SkyDekker

Who would have thought that getting into a van with strangers for free booze and dope was a bad idea? Thankfully the 9 were apprehended.

You left out the question regarding "retard". Do you first have to find out if mentally challenged people are offended by it?

It is a joke. Maybe not a funny one, but then I never did make it on Second City.

How do you define the target? Like Andy, I am offended by the use of the word nigger. Are only black people allowed to determine if the word is offensive? How does that work for "retard"? Those who might be retarded might not have the mental capacity to decide if it should offend them. When do you take a stand?

What good is the gun going to do? The pro-gun crowd always states that those intent on killing will find a way to do it, and the gun is just a tool. So, with that logic, if they knew you had a gun, they would just place explosives and blow up the room. (Who cares what the note says, they have already kidnapped you and are holding you against your will. Clearly these are people who cannot be trusted. Plus there is a donut shop around the corner, they would be at my place a lot quicker)

Redskins isn't offensive, but that tweet needed an apology. Too funny.

Why is "nigger" clear, but "redskins" needs a poll?

Why there is no civilian oversight of the police is completely beyond me.

Insiders will always be able to make different jokes than outsiders. Which is exactly the point.

Happy birthday double d.

For this forum to host a link to the beheading of a US journalist?

You said: If that is not a secret pact and it is out in the open, then clearly there must be documentation outlinging this. Not much happens in a political party without written directives, policy statements etc. The Democratic party not having a specific program to specifically help the black population is not evidence they use the black population and the status quo for money and votes. Unless of course you buy into a (secret) conspiracy theory.

Really? Somebody calling me cracker I would take offense to. Really? Truly? Your joking right? No, I am not joking. I would find it offensive. Next time you have a meeting with a senior caucasian officer in your company, call him or her cracker. See if that person finds it offensive.

Really? Somebody calling me cracker I would take offense to.

So before you decide if nigger is pejorative you need to poll the black population? If so, should we just let people self identify if they are black, or should there be additional proof of their blackness? How black would one have to be to have a valid opinion on the offensiveness of nigger?

A fair chunk of the lieberal lamestream media is owned by republicans. Right. I had forgotten that you never explain anything, you just throw one liners out there. Are there programs out there to only help the black population?

"Your Honor, I want to change my name." "Well, this is a very serious matter, and you had better have a very good reason before the Court will consider you request. What is your name?" "Joe Shit." "My goodness, we will certainly change your name! What is the name you wish?" "Fred Shit." Anyhow, there were some guys with whom I worked in Switzerland that ran a night spot by the name of the 'Dago Bar.' It had no negative connotations for them. The biggest use of seemingly derogatory epithets I have witnessed has been self-identified. 'Faggot,' 'nigger,' 'spic,' 'beaner,' etc. have been bandied back and forth in my presence, to and from people that fit the description. 'Nigger,' FWIW, is simply a variant of a word meaning 'black,' but its context has made its rather benign etymology moot. Most other epithets have similarly mild origins. As far as 'Redskins' goes, I don't even know offhand what sport is involved, and thus don't really care one way or another. BSBD, Winsor The swastika was popular by early aviators as a good luck charm. Before that it has been used by many different cultures and religions. Yet I doubt you will get a good reception walking into your synagogue with it sewn on your chest. Even if you explain you are using it as a good luck charm.

No, that is not the veiled message. The message is simple, everything has pros and cons. The US has taken the path that the pros of free and easy gun ownership outweigh the cons. Other countries feel that the cons outweigh the pros. I just happen to agree with the cons outweighing the pros. Maybe if I lived in a violent society, that balance would tip and the pros start outweighing the cons. In the end, the US has decide to grant a constitutional right to its citizens to have firearms. That right comes with cons. This kid getting shot is one of them.

Know how many family members, friends, pedestrians, etc, are mauled by dogs? Dogs are less predictable than guns and probably even more likely to maul or kill a friend or family member than is a gun. You are right. In stead of a family pet, everybody should have a family gun. These comparisons are getting stupid. In the end the US has a constitutional right to firearms, which simply is never going to change. The occasional kid just dies as a price to pay. Having the convenience of cars comes at the a price too. Each society will have to decide for itself which price they are willing to pay for which convenience/right. For me the costs of relatively free and unfettered gun ownership are not worth the benefits. I know many will disagree, which is fine.

I would. I know some who would do it with a grin on their face and brag about it, if they knew they could get away with it.

I addressed the grand conspiracy theory above. In short, it is delusional.

I just don't buy into this grand conspiracy theory fo all these groups working together, with the buy in from the media all working together for this common goal. That is a lot of people keeping secrets. It also means that organizations owned by Republicans are secretly working towards the greater good of the Democratic party. It simply doesn't make any sense.

I disagree. Sharpton and Jackson make money because of the issues at hand. Deal with the issues and Sharpton and Jackson will fade away. They wouldn't be "needed" any more. You have an incredibly large poor population, with the gap between rich and poor growing almost exponentially. The issues you are seeing will continue and will grow. A strong middle class is important for a strong society.

WHy are you ignoring the witness statements from those who state a different version of the story? You mean you are accusing him of doing what you are doing? Really? BTW, the so called witness that stated Brown had his hands up when he was shot was the same kid who helped him rob the store then there is that pesky fact that ALL shots entered from the front which goes against this so called witness statement that he was shot in the back But please continue I am not ignoring anything. There simply isn't enough information out there to make any kind of determination whether the shooting was justified or not. What you are seeing is the manifestation of racism that is still alive and well, wether it is perceived or not. A complete mishandling of the situation by the local cops once the shooting had happened. A population which has absolutely no faith in the police force. All followed by pisspoor handling of the nights after, combined with the militarization of police. That is what is causing the protests and riots. Clearly large portions of your society are an absolute powderkeg.....I would start adressing that, cause this will continue to happen.... To Anvil, have you ever noticed how the rich and priviliged don't riot much? Do you think that is because they are just not predisposed to rioting, or do you think it is because they have lots to lose?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? From an article that popped up about a different shooting: "Yet within 48 hours I got the message: The police had cleared themselves of all wrongdoing... In 129 years since police and fire commissions were created in the state of Wisconsin, we could not find a single ruling by a police department, an inquest or a police commission that a shooting was unjustified..." http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/what-i-did-after-police-killed-my-son-110038.html Decent article. Ontario has a civilian agency which investigates death and serious injuries with police involvement. This civilian agency has the ability to lay criminal charges against police officers.