OT: Could 2020 just end now!!!!!!

Everything Wyoming Cowboy and Mountain West football!
marcuswyo
A Real Cowboy
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:53 am

The bigger issue in my mind is that the government can’t trample on individual rights and use excessive force. It was not that long ago a UW student was tased and broke his neck on a street curb in Laramie. No weapon, & not attacking anyone. A Wyoming born football player also had a neck injury. I witnessed a female student puking in the stands and put into a choke hold during my time in Laramie. Why? This country needs to have a better process to hire cops and they need to have an appropriate shelf life for their position. ( ie you can’t be a patrol cop for life).

The Casper Police chief seems to get it BTW. Literally calling it murder the incident that happened in Minnesota.
marcuswyo
A Real Cowboy
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:53 am

https://trib.com/news/local/casper/casp ... e4b84.html

Here is the article, I thought he broke his neck that was incorrect.

Also the guy who stole the police horse was pretty funny if it wasn’t the current context of the situation.
User avatar
Wyokie
WyoNation Moderator
Posts: 5895
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 5:40 pm
Location: Oklahoma City but from Casper, WY

A lot of people are starting to think the looters were organized which I agree with.

BTW, if any of you value your sanity....don't stay on Twitter for more than 5-10 minutes at a time. Holy sweet Jesus that's a nuclear level cesspool!!!!!!!!!! Only reason I even go on is to follow my favorite porn stars! LOL
I want CHAMPIONSHIPS not chicken Sh#t! And we're getting chicken Sh#t!!!!!!!!!!!
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

The conflicting autopsies might be a big deal
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

They deleted it but Fairfax Dem organization tweeted: "Riots are an integral part of this country's march towards progress."

Seems like an endorsement. Google it. You can find lots of documentation that they posted it.
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
User avatar
Wyo2dal
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 7350
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: Dome of Doom

Protests are fine and in a lot of cases usher in change for the better. Unfortunately the riot and looting side is nothing more than a portion of people that simply are looking for quick money and an easy score.

They instigate the late night protesting crowds and turn them into a distraction for their own personal gain or vengeance.

Sad state of affairs we’re in right now.
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
User avatar
Asmodeanreborn
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 6650
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:16 pm

ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:04 am
Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
Which states are you thinking of in this case? Most states are now semi-open when it comes to being outside, and the protest guidelines have been to largely stay 6 feet apart (which obviously is not adhered to). My friend above who takes photographs of the Seattle ones has a bunch of pictures showing people actually staying apart, though, but that obviously fails as soon as the morons arrive.

I think a LOT of these people will end up getting sick in a couple of weeks, though. This is like the perfect vector for virus spread - people tightly together shouting things loudly without masks, making spittle and crap fly long distances.

One of Oklahoma State's top recruits warned people he just got sick, and he had participated in protests in Tulsa (in other words, he already carried the virus there, but had no symptoms, and he wants to warn other people he interacted with that he's unintentionally subjected them to the virus).
Expat_Poke
Ranch Hand
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:58 pm
Location: Under the evening shadow of the Bighorns

WestWYOPoke wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:54 pm

First off, the one incident comment was brought up because you literally said "To take one incident and make it indicative of the nation at large is questionable, at best."

To the second part of your comment, no, not all white people are racist, but yes this absolutely is a racist nation, has been basically since it was founded. Want proof, turn on the tv.
Racist nation? I turn on the TV and I see a racial mix of people engaging in discussion about a racial mix of people that get paid lots of money playing sports. I see Americans of Italian, German, Puerto Rican, and African decent hi-fiving and congratulating each other. I see couples who constitute a plethora of skin pigmentation looking to buy homes in nice neighborhoods. I see TV shows with a mix of racial characters living their lives and friendship.

Don't buy into the 1619 agenda. Has the U.S. struggled with race, yes, but few other countries have had the racial mixture to the degree the United States has in its citizens from 1790 til now. Oh sure you had European and Asian based empires whose subjects where diverse. Those are subjects and governing subjects is different than the governing of citizens. The U.S. has been faced with navigating how to have a unified nation with citizens of multiple races. That navigation hasn't been perfect, but the founding principles found in the Declaration of Independence and the idea of equality under the law has enabled the U.S. to continually improve (with its ups and downs) from the imperfect pre-existing condition prior to its founding to a more egalitarian and just nation. The founding idea of the DOI is not one race was created above others, no the idea written was All Men are created equal. Yeah the Founders weren't perfect saints, they all had some flaws some dealing with racial prejudices. Yet a good many recognized that and worked towards changing their attitudes and behaviors to get more in line with the principles they put forth in those founding documents. George Washington for instance knew he wasn't fully living up to the ideals of the Revolution, and seeing his growth in his ideas of how to address slavery and its eventual abolition is in my opinion a good example of self reflection and change. The principles of the Nation as founded are not racist but rather egalitarian and I see people wanting to move from an imperfect, unjust world into a more egalitarian more just world in spite of and against some of their prejudices.

Some of my thoughts about the current situation
We live in an imperfect world with a bunch of imperfect people and some of those people are more imperfect than others. I will call these sorts of people jerks. Some of those jerks are going to find their way into the police force. They may be jerks about religion, race, gender, or 17 on a Wyoming license plate. No matter how good your hiring process is, some are going to make it because the duties and task of law enforcement are enticing to these sorts of jerks. Say as a police agency you make 100 hires, is it hard to think 1, 2, maybe even 5 of those hires are jerks slipping through the cracks? To expect the police to never hire jerks is unrealistic. With that written, this is why it is especially important that when it becomes apparent you hired a jerk, it needs to be addressed pronto. Enough of this Union garbage of defending bad cops, sure let them have their time to defend against false accusations. As soon as it is clear those accusations aren't false, they need to be dealt with. Wanting to hold bad cops accountable doesn't make me unsupportive of law enforcement, rather supporting bad cops torpedoes the good ones, it sullies the reputation of the law enforcement agencies, and makes it far more difficult to police the community.

And before anyone starts saying how bad a certain segment of our nation may have it. Here is a particularly enlightening work about just how well off the bottom 20% of the United States are compared to the average person of other countries. When the bottom 20% are comparing favorably with the average of the other nations, that shows you we are well off.
https://www.justfacts.com/news_poorest_ ... europe.asp
Last edited by Expat_Poke on Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
Returned from my 4 year exodus in Greenieville
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

Asmodeanreborn wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:48 am
ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:04 am
Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
Which states are you thinking of in this case? Most states are now semi-open when it comes to being outside, and the protest guidelines have been to largely stay 6 feet apart (which obviously is not adhered to). My friend above who takes photographs of the Seattle ones has a bunch of pictures showing people actually staying apart, though, but that obviously fails as soon as the morons arrive.

I think a LOT of these people will end up getting sick in a couple of weeks, though. This is like the perfect vector for virus spread - people tightly together shouting things loudly without masks, making spittle and crap fly long distances.

One of Oklahoma State's top recruits warned people he just got sick, and he had participated in protests in Tulsa (in other words, he already carried the virus there, but had no symptoms, and he wants to warn other people he interacted with that he's unintentionally subjected them to the virus).
I wasn't aware of any states allowing mass gatherings of hundreds or thousands of people? Perhaps you can point me in that direction. If the march in Casper today exceeds 250 people, will the governor intervene? Will the march be shut down? We'll see, but I doubt it. If over 250 people congregate in Casper, how is that ok but not at a local fair, rodeo, or church?

Is NY allowing church services with thousands of attendees? MN? DC? St. Louis.

How is it remotely legal to enforce social distancing and crowd restrictions going forward?
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

Let's just use 1 case study but can be applied nationally:

Right now in NY the restrictions are:
Gatherings of 10 or Fewer
Any gatherings of no more than 10 people will be allowed statewide beginning Friday, May 22nd.
Religious gatherings of no more than 10 people and drive-in and parking lot services will be allowed statewide beginning Thursday, May 21st.
You must still keep at least 6 feet of distance between yourself and others and wear a mask or a face covering when social distancing is not possible. Social distancing guidelines and cleaning and disinfection guidelines required by the Department of Health must be followed.
https://portal.311.nyc.gov/article/?kanumber=KA-03299

How can NY possibly punish churchgoers who violate this order? How can NY possibly fine or punish anyone for not following guidelines who violates this order when NY turns a blind eye to "peaceful" protesters who clearly and indisputably violate this order? Lawsuits are coming, guaranteed.

The riots may indirectly end COVID social distancing regulations.
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
OrediggerPoke
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3859
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:57 am

ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:44 am
Asmodeanreborn wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:48 am
ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:04 am
Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
Which states are you thinking of in this case? Most states are now semi-open when it comes to being outside, and the protest guidelines have been to largely stay 6 feet apart (which obviously is not adhered to). My friend above who takes photographs of the Seattle ones has a bunch of pictures showing people actually staying apart, though, but that obviously fails as soon as the morons arrive.

I think a LOT of these people will end up getting sick in a couple of weeks, though. This is like the perfect vector for virus spread - people tightly together shouting things loudly without masks, making spittle and crap fly long distances.

One of Oklahoma State's top recruits warned people he just got sick, and he had participated in protests in Tulsa (in other words, he already carried the virus there, but had no symptoms, and he wants to warn other people he interacted with that he's unintentionally subjected them to the virus).
I wasn't aware of any states allowing mass gatherings of hundreds or thousands of people? Perhaps you can point me in that direction. If the march in Casper today exceeds 250 people, will the governor intervene? Will the march be shut down? We'll see, but I doubt it. If over 250 people congregate in Casper, how is that ok but not at a local fair, rodeo, or church?

Is NY allowing church services with thousands of attendees? MN? DC? St. Louis.

How is it remotely legal to enforce social distancing and crowd restrictions going forward?
That's the issue behind all of these public health orders. The Bill of Rights and other constitutional and due process protections don't go away because of a pandemic. A public health order issued pursuant to the police power of a state cannot supersede constitutional protections. That is why I seriously doubt any decent prosecutor would go forward in prosecuting a person that may be protesting in a group of more than 250 people just the same as I doubt a prosecutor would go forward against a church congregation that refuses to wear face coverings and so on.

The problem in the first place, however, is a government issuing unconstitutional orders and a population that freely accepts them in the name of protection. Luckily, in Wyoming, our orders have been relatively mild compared to executive orders in many other states. But I do believe that there are orders that have been issued in Wyoming that don't pass constitutional muster (for instance the ban on on of state residents camping in state parks - - that is a big dormant commerce clause problem that I believe is unconstitutional...even though that benefits a lot of us in finding camping spots, it doesn't make it ok to ignore the constitution and constitutional law precedent).
OrediggerPoke
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3859
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:57 am

ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:13 pm
Let's just use 1 case study but can be applied nationally:

Right now in NY the restrictions are:
Gatherings of 10 or Fewer
Any gatherings of no more than 10 people will be allowed statewide beginning Friday, May 22nd.
Religious gatherings of no more than 10 people and drive-in and parking lot services will be allowed statewide beginning Thursday, May 21st.
You must still keep at least 6 feet of distance between yourself and others and wear a mask or a face covering when social distancing is not possible. Social distancing guidelines and cleaning and disinfection guidelines required by the Department of Health must be followed.
https://portal.311.nyc.gov/article/?kanumber=KA-03299

How can NY possibly punish churchgoers who violate this order? How can NY possibly fine or punish anyone for not following guidelines who violates this order when NY turns a blind eye to "peaceful" protesters who clearly and indisputably violate this order? Lawsuits are coming, guaranteed.

The riots may indirectly end COVID social distancing regulations.
You're right. Even if a law as written were to be found constitutional (which quite a few public health orders don't appear to be), if the law isn't being applied uniformly then the law itself can be struck down for its enforcement violating the equal protection clause.
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

OrediggerPoke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:27 pm
ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:13 pm
Let's just use 1 case study but can be applied nationally:

Right now in NY the restrictions are:
Gatherings of 10 or Fewer
Any gatherings of no more than 10 people will be allowed statewide beginning Friday, May 22nd.
Religious gatherings of no more than 10 people and drive-in and parking lot services will be allowed statewide beginning Thursday, May 21st.
You must still keep at least 6 feet of distance between yourself and others and wear a mask or a face covering when social distancing is not possible. Social distancing guidelines and cleaning and disinfection guidelines required by the Department of Health must be followed.
https://portal.311.nyc.gov/article/?kanumber=KA-03299

How can NY possibly punish churchgoers who violate this order? How can NY possibly fine or punish anyone for not following guidelines who violates this order when NY turns a blind eye to "peaceful" protesters who clearly and indisputably violate this order? Lawsuits are coming, guaranteed.

The riots may indirectly end COVID social distancing regulations.
You're right. Even if a law as written were to be found constitutional (which quite a few public health orders don't appear to be), if the law isn't being applied uniformly then the law itself can be struck down for its enforcement violating the equal protection clause.
Case Study #2.

https://trib.com/news/local/casper/hund ... 88f53.html
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
User avatar
ZapPoke
Ranch Hand
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:38 am
Location: Cypress, Texas (formerly Casper Wyo)

Expat_Poke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:42 am
WestWYOPoke wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:54 pm

First off, the one incident comment was brought up because you literally said "To take one incident and make it indicative of the nation at large is questionable, at best."

To the second part of your comment, no, not all white people are racist, but yes this absolutely is a racist nation, has been basically since it was founded. Want proof, turn on the tv.
Racist nation? I turn on the TV and I see a racial mix of people engaging in discussion about a racial mix of people that get paid lots of money playing sports. I see Americans of Italian, German, Puerto Rican, and African decent hi-fiving and congratulating each other. I see couples who constitute a plethora of skin pigmentation looking to buy homes in nice neighborhoods. I see TV shows with a mix of racial characters living their lives and friendship.

Don't buy into the 1619 agenda. Has the U.S. struggled with race, yes, but few other countries have had the racial mixture to the degree the United States has in its citizens from 1790 til now. Oh sure you had European and Asian based empires whose subjects where diverse. Those are subjects and governing subjects is different than the governing of citizens. The U.S. has been faced with navigating how to have a unified nation with citizens of multiple races. That navigation hasn't been perfect, but the founding principles found in the Declaration of Independence and the idea of equality under the law has enabled the U.S. to continually improve (with its ups and downs) from the imperfect pre-existing condition prior to its founding to a more egalitarian and just nation. The founding idea of the DOI is not one race was created above others, no the idea written was All Men are created equal. Yeah the Founders weren't perfect saints, they all had some flaws some dealing with racial prejudices. Yet a good many recognized that and worked towards changing their attitudes and behaviors to get more in line with the principles they put forth in those founding documents. George Washington for instance knew he wasn't fully living up to the ideals of the Revolution, and seeing his growth in his ideas of how to address slavery and its eventual abolition is in my opinion a good example of self reflection and change. The principles of the Nation as founded are not racist but rather egalitarian and I see people wanting to move from an imperfect, unjust world into a more egalitarian more just world in spite of and against some of their prejudices.

Some of my thoughts about the current situation
We live in an imperfect world with a bunch of imperfect people and some of those people are more imperfect than others. I will call these sorts of people jerks. Some of those jerks are going to find their way into the police force. They may be jerks about religion, race, gender, or 17 on a Wyoming license plate. No matter how good your hiring process is, some are going to make it because the duties and task of law enforcement are enticing to these sorts of jerks. Say as a police agency you make 100 hires, is it hard to think 1, 2, maybe even 5 of those hires are jerks slipping through the cracks? To expect the police to never hire jerks is unrealistic. With that written, this is why it is especially important that when it becomes apparent you hired a jerk, it needs to be addressed pronto. Enough of this Union garbage of defending bad cops, sure let them have their time to defend against false accusations. As soon as it is clear those accusations aren't false, they need to be dealt with. Wanting to hold bad cops accountable doesn't make me unsupportive of law enforcement, rather supporting bad cops torpedoes the good ones, it sullies the reputation of the law enforcement agencies, and makes it far more difficult to police the community.

And before anyone starts saying how bad a certain segment of our nation may have it. Here is a particularly enlightening work about just how well off the bottom 20% of the United States are compared to the average person of other countries. When the bottom 20% are comparing favorably with the average of the other nations, that shows you we are well off.
https://www.justfacts.com/news_poorest_ ... europe.asp
Thanks Expat, this is one of the best posts I have seen in this thread. I need someone to define “systemic racism”. I just don’t see it. Houston is one of the most racially diverse cities in the country. We didn’t experience the severe rioting other large cities did. Perhaps that is why I don’t see the racism because we just don’t have it. Back in the 60’s even Houston didn’t have the race issues of other places. One day some black students from TSU went into a “whites only” lunch counter. They didn’t raise a ruckus, they just sat there. The business leaders got together and that night all the “whites only” signs disappeared. And it was over. That is why we respect MLK. he accomplished what he did without violence or riots.

To sum up, would someone please provide a definition and evidence of systemic racism?
User avatar
LanderPoke
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 7207
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:47 pm
Location: Laramie

ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:04 am
Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
some rights are greater than others apparently
User avatar
LanderPoke
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 7207
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:47 pm
Location: Laramie

ZapPoke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:32 pm
Expat_Poke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:42 am
WestWYOPoke wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:54 pm

First off, the one incident comment was brought up because you literally said "To take one incident and make it indicative of the nation at large is questionable, at best."

To the second part of your comment, no, not all white people are racist, but yes this absolutely is a racist nation, has been basically since it was founded. Want proof, turn on the tv.
th race, yes, bcist but rather egalitarian and I see people wanting to move from an imperfect, unjust world into a more egalitarian more just world in spite of and against some of their prejudices.
ntable doesn't make me unsupportive of law enforcement, rather supporting bad cops torpedoes the good ones, it sullies the reputation of the law enforcement agencies, and makes it far more difficult to police the community.

And before anyone starts saying how bad a certain segment of our nation may have it. Here is a particularly enlightening work about just how well off the bottom 20% of the United States are compared to the average person of other countries. When the bottom 20% are comparing favorably with the average of the other nations, that shows you we are well off.
https://www.justfacts.com/news_poorest_ ... europe.asp


To sum up, would someone please provide a definition and evidence of systemic racism?
I've asked this question and all I've been told is if you don't know then you are part of the problem. Whatever the hell that means
bladerunnr
A Real Cowboy
Posts: 1466
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:45 pm

LanderPoke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:34 pm
ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:04 am
Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
some rights are greater than others apparently
That's exactly right. This Saturday, Jackson will have a road 1/2 marathon. It has to be a staggered start over the course of 2 hours. There is no post race food or drinks (to keep people from congregating), and to top it off, the number of runners is capped at 100!

But if your protesting "racism", you can do whatever the hell you want. It's just an amazing bit of hypocrisy from our politicians and the media.
ragtimejoe1
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 3121
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm

bladerunnr wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 7:48 am
LanderPoke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:34 pm
ragtimejoe1 wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:04 am
Serious question, are all stay at home orders now defunct in states allowing mass protests?

How can they they charge churches for example but ignore the protests?

Yes, they are allowing mass gatherings and peaceful protests. I'd argue they are allowing violent protests but that is another debate. The fact they are allowing mass gatherings for protests but nothing else is indisputable.

How can they possibly shut down rodeos, churches, limit businesses, etc. but ignore protests? I smell lawsuits coming.
some rights are greater than others apparently
That's exactly right. This Saturday, Jackson will have a road 1/2 marathon. It has to be a staggered start over the course of 2 hours. There is no post race food or drinks (to keep people from congregating), and to top it off, the number of runners is capped at 100!

But if your protesting "racism", you can do whatever the hell you want. It's just an amazing bit of hypocrisy from our politicians and the media.
I'm shocked lawsuits haven't been filed especially in states where governors have openly endorsed the protests (not the riots--different discussion). If COVID is a substantial threat, the protests should not be allowed much less endorsed. If COVID isn't a sufficient threat to shut down protests then it isn't a sufficient threat to maintain COVID restrictions in any capacity. After all, according to the say homers, gatherings pose a risk to millions and millions of Americans. How can the state defend their position that large gatherings are a threat to millions unless that gathering is a protest in the current environment? How can the governor look a business owner in the eye and tell them they need to either remain closed or restrict capacity to bankruptcy levels while also endorsing activities that allow people to gather in crowds larger than many of these businesses will see in months?

It is absolutely mind blowing.
"There's always excuses for a sports program not winning or academic program not succeeding. And it's not that the excuses aren't true; it's that they aren't sufficient," --Sternberg
User avatar
WestWYOPoke
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:35 am

ZapPoke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:32 pm
Expat_Poke wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:42 am
WestWYOPoke wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:54 pm

First off, the one incident comment was brought up because you literally said "To take one incident and make it indicative of the nation at large is questionable, at best."

To the second part of your comment, no, not all white people are racist, but yes this absolutely is a racist nation, has been basically since it was founded. Want proof, turn on the tv.
[/url]
Thanks Expat, this is one of the best posts I have seen in this thread. I need someone to define “systemic racism”. I just don’t see it. Houston is one of the most racially diverse cities in the country. We didn’t experience the severe rioting other large cities did. Perhaps that is why I don’t see the racism because we just don’t have it. Back in the 60’s even Houston didn’t have the race issues of other places. One day some black students from TSU went into a “whites only” lunch counter. They didn’t raise a ruckus, they just sat there. The business leaders got together and that night all the “whites only” signs disappeared. And it was over. That is why we respect MLK. he accomplished what he did without violence or riots.

To sum up, would someone please provide a definition and evidence of systemic racism?
I'm sure you've heard the talking point about black-on-black crime...this talking point is evidence of systemic racism, but why you might ask?

Well, to summarize:

It is true, if you look at just numbers based on race, their is much higher black-on-black crime in this country than other demographics, BUT that is the wrong mitigating factor.

The true mitigating factor is socioeconomic status (SES). When factoring for SES, we find that crime among all demographics is almost equal. In fact, white-on-white crime might actually be higher than black-on-black when SES is neutralized.

So why then, do we have high numbers of black-on-black crime in this country? It is because the black community is disproportionately in a lower SES bracket than their counter parts. Which leads us to the question of why that is? There's only really 2 options to consider: A) people of color are "lazier" or naturally less able than others (an obvious racist statement), or B) our very system is setup to discriminate against people of color.

Since I would like to think no one on this board, and very few people in this country think the answer is actually option A, then we are likely looking at option B for the actual reasoning.

I'm sure there are other examples as well, but this is one of this most simplistic to discuss and understand.

TLDR: race doesn't affect crime, SES status does, black community is disproportionately Low SES, they are low SES because of systemic racism.
Image
Post Reply