it either perhaps?
Click to expand...

Telling his friends isn't the same thing at all. Putting something on youtube immortalises it with a permanent visual record for the entire world to see.

It's not a question of what's allowable since clearly this is allowable. I simply find it troubling for reasons I've articulated.
 
Awesome Wells said:
Telling his friends isn't the same thing at all. Putting something on youtube immortalises it with a permanent visual record for the entire world to see.
Click to expand...

Good. Maybe the next racist prick wiII think twice before abusing peopIe.

Awesome Wells said:
It's not a question of what's allowable since clearly this is allowable. I simply find it troubling for reasons I've articulated.
Click to expand...

Yes - what's perfectIy cIear here is that you find the reaction to the racist abuse more troubIing than the racist abuse (the victim of which reaIIy shouId have turned the other cheek - don't Iike racist abuse? caII the (racist) cops or suck it up).
 
Joe Reilly said:
The notion that she is 'damaged' and has 'issues' is just plain cant, in the same way that her response is a rational one based on what 'she thinks he's done to her kids'. All she ever claimed to begin was that he 'frightened them', though they look oddly unperturbed. However the fact that she is entirely indifferent to the effect she might have on them with her behavior gives lie to the notion that their welfare is anyway central to her motivation. She's venting. She gets off on it. Ultimately she's a bully.
Happily her victim, instead of scuttling away, was confident enough to call her bluff. It's that that really enraged her.
Click to expand...
I don't think going on a racist bender is anything other than the action of someone with issues. It's not just the racism either. Clearly she's venting. Because she's got issues.
 
Awesome Wells said:
Telling his friends isn't the same thing at all. Putting something on youtube immortalises it with a permanent visual record for the entire world to see.

It's not a question of what's allowable since clearly this is allowable. I simply find it troubling for reasons I've articulated.
Click to expand...
Even with the YouTube evidence there has been no police action. If he had just contacted the police nothing would have happened - he would quite possibly have been charged himself.
 
Awesome Wells said:
It's the upload to the Supreme Court of Youtube that I have a problem with. Had he filmed it to show to the cops then i would have no problem; that's providing evidence with which i have no issue.
Click to expand...
It's the US. Unless you're on the campus of certain universities you can call people what you like in a public place, however offensive or racist. Even those universities with speech codes have been taken to court on the basis that they violate the first amendment. What exactly would he be calling the police about?
 
FridgeMagnet said:
Even with the YouTube evidence there has been no police action. If he had just contacted the police nothing would have happened - he would quite possibly have been charged himself.
Click to expand...
That is a separate issue and, if that were to have been the case, it would be just as reprehensible as her bejhaviour since she has clearly broken the law.
 
Awesome Wells said:
That is a separate issue and, if that were to have been the case, it would be just as reprehensible as her bejhaviour since she has clearly broken the law.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't a separate issue at all. How could it possibly be a separate issue? You were the one saying he should have called the police and not done anything else.
 
maomao said:
It's the US. Unless you're on the campus of certain universities you can call people what you like in a public place, however offensive or racist. Even those universities with speech codes have been taken to court on the basis that they violate the first amendment. What exactly would he be calling the police about?
Click to expand...

freedom of speech is not freedom to verbally harrass, use hate speech, and threaten people, and is not interpreted that way by the law. he definitely could have called the police/ pressed charges
 
maomao said:
It's the US. Unless you're on the campus of certain universities you can call people what you like in a public place, however offensive or racist. Even those universities with speech codes have been taken to court on the basis that they violate the first amendment. What exactly would he be calling the police about?
Click to expand...
According to the Young Turks channel (which i watch) and their piece on this, her barrage of abuse constitutes assault and a threat to have him attacked is terrorism!

I don't know if that's true since I'm not a US lawyer, but at the very least threatening to have someone kick your ass I'm sure isn't legal.

Is that parking lot a public place, or the property of the shop? If someone were to have an accident from, say a loose paving slab, in that parking lot who would be liable for damages?
 
Awesome Wells said:
According to the Young Turks channel (which i watch) and their piece on this, her barrage of abuse constitutes assault and a threat to have him attacked is terrorism!

I don't know if that's true since I'm not a US lawyer, but at the very least threatening to have someone kick your ass I'm sure isn't legal.

Is that parking lot a public place, or the property of the shop? If someone were to have an accident from, say a loose paving slab, in that parking lot who would be liable for damages?
Click to expand...
Read what the police say in the link Johnny posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PTK
  • Poll
Do You Agree that the USA should Reduce its Military Expenditure and Close its Overseas Bases?
2 3
Replies
82
Views
3K
likesfish
likesfish
Yuwipi Woman
Political violence in the USA
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
243
Views
16K
two sheds
two sheds
hash tag
Snake's alive
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
tonysingh
tonysingh
Joe Chi Min
Well then, this is it.
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
likesfish
likesfish
Pickman's model
fascist republican state legislators (usa)
Replies
0
Views
341
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Back
Top Bottom