It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Wookiep
So many people defending thugs, it's incredible.
Who is?
And as of 2010, 10% of the population is retired age.
I don't know. But unless a very disproportionate number are white, it doesn't change much of anything. Do you think there are a higher number of older white people than black people in Ferguson?
How much of that percent is white?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Vector99
And as of 2010, 10% of the population is retired age.
Yes, that would make sense, since 90% are below retired age.
I don't know. But unless a very disproportionate number are white, it doesn't change much of anything. Do you think there are a higher number of older white people than black people in Ferguson?
How much of that percent is white?
YOU and others like you are part of the problem for refusing to see reality for what it is.
Sorry no. That is not a logical conclusion. It does indicated though, that more blacks are arrested. The statistics from Ferguson demonstrate that fallacy. Blacks were twice as likely to be searched, but were found with contraband 25% as often as whites.
The fact that more blacks are jailed (or jailed longer) than whites statistically is telling, especially since the more logical conclusion is that more crimes are commited by blacks
I don't think they're running the country but unequal treatment by law enforcement does not equate with white extremity. That's a nice bit of hyperbole you tossed out there.
People need to get out of denial and stop spewing the mythical lie that white extremist racists run this country.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr
Are you sure about that?
Since most of the time police pull someone over they either they broke a traffic law or suspect drunk driving.
I think it's you who is being naive.
I don't think they care if they are black green or purple.
So you think that police only stop vehicles they are behind?
So you think that when the police is behind a vehicle they can tell what color the driver is?
How easily you toss off the racial aspect. How about pulling them over for no particular reason?
I personally think they would pull them over anyway. So if race isn't a factor then we should look at other possibilities.
Perhaps most troubling from a civil liberties perspective, nearly five percent of blacks weren't given any reason for why they were stopped, compared with 2.6 percent of whites and 3.3 percent of Hispanics.
Or, maybe they are racially profiling. Stopping people for "driving while black." Do you think that it's ok to do so? Do you that it could be something that deserves some looking into or is it just better to turn the other way as assume "Nah, they wouldn't do that."
Point being could be any number of reason and in today's politically correct world id bet police go out of there way to even seem to be profiling.