I can't find the study offhand, but from what I've seen, in a county-by-county studies, minority defendants tend to be found guilty at a high rate and receive longer sentences. I'll see if I can find it tomorrow. Here's all I've got now: http://www.safefromabuse.com/assault_myths.html 6. Most sexual assaults are interracial. Myth. Almost all sexual assaults occur between members of the same race. Interracial rape is not common, but it does occur. When it occurs, white victims tend to report black assailants more frequently than white assailants and a disproportionate number of black offenders are convicted. Black victims tend to underreport assaults, especially if the offender is white. The myth that black men rape white women may be perpetuated by the publicity afforded to those assaults that fit cultural and racial stereotypes. But yeah, the part you posted (minority victims) is more relevant here anyway.
If I may quote Lynyrd Skynyrd Mr. Saturday night special Got a barrel that's a blue and cold aint good for nothin special just put a man six feet in a hole.
First a question, do those statistics control for wealth? Black people in America are on average poorer than white people. This can lead to both an increase in crime rates and a decrease in funds available for legal council. If black people are committing crimes at a higher rate and have worse legal representation, then one would expect them to be convicted at a higher rate. As to your question, no we do not need organizations out there fighting for the interests of groups that are treated unfairly, we need organizations out there fighting unfair treatment. They should not be working to advance colored people (as their name says) they should be working for everyone to be treated the same (people currently treated unfairly would be helped as a byproduct of this). At least, that is my view on it. I'm . In what way is an organization built around the protection of the right to bear arms similar to the NAACP, let alone the most similar organization "on the other side".
Batman, we both know that the reality of the world is uneven justice. However, the only way to erase this human flaw is to have a truly colorblind / creedblind society. This can never happen as long as there are groups like the NAACP and KKK who champion a race rather than a humanity. Now you probably will say to me that one is less of an evil than the other. But I say to you, if a man on your left steals $5 from your wallet and the man on your right steals $10, are they not both thieves? Here's to a glass of wine together some day!
it always amazes me when people choose to totally ignore the historical context of why a group like the naacp even exists. its the same people who argue that groups like black fraternities are racists totally ignoring the fact that the only reason these organizations exist is because blacks weren't allowed to join the other fraternities at the time of their founding. if you have a problem with what the naacp stands for you need to take it up with the history of this country and please refrain from making idioic statements comparing them to the kkk.
The problem with organizations like the NAACP is that they don't really care about the "Advancement of Colored People" anymore. They care about keeping certain politicians and certain political parties in power. If you're a conservative minority, you can pretty much give up much hope of the NAACP, LULAC, etc. representing your interests.
If you look at the actions of the NAACP, especially in recent times, it's more about getting people to vote for Democrats than any type of advancement for minorities. They've become a pawn of the DNC. I think even members of the organization have noticed it because in the last election there was a big deal about them endorsing a Republican candidate to "wake the Democrats up" because they were taking them for granted.
The "idiocy" depends on which side of the bread is buttered, doesn't it? You may not agree with me and I may not be the sharpest knife in the box, but few would accuse of me of "idiocy." However, if you desire my silence in contradiction to the standards of liberty but pursuant to those of a dictatorship, you must offer a serious challenge based on wit, logic and reasoned perspective, i.e. facts.
challenge what? there is nothing to challenge. we all know why the naacp exists. you're right, they specifically champion the causes of blacks. we've already established that, we've already established why that is. there is nothing to challenge.
As I said to Batman Jones, "Now you probably will say to me that one is less of an evil than the other. But I say to you, if a man on your left steals $5 from your wallet and the man on your right steals $10, are they not both thieves?" The NAACP exists. So does the KKK. Do they have a right to exist? Yes. Should their racist purposes be exalted? No. They are both racist organizations even though one is less odious than the other.
how has the naacp prevented anyone from voting, from having justice in the court system, from getting a job, etc? see that's the problem with your analogy. one group in its hey day used to prevent others from being full citizens. the naacp isn't trampling on anyone's civil rights. its not a zero sum game. because they look for black people's interest, they aren't working against anyone elses. the analogy is beyond stupid.
The NAACP along with sister organizations like ACORN has indeed trampled on civil rights by, for example, "raising voters from the dead" to skew voting results in their favor -- and through instances of intimidating black voters with threats or payola (see the radical days of the Black Panthers). The analogy is "beyond stupid" only because you choose to turn a blind eye to the truth. Granted, the one does not have as deep nor as dark a history of abuses as the other, but that $5 thief is still a thief.
what does the black panthers have to do with the naacp? the fact that you lump them together shows where you are coming from. all black groups are the same right? I don't know what the "raising voters from the dead" is referring to.
fortunately times change, and unfortunately so does the goals of an organization. NAACP is more concerned with its own financial and political issues than the general black population.
Google ACORN. As far as your lumping shot, it is a bb. I associate the two only because the NAACP has endorsed many of the positions espoused by some of their more radical associates. If I say I'm a Democrat but I always vote Republican, to which party do I belong? Same thing.
first of all, just because you want to lump them together, they are different organizations. so that point is moot. secondly, no one ever argued that the naacp was perfect, just that it isn't the kkk and the analogy is ridiculous.
Okay, since you continue to refuse a cogent response, choosing instead the child-like litany of an "it is so" argument, I abandon any further dialogue on the subject.
I'm pretty sure the NAACP has never lynched anyone. I'm pretty sure being in the NAACP doesn't require wearing a costume (even when it would have been beneficial to do so) and riding around freaking people out like the redneck Batman. The KKK was not an organization to advance anyone, it was a social club that sought to preserve a unjustifiable hierarchy through intimidation and violence. They were not interested in negotiation, they did not want to meet and discuss the issue. The NAACP was formed to help black people get their rights. They represented the oppressed, not the oppressors. It's like saying NAMBLA and Unicef are the same because they both concern themselves with children, or that NORML and the DEA are the same because they're both concerned with the legality of drugs. You may be able to find some militant black groups from the 60s who were willing to use violence to accomplish their aims (but can you find examples of times they actually did?) - but, not only were groups like that incredibly rare, they never had significant enough membership to accomplish their agenda or really have much impact at all. The KKK, on the other hand, relied almost exclusively on violence and intimidation. Maybe you're arguing that both organizations are 'racist' because they represent the interests of particular races - and therefore they're the 'same'. For one, this relies on a generic, non-valued denotation of the term 'racist' that ignores how it is commonly and historically used. It's like you insisting that the word 'gay' only means 'happy'. Second (and here comes another metaphor), stating that both organizations are the same based on both of them being 'racist' is like saying humans and ostriches are the same because both species have two legs. You're arguing about the word 'racist' itself, but you're ignoring how the word actually works in the world. thumbs, I have the feeling you're being disingenuous and just trying to be controversial. Fine, here's your argument. But, seriously, you don't really have enough of a point to make your controversy substantive.
If the woman was white it wouldn't matter cuz they'd be convicted in a New York minute. The NAACP has no need to get involved in this case as it stands. And what hypocrisy? The NAACP isn't rushing to the aid of a white girl? Why should they? It doesn't really protect their interests unless the "suspects" are minorities who are unfairly convicted based on circumstantial evidence or something of the sort. Are you serious? To be blunt, the KKK's main purpose was to torment, torture, disenfranchise and strip an entire race of people of their rights purely because they don't suffer from a melenin defiency. The NAACP has never tried to deny anyone of their basic rights as a human. I really lets compare here; The KKK is all for lynching them no good coloreds cuz they looked at a decent white woman or God forbid, tried to exercise their right to vote, while the NAACP just wants to make sure that black people have some symbolance of equality in the white mans world we live in. It is not at all the same thing and its really a slap in the face to any person of color that you'd compare the two especialy since you don't seem to understand racism in its practical application at all. Well said. I always wondered why it was that white people like to blame people of color for the problems they created. If everyone had be treated as equal in the first place we wouldn't still be trying, rather unsucessfullly, to fix things now. Alas, the sins of the father will come back to haunt his children. I suggest having a nice long talk with your grandparents and then maybe you'll gain some perspective.
