AbsolutePunk.net
   Username
Password
This Thread is Closed.
 
Share
02:43 PM on 02/15/12 
#1
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
"The things I say don't necessarily reflect my own thoughts nor what the words actually mean."

-EasySkankin
03:02 PM on 02/15/12 
#2
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
I wouldn't judge his entire person based on it, but it would leave a VERY bad first impression, and you know what they say about first impressions.
09:27 AM on 05/09/12 
#3
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
well, one recent one that comes to mind seemed completely harmless except for the fact that the entire thing just showed african americans going ga-ga over fried chicken.

Yeah, but they have commercials where white people do that too. They're selling a product, of course they're going to show people going gaga over it. I think if KFC instead decided to never feature black people in their commercials just to avoid a stereotype, that would be way more racist than showing black people enjoying fried chicken every now and then.
08:44 PM on 05/09/12 
#4
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
i meant more to emphasize the fact that the commercial featured only african americans and no other races.

Well if it just shows one family it kind of makes sense but I guess I'd have to see the commercial.
10:59 PM on 08/03/12 
#5
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
The first part, yes, the second part is yet to be determined. There is a propensity among blacks to commit crimes, but assuming it's caused on the function of their race and race alone I don't agree with.

So you don't think there's any margin of error in law enforcement being more likely to detain a black person (even when they've done nothing wrong) and more likely to turn the other way with a white person (even when they see them committing a crime)?
04:29 PM on 08/05/12 
#6
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
So you're asking if I think a cop will witness a white person commit a crime, but not do anything about it because they are white, and that this is somehow systemic in law enforcement? Thats a resounding no.

Cops will detain any person even if they have not done anything wrong if they believe they will cause a disturbance. Will some of these people be black? Of
Course. Will there be a handful of cases where racist officers use their authority to enact Hateful prejudice? Of course, they are people just like us. But hateful prejudice is not systemic. With any statistical sample there is a margin of error, irregularities, exceptions, etc. but we're talking about pretty wide margins.

No, I'm asking if you think a cop will pull over a black guy just for "looking suspicious" but drive right past and assume nothing is wrong if that person is white. I think there is a systematic prejudice; for example if a black guy is standing outside of a house looking into a window, most police officers will probably pull over first chance they get, but if a white guy does it they're more likely to assume it's his house and he locked himself out and is seeing if maybe there's someone inside and they aren't hearing him knocking.

And I'm not suggesting this happens 100% of the time or even a majority of the time (I don't know any studies off the top of my head and I'm not going to look right now) but you're speaking in absolutes as though there's no chance anything like that could ever happen, let alone happen enough to make the figures you're claiming skewed, and I'm willing to bet you're wrong about at least once of those.
04:44 PM on 08/10/12 
#7
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
This is all pure speculation in your head, you realize that? And that there are dozens of other contextual factors you'd have to take into account if you really are trying to prove that law enforcement is systemically racist with a tiny hypothetical?

If you read my last post you'd see I clearly said there are examples of people in law enforcement behaving badly, as happens everywhere in all societies. There are exceptions to everything.

You know, I really hope I am wrong.

I was only asking you a question and giving a hypothetical example of what I was talking about because you sounded like you assumed there was never a case like that (which I now know isn't your assumption), that's all. Like I said, I don't have the numbers (which would be nigh impossible to compile anyway since we're talking about people's thoughts). If black people commit more crimes than white people I don't think it's because of police injustice (though that may be and likely is a factor in some areas), I think it has more to do with how society is skewed on the whole.
07:37 AM on 08/22/12 
#8
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
Nice play on words, but I didn't get shut down at all. If you read my posts, you would all see that the only thing I'm claiming is that this agenda was put into effect without Congress' approval.

If you'd like to debate that, then by all means...

My issue with this whole thing, and other things that take place in our government, is that the Constitution is continuously getting stepped on.

It's a UN initiative, I don't think our Congress has the power to overturn the UN. Nor is the UN part of "our government".
07:46 AM on 08/22/12 
#9
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
I'm not completely familiar with Congress' role in the UN, but I do know that the U.S. is part of the UN and I do know that Bill Clinton, George Bush Jr. and Barack Obama have all signed Agenda 21... without Congress' approval.

Executive orders in general are something I have an issue with.

Executive orders aren't unconstitutional.
08:08 AM on 08/22/12 
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
It has nothing to do with the Constitution because it's not a U.S. document.
08:13 AM on 08/22/12 
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
Executive orders in and of themselves ARE NOT unconstitutional. The problem is the abuse of executive orders in order to do things that ARE unconstitutional.

The best example I can give is during WWII when Roosevelt sent Japanese Americans... AMERICANS to internment camps.

The PATRIOT act is another example.

While the executive order may not be unconstitutional, how can you argue that imprisoning U.S. citizens without due process is.

I've heard that there are unconstitutional things in it, and I know that it came into being via executive order, but like I said, without reading Agenda 21 (which I plan to do this weekend) I cannot argue that the document has things in it that are unconstitutional. Which is why I was looking for opinions from those who have read it. So I am curious to learn more and get the opportunity to sit down and read it.

Congress has the power to overturn an executive order, so if they don't overturn it then your argument that this is "without Congress's approval" doesn't hold water. If Congress doesn't approve they can try to overturn it. As far as I know they haven't even made the attempt.
08:14 AM on 08/22/12 
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
No. I'm not assuming anything. I'm asking opinions from people who have READ the document. If you haven't read it, then why are you assuming that it doesn't contain anything fishy.

Are you fucking kidding me? You realize your logic is completely and totally backwards, right?
08:23 AM on 08/22/12 
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
So you think it would be a shorter thread if we discussed things that world governments are doing to help humanity, but at the same time you think I'm crazy for even thinking that maybe they are doing things to harm it?

No, we think you're crazy because you're claiming they're doing something wrong simply because an article exists on the Internet.
08:30 AM on 08/22/12 
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
I'm simply stating that everyone who blasts me constantly, hasn't read any of these documents but immediately assumes that they are on the up and up.

I realize that it's up to me to prove that something is fishy about them, but I'm not claiming that there is anything fishy about them.

You on the other hand are claiming that it's all legit, so shouldn't the person making the claim bear the burden of proof.

When did I claim that? After that little fit you just threw about people claiming you're saying something you didn't, you should probably think twice before doing the same exact thing thirty seconds later.
09:08 AM on 08/22/12 
Offline
User Info.
crackedthesky
cause when I fly solo I fly so high
crackedthesky's Avatar
Gladstone, MO
Male - 26 Years Old
I didn't say that you personally claimed that it was legit,

Yes you did:

You on the other hand are claiming that it's all legit,

Quote:
but the way that everyone reacts to my posts leads me to believe that you think I'm wrong.

You are wrong. You suggested the UN is guilty of operating outside of the US constitution, which they aren't beholden to. You also suggested executive orders are unconstitutional, and they aren't. You're also claiming that there is "probably" something fishy in a document you've never read, and asking us to prove there isn't. You're the one making the claim, indirectly, that something is amiss, and we're pointing out to you that the burden of proving anything at all is on you, not us.

Quote:
Lots of the posters in this thread have called me "crazy" even though I haven't made any irrational claims. If people think I'm crazy, then I'm led to believe that they think this document is not fishy.

You're the one who first floated the idea that you're crazy, but we don't think you're crazy because you think an article you've never read contains secret sinister information, we think you're crazy because you're constantly posting utter bullshit nonsense like this.
 



NEWS, MUSIC & MORE
Search News
Release Dates
Exclusives
Best New Music
Articles
CONNECT
Submit News
Forums
Contests
Mobile Version
AP.net Logos
HIDDEN TREASURES
AbsolutePunk Podcast
Free Music
Sports Forum
Technology Forum
Recommendations
INFORMATION
Advertising
Contact Us
Copyright Policy
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
FOLLOW
Twitter | Facebook | RSS
PropertyOfZack
UnderTheGun
Purevolume
Chorus.fm | @jason_tate