Total posts: 1,048
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
NCBI study linked is outdated.
"In fact, crack cocaine is actually more powerful than powder cocaine, causes physical dependence to set in more quickly and is far more dangerous than the powder counterpart."
It has been firmly established that crack is worse than powder cocaine.
Just like hard liquor is more dangerous than beer. A few shots can get an average person shit faced, while it takes 6 or more beers to reach the same level. It is all about the content of the drug at play. And the fact is, crack in its used form is more dangerous than snorting the powder version.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Yeah, this is why an E4 Military Police Investigator is more intelligent than a mere butter bar Jar Head Marine.Lol. This is painful. The article you cited from the Army News says the cops took the gun without a warrant. Red flag laws involve a warrant from a judge to take the guns. Red flag laws provide due process. Now you wouldn’t learn that on FOX News, but you need to do more research and understand what you are talking about.
Warrants are NOT issued without fact-based evidence. They are not given willy-nilly. Something you clearly do not understand having never worked in law enforcement, state or federal. Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
unsubstantiated claims is NOT due process.It’s not? A witness testifying under oath in front of a judge sounds like due process to me.
Subjectivity does not equal objective fact-based evidence. It's opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
So if I block you doe sit prove that too?If I unblock you does it prove the opposite?
Q1. No. We have had no engagement here. But to just arbitrarily block me demonstrates something else.
Q2. No. It just demonstrates something else.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@IwantRooseveltagain
@IwantRooseveltagainit’s the financial status of the people using the drug.Categorically false. Poor Black immigrants show less crack cocaine usage than poor white Americans. It's not an issue of poverty. It's an issue of culture.
THANK YOU!!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
That was the justification for the law in the 80's, but it has been thoroughly debunked with what we know today.
Please cite sources that establish that debunking, cause links I've provided prove it true, not debunked.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Red flag laws are patently unconstitutional and unnecessary. There are already enough laws on the books that can do the same once an actual legal case has been brought to the Courts for a judge to sign off on this after evidence has been presented to justify it. Not before without due process.Red flag laws include due process. A family member or police believe someone who owns a gun is a danger to himself or others. They petition a judge and hear the facts. Then the judge makes a decision on removing the firearm. What are these “laws on the books” you believe do the same thing? Why aren’t they “patently unconstitutional” but red flag laws are?
Red flag laws fly in the face of due process.
A cop or family going before the judge with unsubstantiated claims is NOT due process.
What part of this: "There are already enough laws on the books that can do the same once an actual legal case has been brought to the Courts for a judge to sign off on this after evidence has been presented to justify it. Not before without due process." did you fail to comprehend?
Procedural law is not unconstitutional (when never challenged as being such), but red flag laws are because they violate the 5th and 14th due process clauses, among others.
Yeah, this is why an E4 Military Police Investigator is more intelligent than a mere butter bar Jar Head Marine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Without the crack, no addiction.
Without the addiction, no violence.
Crack causes addiction to crack.
Addiction to crack causes violence.
Therefore, Crack causes violence.
Why cocaine use leads to violence
Cocaine interferes with mood from the first use. In the longer-term, cocaine abuse can cause frequent mood swings due to its interference with the brain. So why do people use cocaine? Many people don’t realise the full extent of what cocaine does to their bodies and brains, taking it only for its perceived pleasurable effects. In fact, cocaine stimulates the central nervous system and creates a wide range of symptoms:
- A feeling of intense euphoria
- A sensation of invincibility
- Increased confidence
- A feeling of superior intellect
- Appetite suppression
- Reduced fatigue
- Reduced inhibitions
- Higher pain threshold
Numerous combinations of these effects can result in cocaine users becoming erratic and reckless in their behaviour. Alongside these symptoms, many cocaine users are prone to becoming anxious, agitated, aggressive, paranoid (known as ‘cocaine paranoia’) or carrying out violent behaviour. Significantly, studies show that crack cocaine can make you more angry and violent than powder cocaine.
Research indicates that the rage and violence associated with cocaine use is down to its effect on neurotransmitters in the pleasure centres of the brain. Studies also show that cocaine abuse causes changes in levels of norepinephrine and serotonin. This interference with organic bodily chemicals, which act as neurotransmitters to the brain, leads to aggressive behaviour, hyperactivity, impaired judgement and paranoia.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Crack doesn’t cause violence
"Crack cocaine is more psychologically addicting than powder cocaine and is thus more likely to result in chronic and heavy use. In addition, the drug is more commonly associated with systemic violence than its counterpart."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
The most important difference though is blacks tend to use crack and whites tend to use powder.
So, what you're saying is whites choose A while blacks choose B, and the latter causes more violence while A does not.
That's like whites choose a black car to race around in while blacks choose a red car to race around in, and we all know red gets the attention of police more than black.
How about this: blacks choose to drink Absinthe while whites choose Jack Daniels. Absinthe causes violence and a little madness; Jack Daniels just results in drunken stupor passed out in bed.
All examples are about choice, which includes the consequences of said choice.
So what if blacks choose crack and whites powder! Whites clearly knew that crack causes violence and hard addiction, so they took the less addictive route. Shows some sense of intelligence and responsibility on their part vs their black counterpart choosing crack despite knowing the addiction and harm it causes. Again, choice.
Choose the harder road, you get the harder punishment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Ignorant JAR HEAD TROLL!!!
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
TROLL
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
“Minnesota lawmakers had approved mandatory prison sentences of four years for users of crack, a derivative of cocaine that's cheap and common on inner-city streets. Powdered cocaine, on the other hand, is seen by some as the suburban alternative - more popular among whites. State law prescribed probation for powder cocaine users.”Any non-racist defense of such obviously unconstitutional laws?This is just one of thousands of examples.
"Crack cocaine is more psychologically addicting than powder cocaine and is thus more likely to result in chronic and heavy use. In addition, the drug is more commonly associated with systemic violence than its counterpart."
That is why those who get busted for crack get harsher sentences, which has nothing to do with being black or white. It's the end result of the use and addiction - the violence - that gets users busted, black or white.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, either a DNA test or other documented ancestry proving it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Ignorant TROLL!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
"Recently had one of those audit videos come across my Facebook. I have been shocked at the attitude of police officers with American citizens doing nothing wrong. I have been shocked at the number of videos of white people calling the police on black people for being a house or in a yard or in a car on their street because they're not used to seeing black people in their neighborhood. Pulling black people over for going to work early in the morning or on a street they don't expect to see a black person. The police have reached a point where they feel like they don't have to justify what they do to anyone, they don't have to care about rights, when they tell you to do something you do it whether they're right or wrong and they don't care if they kill people. This has come down from those that develop training to those that are sergeants so until they fix it they're going to they're going to be corrupt."
Do you know/realize just how many police to civilian interactions there are annually?
2002: less than 1.3% of all contacts involved use of force; and whites and blacks were stopped equally.
2018: Among the 61.5 million U.S. residents age 16 or
older in 2018 who had contact with police during
the prior 12 months, 1.3 million (2%) experienced
threats or use of force from police (table 3).
Whites who experienced a threat or use of force
were less likely than blacks to perceive it as excessive
(44% to 63%)
- Whites acknowledge police have a job to do, and that they most likely deserved it by their behavior, taking personal responsibly for said behavior by not perceiving that use of force as excessive; whereas blacks lack personal responsibility and blame police for getting caught in their criminality and perceive any use of force as excessive, and where there is no excessive force, they lie about it or make up outlandish charges against the officer in an attempt to get out of being charged
Fewer than 1% of members of any race or ethnicity
had a gun pointed at them during their most recent
police-initiated contact or traffic-accident contact.
Then there is this: FBI Releases Statistics for Law Enforcement Officers Assaulted and Killed in the Line of Duty — FBI
When it comes to black suspects, cops are 18.5x more likely to be shot and killed and killed by them than the mere 2.5-2.8x blacks being unarmed (not necessary without a weapon (gun) but rather - e.g., car, blunt object, etc.), and as of late black males have become ever more violent with law enforcement: verbal attacks, fighting, resisting arrest, and violent assaults (to include ambush shootings, murdering cops). So it is perfectly understandable why police are more hyper vigilant around black males then any other race.
Created:
I just do not see it happening (her pulling it off); what say you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, it should be a federal crime and the first person to get arrested would be this fraud and grifter: Jeffrey "Shaun" King.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Guns nowadays should be less available to the public and more expensive so they generally end up as luxury in the wealthy of the more etiquettes. The more the gun availability is and the cheaper it is, the more crime there will be(unless we get to a point where everyone has a gun and we have threat duels every single day on the streets of every single concentrated settlement, which is unlikely and also, steel is not free).
Why do they need to be less available and to whom? Any and all gun controls and restrictions only hurt law abiding citizens, not criminals.
Making it harder for law abiding citizens to acquire means of protection makes no sense. Especially in a day and age where police are stretched thin and in reality, the only thing standing between you and an armed criminal is whatever you do or do not have for effective protection. Having the means to defend yourself and your family saves lives. Good guys (law abiding carrying) with guns save lives.
Created:
Posted in:
valkyrie67 blocked me. LOL!
Typical sophomoric liberal intellectual cowardice move. Demonstrates she has zero interest in legitimately debating/discussing the topic.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
-->@TWS1405Let's use common sense here. Different people are different. Black people are different from white people resulting in different advantages and disadvantages. Yet you think White privilege doesn't exist while pushing that black privilege does. That seems contradictory to me in a societal standpoint.
There is no contradiction.
Had you actually read the entire writing you would have learned why white fragility/privilege is a scam created by the left to replace the bankrupt infamous 'race card,' and in the wake of that blacks do, have and continue to get away with things said and done that would otherwise cause the left and cancel culture to destroy any non-person of color for saying or doing the exact same thing. That, by definition, is black privilege.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Stop whining. You know damn full well that there is a character limit that my writings exceed.
So, linking back to the original work puts what I intended to say in full context without butchering it here to meet that 3,000 character limit.
Created:
-->
@K_Michael
And there's jumping straight to murder. You kill dozens if not thousands of microscopic organisms every time you move, and you most likely kill bugs in your house without a second thought. You might have even had a dog put down. Yet no one calls it murder. A dog is unequivocally more sentient by every human metric than a 22 week fetus, so why do you make the distinction?
The issue/matter/reality of abortion is solely a human being issue/matter/reality, not a canine, feline, bovine, or insect issue.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
-->@TWS1405Abortions before 14 weeks shouldn't be illegal, but so what about abortions after 22 weeks? Since they probably can survive outside of womb thus classifying them as organism, wouldn't that be murder of some sort?
My position is abortion should be legal up to 20 weeks. If you cannot decide by then, hands off. You carry to term. That is, unless, there is a medical emergency warranting an abortion after 20 weeks.
Still wouldn't be murder. Murder only applies to a human being (an already born one) taking the life of another human being (an already born one) with malice and aforethought without justification.
The rights, privileges and equal protection of the law is not granted/bestowed until birth (14th A.).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I hear your point about Uvalde, but it has nothing to do with the topic of this post.
As outlined in my writing linked to, this topic is about people blaming the police and calling for a defund the police movement all because of criminals who are POC. POC who are lifted to martyr/hero status while cops are ridiculed and castigated for doing their job.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
A music video? That's what your you tube video linked to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
As I said in the other thread(s), DART has a 3000 character limit. So yeah, I linked back to my blog where I provide info to illicit a response in the spirit of debate/discussion here.
Stop whining about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Every group has certain privileges when contrasted against other groups.As a white person, many crimes I may commit will net much lower prison sentences than if I were black.
My virus software says that link is not safe.
Regardless, what many fail to comprehend when making that argument is the fact that the court(s) take criminal history into account when applying the sentencing guidelines. Blacks typically have longer criminal histories whereas whites do not; so even if they commit the same crime(s), the sentencing guidelines will dictate more time for blacks than whites based on their criminal histories.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Of course. This forum has a 3,000 character limit. Everything I intended to say doesn't fit in this box. So, it was easier to link back to what I wanted to say to prompt a discussion on the topic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Your example/reference involves a period of overt racism and Jim Crow, not white privilege.
And Greyparrot is correct. I said "is," not "was."
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
-->@TWS1405This thread seems to have gone off the rails, away from facts and scientific analysis into emotive outbursts and name calling, lets bring it back rational analysis and look at the science .Science has studied racism extensively and determined what the root cause is:Penis EnvyScientifically speaking, studies have shown that racists have very small naughty parts, TWS1405's probably looks like a button.
And yet here you are committing your own ad hominem argument attacking me. (hypocrisy)
Nothing I have said throughout this thread is racist. Truth does not equal racism.
Thanks for adding to the derailment.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
Your level of legal ignorance, lack of reading comprehension skills and delusions of grandeur knows no bounds.
You are incorrect on each point, yet again, and I have proven such. One word for ya: denial.
This is my last response to you in this thread. You will never 'get it.' Never!
Adieu
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
->@TWS1405Yes yes theists are all mentally ill and too stupid to know what they're doing, we know.
to the contrary, they were very smart in regard to human psychology and social psychology. That's why they were so good at selling their dogma via imminent threats of direct and indirect violence in the name of 'God.'
but they were mentally ill, yes; takes a special kind of derangement to wantonly kill and commit acts of genocide to serve one's own interests but call it 'God's Will.'
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
SwagnarokI'm talking about not being able to have an abortion.Ok, but woman have a constitutional right to an abortion, until we got a few nut jobs on the Supreme Court who are applying their personal beliefs to get a desired legal result. That right will likely return in most of the 25 red states where it is now under threat.A military draft has not been deemed a violation of our constitutional rights as far as I know. Do you have a case to cite from the Supreme Court?
Created:
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
White privilege is a myth, pure fiction.
Prove me wrong.
Created:
94% of ALL abortions take place BEFORE 14 weeks gestation, the majority of those being BEFORE 6 weeks gestation. Absolutely. Positively. NO BABY involved.
Words have meaning. That meaning is defined by the context in which they are given. Semantics matters. Syntax matters. When you use words out of context, out of syntax, and semantically incorrect...you end with emotively charged terms based on a perverted context in which they are given. As a result, many words are used as misnomers and many are also conflated with others, albeit incorrectly. Terms like baby, child, children...the "pro-life" crowd never, ever uses the scientifically accurate terminology of any of the stages of pregnancy. Be it biology, psychology, legally, or reproductively. They are too truthful, too dry and meaningless for them because they cannot handle the truth of it all.
The obvious ignorant (uneducated) #prolife bandwagon considers #conception = to [a] #humanlife or [a] #humanbeing. Problem with that statement is, #cellularlife does NOT equal #ahumanbeing or #personhood.
Cellular life (i.e., conception), the basic biological criteria for #life, is merely potentiality. Without #viability (capable of extrauterine survival), the pregnancy is immaterial. It will not exist until it gestates long enough within the female #womb, period.
Again, 94% of ALL abortions are BEFORE 14 weeks, and viability is technically 19-20 weeks. Less than 1.2% of ALL abortions are AFTER 22-24 weeks. So, the whole "baby killers" argument is unsubstantiated uneducated nonsense. While there are some late term abortions, they are far, few and between (the noted 1.2%).
While fertilization, or conception, meets the very basic biological criterial for cellular life, that cellular life simply does not equal an actual #humanbeing. It just doesn't; as potentiality can never equal actuality. And yet the pro-life crowd keeps using incorrect terminology, misnomers, to describe accurately labeled stages of human reproductive development of a pregnancy. Baby this, baby that.
A zygote is NOT a baby.
A blastocyst is NOT a baby.
An embryo is NOT a baby.
An unviable fetus is NOT a baby.
An initial heartbeat does NOT equal a baby either. A heartbeat only means that an albeit immature organ (not entirely fully developed) is functional. Take the embryo/fetus out of the womb too early (before 19-22 weeks), and it will cease to exist. That being said, #viability is the ONLY issue that should concern anyone where a pregnancy is concerned. This proves why 94% of ALL abortions are before 14 weeks gestation, the majority of those being before 6 weeks. NO girl or woman wants to be responsible for the outright death of a viable fetus (i.e., if viable, an actual "baby"). Despite viability, the pregnancy still has no legal rights outside of Roe v Wade (i.e. - prohibition of late term abortions for mere contraceptive purposes).
Yes, many come back at me with the laws concerning double homicide of a pregnant woman; yet the fact remains that both the state and federal laws written of same categorize or ascribe the label of "legal victim" to the pregnancy, regardless of stage, and never that of [a] human being. The legislators knew that to state otherwise would immediately conflict with established case law (precedence) and Roe v Wade; not to mention the 14th Amendment of the Bill of Rights. So that argument is dead in the water (pardon the pun).
The undeniable fact remains, that without fetal #viability there can be NO actualized "human being."
Created:
Posted in:
There are numerous contradictions throughout ALL religious texts.
When there are multiple languages and differing interpretations, written and re-written over hundreds and hundreds of years, nothing will come out perfectly as originally intended.
Religion, organized religion, is the very first known human example of the concept of psychology of selling a product that resulted in mass psychosis and mass hysteria.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Trump breaks all the rules
Official Diagnosis: Trump derangement syndrome - Wikipedia
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Trump is an idiot
Unless you are an accredited psychiatrist with numerous peer reviewed papers and studies, you are ill-equipped to even ask this question let alone debate/discuss it. Especially when YOU have proven yourself highly uneducated in various real-world topics. Thus, making you a flagrant HYPOCRITE!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
There weren't really World Wars previously.That's just how things were recorded for Western Posterity.
Maybe you are reading into the phrase a bit too much.
When one country on one side of the planet gets involved in warfare on another side of the planet, that makes it a "world war" as it impacts all other nations across the planet.
Created:
For all the choices made, actions completed, things said and done...the following are examples of black Americans who are living proof of Black Privilege:
Jussie Smollett = black privilege
Joy-Ann Reid = black privilege
Elie Mystal = black privilege
Michael Eric Dyson = black privilege
Nicole Hannah Jones = black privilege
Jada Pinkett Smith = black privilege
Will Smith = black privilege
Al Sharpton = black privilege
Jesse Jackson = black privilege
Van Jones = black privilege
Whoopi Goldberg = black privilege
George Floyd = black privilege
Jacob Wright = black privilege
Benjamin Crump = black privilege
Every black male that kills another black person = black privilege
And every black person that make a hoax claim of a hate crime/racism (e.g., Jussie Smollett, Tawana Brawley, etc.)
I mean, I can go on and on and on with example after example of blacks getting away with things said and done that no white person, or any other non-person of color (e.g., Jews) would be allowed to get away with. Anyone not black would just be castigated for being a "racist." The all too common "race card" being pulled to shut down any argument or proffering of the truth about a black person. A fact we see all the time in the immediate aftermath of a black male being shot and killed by the police.
Over the past decade and beyond, any non-person of color could be fired, blacklisted, and ostracized for innocuous things said and/or done whereas if a person of color did the same thing would be either ignored or given a pat on the back for saying or doing so. This, by definition black privilege (or even Hispanic privilege), not white privilege.
I could go on and on listing cases and example after example of how false claims of racism have been literally weaponized in America in order to not only shut down debate/discussion, but also businesses, personal lives, neighborhoods, towns and even entire cities - just look at the summer riots of 2020. Despite the level of damage structurally, financially but also personally for hundreds of thousands of people, to include those who lost their lives, no one on the left, let along Congress, will simply not investigate the rioting to get to the actual truth. In fact, many politicians (and celebrities) supported the rioting by BLM and created funding sources to get anyone arrested out of jail, politicians like Kamalla Harris.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@valkyrie67
Please don’t come on my post bashing people or even me. It was a idea. Not like it’s going to pass in Law. It’s a SUGGESTION.
It was NOT a suggestion. The very title of your OP is a question. Hence the "?" at the end of it.
Constructive criticism is not "bashing people or even you." If you are that sensitive, then perhaps you found the wrong forum to debate/discuss real world issues.
Created:
Elie Mystal, a so-called legal scholar has got to be one of the most ignorant ones where it comes to the US Constitution.
The BS he wrote about in his book "Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution" is nothing short of pure racist rhetoric, anti-American rhetoric, anti-law enforcement rhetoric, and more with a complete misconstruing of what the Constitution actually says.
He has gone on television too to repeat his nonsense, and there has been backlash against his flagrant ignorance just the same.
The man is a racist. On par with Don Lemon, Joy Ann Reid, et al.
It is because of this divisiveness that causes further strife for the very people they claim to help and defend.
What say you?
Does America need flagrant racists protected by the veil of "black privilege" like this causing more harm than good? I think not.
Again, what say you?
Discuss.
Debate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@valkyrie67
My stance is that we put a limit on lethal ammo and only make bean bag rounds available for Americans to purchase.
Yeah, bad guy breaks into your home intent on raping you and all you have are bean bag shots, which will do nothing to a 225lb guy high on PCP or meth intent on doing his deed, holding a pistol with lethal rounds.
That's tantamount to bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Dumb. Just dumb.
Created: