is killing blacks * the newest form of crowdfunding?

[hand2handking]

 
people that pay to support these racists can keep their names private just like how someone can remain unknown after donating to a sex offender

there are literally hundreds of examples throughout history where religion was used to promote racism, but thats a thread topic in itself 

my problem with this is that racism is so institutionalized that it is even more powerful when money is being given directly to support it.  im saying that as a way to counteract the support racism can receive in such a wide-reaching and public manner is to make public the names of people who support such causes.  

as far as religion and racism, my point wasnt to say that religion can't be used to promote racism, but rather that religion in and of itself does not teach racism

Cuz you can't label a person something like racist and especially hate criminals just for supporting someone with money. I said I assume they're racists for the most part but that doesn't mean they are. They can just as easily be ppl that think the person is not guilty and wants to see the person get a proper defense and not be a victim of the high rates it takes to have competent counsel.

But more importantly about revealing names, that's not how donations work. If you want to change that go speak with your congressman or go hack the IRS or the defense attorney's firm accepting the money on behalf of his client.

supporting someone with money is like literally putting your money where your mouth is.  as you say they can just want to see someone get a proper defense, and i understand innocent before proven guilty.  however there seems to be a double standard at play where in proclaiming the white man innocent, the black man is automatically declared guilty.  the facts have yet to even be revealed and yet the black man is always the threat, they can always go back and look at his social media and call him a thug etc.  

when you say whatever they do it is their own, thats exactly what im saying.  their own reason for supporting causes like this are racist, whether because you think the shooter is hero or the victim is a criminal/thug etc.

when its peoples lives being taken the crime does matter because with the money gained, murderers can walk free simply because the public supports it.

of course i know donations dont work that way, but as i said before the institution that exists provides avenues for racism to hide behind.  im not saying in every case of donations peoples name should be revealed.

They're not being killed for funding because racist occurrences happen everyday.

so everyday more and more black people will be shot and more and more money will be raised to defend the shooters?

 

[Master Zik]

supporting someone with money is like literally putting your money where your mouth is.  as you say they can just want to see someone get a proper defense, and i understand innocent before proven guilty.  however there seems to be a double standard at play where in proclaiming the white man innocent, the black man is automatically declared guilty.  the facts have yet to even be revealed and yet the black man is always the threat, they can always go back and look at his social media and call him a thug etc.  

If you want to address the double standard you perceive then go about it the right way. I'm still not seeing anything about this thread topic that isn't stupid.

This aint helping. Go and prove that the black man is "automatically guilty" while the white man gets a chance and then do something to change that.

when you say whatever they do it is their own, thats exactly what im saying.  their own reason for supporting causes like this are racist, whether because you think the shooter is hero or the victim is a criminal/thug etc.

If you want to get names revealed proving that they supported for racists reasons wouldn't help that.

when its peoples lives being taken the crime does matter because with the money gained, murderers can walk free simply because the public supports it.

You misunderstand. The crime doesn't matter for a person to have the right to donate and support. People have supported murderers and accused murderers for their trials since it's been allowed.

You also seem to be confusing things. Just because the public supports a murderer doesn't mean they'll walk free. It is your right to have the best lawyer you can get if you're charged with a crime. Just cuz the public supports you and you get a really good lawyer doesn't guarantee you'll walk free.

of course i know donations dont work that way, but as i said before the institution that exists provides avenues for racism to hide behind.  im not saying in every case of donations peoples name should be revealed.

It's not just racism though, like I said, there's a right for you to support anyone financially in this situation without getting your name revealed. It can be racism or it can be something as simple as you don't like the law the person was charged with to something petty like you don't like the prosecutor.

That's why you can't focus just on racism. You open the door for one you open it for all and if you don't have the names you can't prove who of the supporters did it for racist reasons or not.

 

[hand2handking]

Originally Posted by Master Zik  

If you want to address the double standard you perceive then go about it the right way. I'm still not seeing anything about this thread topic that isn't stupid.

This aint helping. Go and prove that the black man is "automatically guilty" while the white man gets a chance and then do something to change that.

If you want to get names revealed proving that they supported for racists reasons wouldn't help that.

You misunderstand. The crime doesn't matter for a person to have the right to donate and support. People have supported murderers and accused murderers for their trials since it's been allowed.

You also seem to be confusing things. Just because the public supports a murderer doesn't mean they'll walk free. It is your right to have the best lawyer you can get if you're charged with a crime. Just cuz the public supports you and you get a really good lawyer doesn't guarantee you'll walk free.

It's not just racism though, like I said, there's a right for you to support anyone financially in this situation without getting your name revealed. It can be racism or it can be something as simple as you don't like the law the person was charged with to something petty like you don't like the prosecutor.

That's why you can't focus just on racism. You open the door for one you open it for all and if you don't have the names you can't prove who of the supporters did it for racist reasons or not.

look im merely identifying that these things exist and the factors at play.

you and other dude telling me to go out and do something about doesnt invalidate what im saying.

as far as good lawyers not being a guarantee, the point is that its stacking deck with the publics money and inherent approval.  at the very least, your chances are greater than if no one donated correct?

once again, i understand the openness of allowing anyone to contribute to anything.

what i am challenging is that race (and racism) is a clear determinant in people choosing to donate to certain causes.

like the fact that it is open to any reason is all the more reason im saying that people will above all else donate for racist motivations.

like what logical reason is there to pledge money to a man without any evidence of his proclaimed innocence?

 

[SIETE TRES LA]

OP is Jrose5

 

[thunderchunk69]

im saying that white men are shooting young black men in order to crowdfund.

That's racist bruh

He's black though.

what if he's Dominican though?

(funny how my old jokes that everyone 'hated' are ok when repeated by 'others' )

also OP is on my ignore list... wonder why.

 

[Master Zik]

If you want to address the double standard you perceive then go about it the right way. I'm still not seeing anything about this thread topic that isn't stupid.


This aint helping. Go and prove that the black man is "automatically guilty" while the white man gets a chance and then do something to change that.

If you want to get names revealed proving that they supported for racists reasons wouldn't help that.


You misunderstand. The crime doesn't matter for a person to have the right to donate and support. People have supported murderers and accused murderers for their trials since it's been allowed.


You also seem to be confusing things. Just because the public supports a murderer doesn't mean they'll walk free. It is your right to have the best lawyer you can get if you're charged with a crime. Just cuz the public supports you and you get a really good lawyer doesn't guarantee you'll walk free.


It's not just racism though, like I said, there's a right for you to support anyone financially in this situation without getting your name revealed. It can be racism or it can be something as simple as you don't like the law the person was charged with to something petty like you don't like the prosecutor.


That's why you can't focus just on racism. You open the door for one you open it for all and if you don't have the names you can't prove who of the supporters did it for racist reasons or not.

look im merely identifying that these things exist and the factors at play.

you and other dude telling me to go out and do something about doesnt invalidate what im saying.

as far as good lawyers not being a guarantee, the point is that its stacking deck with the publics money and inherent approval.  at the very least, your chances are greater than if no one donated correct?

once again, i understand the openness of allowing anyone to contribute to anything.

what i am challenging is that race (and racism) is a clear determinant in people choosing to donate to certain causes.

like the fact that it is open to any reason is all the more reason im saying that people will above all else donate for racist motivations.

like what logical reason is there to pledge money to a man without any evidence of his proclaimed innocence?

All I said was that it wasn't smart. Nothing you've said so far has convinced me otherwise for your reasons to start this thread.

You still don't get the circular logic of making a claim and labeling the ppl that support as racists and then want to infringe on their rights in order to prove that they are racists.

To answer your original question, yes it was necessary to say "Guess he's not smart then" I'll be a smart guy if that's the result of it.

OP is Jrose5

Hmmmmmmm

 

[hand2handking]

All I said was that it wasn't smart. Nothing you've said so far has convinced me otherwise for your reasons to start this thread.

You still don't get the circular logic of making a claim and labeling the ppl that support as racists and then want to infringe on their rights in order to prove that they are racists.

To answer your original question, yes it was necessary to say "Guess he's not smart then" I'll be a smart guy if that's the result of it.

just trying to frame it into a narrative that fits what you/re trying to argue 

im not the one donating money to cause just off the fact that i hear its a white defendant and a black victim.

im not the one that posts racist messages along with my pledge of support.

it is not the releasing of the names that proves them racist, it is them pledging their money.

releasing the names is just so that you could know your local sheriff, doctor, lawyer etc believes in a mans innocence simply based off the color of his skin.

 

[Master Zik]

All I said was that it wasn't smart. Nothing you've said so far has convinced me otherwise for your reasons to start this thread.


You still don't get the circular logic of making a claim and labeling the ppl that support as racists and then want to infringe on their rights in order to prove that they are racists.


To answer your original question, yes it was necessary to say "Guess he's not smart then" I'll be a smart guy if that's the result of it.

just trying to frame it into a narrative that fits what you/re trying to argue 

If that's how you feel then I'm sure you can understand that I feel you're just trying to frame this narrative in a way so that you can argue for it albeit a stupid argument.

it is not the releasing of the names that proves them racist, it is them pledging their money.

Again you can't prove who is and who isn't a racist based off of this. This is why I said it's close minded. You got a narrow minded view on this off of the dumb premise.

 

[hand2handking]

 
im not the one that posts racist messages along with my pledge of support.

 

[Master Zik]

So now you specifically want the names of the ppl that post racist messages What is being accomplished again? I mean if they're making racist posts then you already know they're racists right? You'll have to come up with a better reason for wanting their actual names revealed in connection to supporting a crowd fund than them being racist or making racist posts.

Like are you trying to make this about racists hiding behind the internet on crowd funding sites now?

You went from something dumb to now jumping on to a witch hunt.

 

[threeoneoh]

waaaahh waaaahhh waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh somebody call the waaaaaammmmbulance

 

[hand2handking]

You'll have to come up with a better reason for wanting their actual names revealed in connection to supporting a crowd fund than them being racist or making racist posts.

 

[Master Zik]

You'll have to come up with a better reason for wanting their actual names revealed in connection to supporting a crowd fund than them being racistor making racist posts.

What don't you understand?

Simply being racist isn't a crime, you know All that racist posting you included to crowd funding you pushed the goalposts back to falls under free speech. No different than the racists on youtube, yahoo, and any other place with a comment section.

If you want to have these ppl's name revealed a.k.a. infringe upon their rights you'll need a better reason than the accusation of them being racists or that they made racists post in the comment section of a crowdfunding pg. You should know this if this is your goal but then again if you did I think you'd know why you won't succeed.

 

[fontaine]

I always find it amazing how black people can be so fragmented on things, and other groups aren't...

When some stuff break bread, many other races stick together like butt cheeks...

But black people just have a knack for disagreeing, arguing, and putting down other black people.

 

[thunderchunk69]

But black people just have a knack for disagreeing, arguing, and putting down other black people.

it's almost like they're individuals

 

[OrangeBlueGarden]

The idea of killing black men has always been accepted,encouraged and profitable, just ask your favorite rapper.

2pac?

 

[zapatohead408]

I always find it amazing how black people can be so fragmented on things, and other groups aren't...

When some stuff break bread, many other races stick together like butt cheeks...

But black people just have a knack for disagreeing, arguing, and putting down other black people.

The latino community is just like this. They wanna see you do good, but never better than them.

 

[bendover]

I always find it amazing how black people can be so fragmented on things, and other groups aren't...

When some stuff break bread, many other races stick together like butt cheeks...

But black people just have a knack for disagreeing, arguing, and putting down other black people.

The latino community is just like this. They wanna see you do good, but never better than them.

White people do this too tho.
It's not a race thing.
There are very selfish people in this world that just don't want to see you make it. That's how you learn to pick and chose who you associate with.

 

[hand2handking]

What don't you understand?

Simply being racist isn't a crime, you know

All that racist posting you included to crowd funding you pushed the goalposts back to falls under free speech. No different than the racists on youtube, yahoo, and any other place with a comment section.

If you want to have these ppl's name revealed a.k.a. infringe upon their rights you'll need a better reason than the accusation of them being racists or that they made racists post in the comment section of a crowdfunding pg. You should know this if this is your goal but then again if you did I think you'd know why you won't succeed.

what are you talkin about i wasnt pushing any goalposts i hghlighted that after you said theres no way to know who is racist or not just by pledging.  i countered that with we know the ones who post racist messages along with their pledges are racist.  unless people can post racist messages online and arent considered racist?

the difference between a youtube comment, yahoo etc and this is the fact that along with that comment was a contribution.  i notice how its always a matter of rights when it comes to upholding white privilege.  i would think that making racist posts on the page of which you just donated money to is a clear enough indicator of racism for anybody to which one couldnt deny if their name was attached to their message.  

i never said racism was illegal, but what should be illegal is to allow its funding and organization under the guise of "right to donate" and "right to privacy"

furthermore, we cant label racists as such when they post like that, but a black man puts up a pic with a middle finger up or whatever and theyre thugs and criminals right?

 

[Master Zik]

First you said you wanted all of the ppl's names who supported because you believe them all to be racists. I said there's no way to justify that. You simply can't make a blanket statement that they're racist just because they supported. Then you push the goalposts back by saying ppl who supported that left racist posts. So now we're not talking about ppl who donated, we're talking about the ones that left racist posts and donated. It didn't change much but it just shows how willing you are to be argumentative because even under those conditions your request isn't justified.

This isn't about white privilege. You think only white ppl supported? Again this shows you're making wild accusations about ppl to try and justify what you're talking about. I'd be saying the same thing about rights and you looking to reveal these ppl's names if you switched races or made this about any other topic. For you to even imply I'm in favor of upholding white privilege just goes to show that you're willing to trot out any logical fallacy that suits you.

What exactly makes what you're talking about illegal? A person can easily lie to you about why they support something while they did it for a completely different reason. Sounds to me you're trying to police intent and thus police thoughts. Like it or not even racists are allowed to support the things they want to support. We're not talking about something that led to a hate crime. This is after the fact. The whole circular logic used to prop up this topic simply isn't floating.

I never said you personally can't label someone a racist for racist posts or actions.You are quite able to do that, it's obviously half of your argument You seriously can not be that confused to think that's what I'm saying when my posts are right there. I'm just saying you can't prove it and despite that a racist person supporting a crowd fund isn't grounds to now revoke everyone's rights when it comes to donating money or supporting someone or something. The law simply isn't with you if you're trying to get rid of racism this way or expose racists, you should know that.

Also no, "a black man puts up a pic with a middle finger up or whatever" does not make them a thug or a criminal. Are you so petty that you would think I'd agree with that? If your argument comes down to stupid sarcastic double standard questions then you got to do better. It really just a waste of keystrokes.

I always find it amazing how black people can be so fragmented on things, and other groups aren't...

When some stuff break bread, many other races stick together like butt cheeks...

But black people just have a knack for disagreeing, arguing, and putting down other black people.

Eh, I tend to find it that these other groups are fragmented but they find a way to get past it and mend those differences.

Also black ppl simply do not have the unity as any sort of pattern they can base off of. It's usually the result of a diaspora on such a global scale; you got your black ppl still from the mother land, then your black ppl from the Caribbean, then your black ppl from North America and that can be broken down to North and South then further more over time to Northeast/East coast, Midwest, South, West. A lot of similarities amongst us all, many of them being unfortunate things in common but there's just too much bull **** to wade through to find that ability to stick together.

 

[Brownstone]

I always find it amazing how black people can be so fragmented on things, and other groups aren't...

When some stuff break bread, many other races stick together like butt cheeks...

But black people just have a knack for disagreeing, arguing, and putting down other black people.

I mean, I for one am tired of having to agree with black people on "certain" issues. 

I feel unlike other races, blacks are expected to have 1 voice. Don't expect that I voted for Obama just cause I'm a brotha. I'm a real person, capable of original thought without the context of my ethnicity. 

As far as the original post goes, who cares? They just in so much denial they do the opposite of "white guilt" called "white blame" I would say bunch of Tea Party folks, but you'd be surprised how little liberals care about black people.

 

[hand2handking]

 

just because them donating is not justified evidence to you of their racism, doesnt mean its not.  

it just means you dont believe it.  

i believe them all to be racist, but since you wanted a distinction i gave you an undeniable one.  

now its im changing goalposts, when my point never changed.  

like i said, i think theyre all racists, but the only ones that can be proven are the ones that posted.  

i already told you how i believe that the only they are donating is because of a double standard on innocent until proven guilty.

now its "a stupid sarcastic double standard" when clearly we've seen how media portrayals and social media paint these black victims.  

denying that is sticking your head in the sand.

i never said only whites donate, i said racists donated.  

of course people can lie about why theyre donating, the reason why theyre not now and posting all of that stuff is because they are anonymous.

telling me that its not illegal and that the law wont expose racists is like saying the sky is blue.

what im saying is in cases where race is at play, they are a different classification from other issues.  

the funding of money to defend people with no evidence is wrong, when race is the only contributing factor.

you clearly said you cant justify calling someone a racist if you cant prove it, but when i say there is proof in the posting it becomes a free speech issue.

 trying to race-bait by implying that any self-respecting black would sell themselves out and donate to a cause like that.

you say its circular logic simply because the donations happened after the fact.

im saying how do you go and shoot and somebody and then just randomly decide to start a crowdfund and it not be with that purpose in mind?

its obvious that youre hung up on protecting the status quo and not what damage the moral implications have on the future of this country.

 

[mr marcus]

At this point I think the majority of white people are racist. Some in that crowd doesn't know they are until they're faced with a situation.

The **** that went down at the cardinals baseball game is sickening

It's just sad the ignorant majority gives the good minority of whites a bad name. I wish I could say I like white people as a whole but I can't cause the majority doesn't like me because of my skin color. I'll just like white folks on an individual basis.

 

[hand2handking]

see but youre not allowed to think like that

for them its like you have to wait until they do or say something racist

in their minds its ok for them be as racist as they want because thats their private business

but they can stereotype all day all night, call the people who built this country lazy, torture us and we're the monsters

shape the conversation on race how they want to

make race issues about both sides coming together, or black ppl needing to unite or colorless society etc

never wanting to just str8 up acknowledge both the privilege and the destruction

 

[Master Zik]

 

just because them donating is not justified evidence to you of their racism, doesnt mean its not.  

it just means you dont believe it.  

It's not about what I believe or don't. I'm saying you can't prove it. Did you read what I actually said? You keep trying to change what I clearly posted to fit your replies.

i believe them all to be racist, but since you wanted a distinction i gave you an undeniable one.  now its im changing goalposts, when my point never changed.  

That's called pushing the goalposts back. I didn't want a distinction or ask for one. I specifically told you what the case is and then you brought up a different situation.

That is exactly what pushing the goalposts back is. If you say x is _____ because of _____ and I say you can't prove this because of _____ and then you switch it to but what about x who do ______ that's pushing the goalposts back. We weren't talking about those ppl.

like i said, i think theyre all racists, but the only ones that can be proven are the ones that posted.  

i already told you how i believe that the only they are donating is because of a double standard on innocent until proven guilty.

What you believe isn't good enough.

now its "a stupid sarcastic double standard" when clearly we've seen how media portrayals and social media paint these black victims.

 
This is where your poor reading comprehension comes in and I think you're just arguing just to argue.

You don't even know what I was referring to when I said that or you're pretending you don't just to waste more key strokes. Your stupid sarcastic double standard has nothing to do with a double standard of innocent until proven guilty. That's not what I'm talking about. You asked me a stupid sarcastic double standard question about black men being criminals and thugs for doing "whatever" and posting pics of the middle finger with a "right?" at the end. That's a stupid question, it had to be sarcastic unless you're trying to pretend you know anything about my previous posting history that would agree this and it was a double standard question because you tried to imply that it's about rights when white ppl say something racist but it's not for black ppl. That whole question was uncalled for and a waste. You can think what you want about me but your assumptions and bias aint gonna fly here. You want to fit me in one definition and it's not working and you're just getting either petty or emotional with it.

denying that is sticking your head in the sand.

I'm not denying anything so how could I be sticking my head in the sand? You just can't seem to follow what I'm saying and what I'm replying to when I post. That's your problem. Reread the post slower and actually think about what I said.

i never said only whites donate, i said racists donated.  

Then why did you bring up white privilege? Don't back pedal now I didn't bring that up. You did. That's you assuming this is just about white ppl being racist. All racists do not benefit from white privilege. It's pretty clear who white privilege is for.

of course people can lie about why theyre donating, the reason why theyre not now and posting all of that stuff is because they are anonymous.

No ****. Welcome to the internet.

telling me that its not illegal and that the law wont expose racists is like saying the sky is blue.

You were the one that said it was illegal. I had to ask you is what exactly about it is illegal, you couldn't answer and now you're trying to say it was obvious

what im saying is in cases where race is at play, they are a different classification from other issues.  

So racism is a special issue more unique than other prejudicial issues that needs to be classified differently. Why?

the funding of money to defend people with no evidence is wrong, when race is the only contributing factor.

What are you talking about? This is bull ****. You seriously do not understand the ramifications of what you're saying right now.

you clearly said you cant justify calling someone a racist if you cant prove it, but when i say there is proof in the posting it becomes a free speech issue.

No. I'm saying two things here. You can't just call ppl racists for donating. You said ppl who donated are racists. You said that several times. Now you're switching what you're previously was talking about and saying ppl who donated and made racist posts are racist. So now the 2nd thing I'm telling you is them being racist and labeled racist to the whole world won't stop them from donating if they want to.

 trying to race-bait by implying that any self-respecting black would sell themselves out and donate to a cause like that.

Wow, you coming off like a real piece of **** right here. I'm a bit tired of your assumptions at this point. I don't even know what you're talking about or where this is coming from. You better start addressing me correctly or don't address me at all man.

you say its circular logic simply because the donations happened after the fact.

No. You have to understand what circular logic is first man It's circular logic because you called everybody who donated racist, you then want their names revealed so that you can prove they're racist. You've already blindly made a claim about all of these ppl. Now you want to infringe upon their rights to prove your claim.

im saying how do you go and shoot and somebody and then just randomly decide to start a crowdfund and it not be with that purpose in mind?

This is why I don't think you're smart.

Either case your bringing up, you do not know that they shot somebody and then went inside and started a crowd fund. I never said there was anything random about this. You just can't stop being narrow minded to not realize that any person charged with a crime would try to do this. A dude gets charged with a crime, lets say the crime gets national attention. Whether you like it or not there's gonna be a trial to determine guilt. Whether you like it or not there are ppl that believe that think the dude is guilty and ppl (if they're racist so be it, doesn't matter) that don't. Dude wants a good lawyer cuz he doesn't want to go to prison. Crowdfund is popular on the internet, so he goes there to gain support so he can pay for his legal fees.

We're going to see this a lot more with plenty of ppl charged with crimes.

its obvious that youre hung up on protecting the status quo and not what damage the moral implications have on the future of this country.

No. I just disagree with your stupid ideas on how to bring about actual effectual change for these heinous crimes and methods on how to make sure these things do not happen again. I think that's what's obvious. I think this thread topic is a joke, I don't think you're smart if this is how you want to go about things. Go ahead and try to make this about my views but all I've continually spoken about what you've said regarding this topic.

You haven't given any of your ideas actual thought. You haven't considered consequences or exactly how effective they'll be. The loopholes already in place, etc. I mean if it's just about ppl who make racist posts donating not allowed then they'll stop making posts. If you want to stop crowd fund for these ppl because they're charged with a crime where there's no evidence that proves their innocence then ppl will donate money through the mail or hell a relative of a person charged will start the crowd fund (this is very common) and they'll collect the money and pay for the legal fees. There been plenty race based trials before the internet. Plus like I said, this just opens the door for others even if you want to limit this just to racism. Any time a black man is wrongly accused of a racist crime he won't get any support now if there's no evidence right? So he'll get the ****** lawyer and end up in prison. Then everybody else like you with a bias against some other sort of prejudice based case will be asking for the same special exceptions in not allowing crowd funding for their cases.

What you don't understand is your solution is bull ****. It doesn't stop anything of value. It'll just give ppl a reason to look for a way around it. You up in here typing all this nonsense and not realizing it don't really matter had you got your way. The problem is not ppl supporting these ppl financially on an internet site but for some reason you can't see that. The lack of evidence has no real bearing on whether or not a person should or should not support someone if they want to.