Another mass shooting in the US

[Rinkals]

Or he was just more honest about it.

He was honestly more of a racist and by the standards of other people in his position he was fucking awful. Sorry.

So what level of racism would be acceptable to you? I never thought one could apply a Dante's inferno type of understanding on racism. My understanding is you're either a racist or you're not.

Can you seriously look at a person and judge if they are black or white? Apart from the obvious extremes of course.

Don't you remember the 'pancil test'? I'll remind you: in order to judge whether a person was black or white, a pencil was inserted into their hair. If it fell out, you were white.

I'm pretty sure that Connie Mulder would have failed that test. What about Damian de Allende? wasn't he deemed coloured for representative purposes against his own protestations?

The point is that racial distinctions are largely contrived and anyone who isn't racist recognises that.

[average joe]

Of course there's varying degrees of prejudice, kinda mad to think otherwise.

Of course yes, but your degrees of prejudice does not make you any less or more a racist. If you only whisper your prejudice to your partner in the confines of your room or you broadcast it on national radio, you're still just a racist. If you only hate black people that comes from a certain part of Africa or anyone with different coloured skin, you're still just a racist.

[average joe]

He was honestly more of a racist and by the standards of other people in his position he was fucking awful. Sorry.

So what level of racism would be acceptable to you? I never thought one could apply a Dante's inferno type of understanding on racism. My understanding is you're either a racist or you're not.

Can you seriously look at a person and judge if they are black or white? Apart from the obvious extremes of course.

Don't you remember the 'pancil test'? I'll remind you: in order to judge whether a person was black or white, a pencil was inserted into their hair. If it fell out, you were white.

I'm pretty sure that Connie Mulder would have failed that test. What about Damian de Allende? wasn't he deemed coloured for representative purposes against his own protestations?

The point is that racial distinctions are largely contrived and anyone who isn't racist recognises that.

I don't know what you're on about. It's nether here nor there and this is way I choose not to engage with you on anything.

[sockwithaticket]

There are degrees of racism. Someone who believes in and perhaps voices derogatory stereotypes about a race is a little different from someone who specifically won't hire people of a certain race or, as we've seen in the recent incident, goes on a murderous rampage because they believe in replacement theory. In a binary test of 'are each of these 3 people racist?' the answer is obviously yes, but it has manifestations that differ in severity and impact.

[Tilly Orifice]

Of course there's varying degrees of prejudice, kinda mad to think otherwise.

Of course yes, but your degrees of prejudice does not make you any less or more a racist. If you only whisper your prejudice to your partner in the confines of your room or you broadcast it on national radio, you're still just a racist. If you only hate black people that comes from a certain part of Africa or anyone with different coloured skin, you're still just a racist.

If you adopt a condescending attitude toward black people, and make sure to offer them a bit more help and supervision at work; are you as racist as a bloke who enjoys a good lynching?

[JM2K6]

Of course there's varying degrees of prejudice, kinda mad to think otherwise.

Of course yes, but your degrees of prejudice does not make you any less or more a racist. If you only whisper your prejudice to your partner in the confines of your room or you broadcast it on national radio, you're still just a racist. If you only hate black people that comes from a certain part of Africa or anyone with different coloured skin, you're still just a racist.

That's fine. The point is that levels of racism don't mean they're not racists. Yes, they're all racists. But the guy who only hires white people without consciously recognising that that's what he's doing is probably less prejudiced than the old woman who fears being around black people because she's been fed a diet of nightmare stories by the right wing media who is probably less prejudiced than the guy who believes black people are inferior to white people and actively works to cause them harm...

Sure, they're all racist in some way. But it's daft to pretend there isn't a difference between, say, Stephen Miller and Ron Atkinson.

[average joe]

Of course there's varying degrees of prejudice, kinda mad to think otherwise.

Of course yes, but your degrees of prejudice does not make you any less or more a racist. If you only whisper your prejudice to your partner in the confines of your room or you broadcast it on national radio, you're still just a racist. If you only hate black people that comes from a certain part of Africa or anyone with different coloured skin, you're still just a racist.

That's fine. The point is that levels of racism don't mean they're not racists. Yes, they're all racists. But the guy who only hires white people without consciously recognising that that's what he's doing is probably less prejudiced than the old woman who fears being around black people because she's been fed a diet of nightmare stories by the right wing media who is probably less prejudiced than the guy who believes black people are inferior to white people and actively works to cause them harm...

Sure, they're all racist in some way. But it's daft to pretend there isn't a difference between, say, Stephen Miller and Ron Atkinson.

So that brings me back to my question. What level of racism is acceptable to you?

[JM2K6]

Of course yes, but your degrees of prejudice does not make you any less or more a racist. If you only whisper your prejudice to your partner in the confines of your room or you broadcast it on national radio, you're still just a racist. If you only hate black people that comes from a certain part of Africa or anyone with different coloured skin, you're still just a racist.

That's fine. The point is that levels of racism don't mean they're not racists. Yes, they're all racists. But the guy who only hires white people without consciously recognising that that's what he's doing is probably less prejudiced than the old woman who fears being around black people because she's been fed a diet of nightmare stories by the right wing media who is probably less prejudiced than the guy who believes black people are inferior to white people and actively works to cause them harm...

Sure, they're all racist in some way. But it's daft to pretend there isn't a difference between, say, Stephen Miller and Ron Atkinson.

So that brings me back to my question. What level of racism is acceptable to you?

What a weird non-sequitor of a question. What does this have to do with Reagan being quite a bit more racist than many of his contempories and with you trying to make out everyone was the same, when a cursory understanding of the line of US presidents shows that was not true at all?

I have no real idea what level of racism is "acceptable" to me. I'd have to define acceptable, which can mean all kinds of things. I'd have to define "levels", which seems pretty pointless after everything I just wrote. And I'd essentially have to take every situation on a case-by-case basis, as you'd expect. And I'm certainly not willing to do any of that for the sake of jumping through hoops for someone who seems to be arguing in bad faith.

And hey, guess what? Even I thought all racism was acceptable, and in fact wanted all black people to be shot into the sun, it still wouldn't make Reagan comparable to his peers.

[weegie01]

If you adopt a condescending attitude toward black people, and make sure to offer them a bit more help and supervision at work; are you as racist as a bloke who enjoys a good lynching?

New to South Africa, my first visit to Soweto was in the company of a wealthy couple white couple who did a great deal of charity work there. Shortly afterwards, they won an important award for their work.

It was only later that I realised that they were amongst the most racist people I knew. As you allude to above, their fundamental belief was that the black population was less able than the white, so needed help and support. It was the most classic manifestation of white saviour complex I had seen up to that point.

[inactionman]

Of course yes, but your degrees of prejudice does not make you any less or more a racist. If you only whisper your prejudice to your partner in the confines of your room or you broadcast it on national radio, you're still just a racist. If you only hate black people that comes from a certain part of Africa or anyone with different coloured skin, you're still just a racist.

That's fine. The point is that levels of racism don't mean they're not racists. Yes, they're all racists. But the guy who only hires white people without consciously recognising that that's what he's doing is probably less prejudiced than the old woman who fears being around black people because she's been fed a diet of nightmare stories by the right wing media who is probably less prejudiced than the guy who believes black people are inferior to white people and actively works to cause them harm...

Sure, they're all racist in some way. But it's daft to pretend there isn't a difference between, say, Stephen Miller and Ron Atkinson.

So that brings me back to my question. What level of racism is acceptable to you?

I'm not sure if it's ever acceptable, but some persons and acts are certainly more contemptible than others.

Strangely - as ignorance is one of the things that usually gets me disproportionately riled - I've more tolerance for racists whose racism is caused mainly by ignorance than those who have had ample opportunity to address their prejudice but don't have the character to do so. I'm wondering how many times Ron Atkinson had his prejudice challenged in his daily life (clearly not enough) - is he irredeemably racist or someone who simply needs educating? One of the most unsavoury aspects of Trump's dogwhistling, for example, is the degree of cynical calculation. I've a degree of sympathy for the poorly educated person who falls for the dogwhistle. Yes, Trump is playing on latent racism but he's embedding it rather than dismantling it, and it's yet another reason to hold him in contempt. I say all this to make the laboured point that some racists just seem to have prejudice dripping from every pore of the body, others just seem to be, well, a bit gullible, but this at least gives us a chance to address their ignorance.

[Line6 HXFX]

That's fine. The point is that levels of racism don't mean they're not racists. Yes, they're all racists. But the guy who only hires white people without consciously recognising that that's what he's doing is probably less prejudiced than the old woman who fears being around black people because she's been fed a diet of nightmare stories by the right wing media who is probably less prejudiced than the guy who believes black people are inferior to white people and actively works to cause them harm...

Sure, they're all racist in some way. But it's daft to pretend there isn't a difference between, say, Stephen Miller and Ron Atkinson.

So that brings me back to my question. What level of racism is acceptable to you?

I'm not sure if it's ever acceptable, but some persons and acts are certainly more contemptible than others.

Strangely - as ignorance is one of the things that usually gets me disproportionately riled - I've more tolerance for racists whose racism is caused mainly by ignorance than those who have had ample opportunity to address their prejudice but don't have the character to do so. I'm wondering how many times Ron Atkinson had his prejudice challenged in his daily life (clearly not enough) - is he irredeemably racist or someone who simply needs educating? One of the most unsavoury aspects of Trump's dogwhistling, for example, is the degree of cynical calculation. I've a degree of sympathy for the poorly educated person who falls for the dogwhistle. Yes, Trump is playing on latent racism but he's embedding it rather than dismantling it, and it's yet another reason to hold him in contempt. I say all this to make the laboured point that some racists just seem to have prejudice dripping from every pore of the body, others just seem to be, well, a bit gullible, but this at least gives us a chance to address their ignorance.

Yeah, but you know, how do you go through life being "innocently" ignorant, or ignorantly racist? If I turned up to the office or workplace and was all racist, I would be on a HR course on racial diversity in 3 seconds flat. I don't believe you can innocently or ignorantly hate anyone. Trump supporters
largely came from the educated middle classes, who have self serving contempt for anyone not like them.it serves them to have contempt for different groups of people, so they do. Self serving contempt goes way beyond "innocent" hatred.

[Tilly Orifice]

So that brings me back to my question. What level of racism is acceptable to you?

I'm not sure if it's ever acceptable, but some persons and acts are certainly more contemptible than others.

Strangely - as ignorance is one of the things that usually gets me disproportionately riled - I've more tolerance for racists whose racism is caused mainly by ignorance than those who have had ample opportunity to address their prejudice but don't have the character to do so. I'm wondering how many times Ron Atkinson had his prejudice challenged in his daily life (clearly not enough) - is he irredeemably racist or someone who simply needs educating? One of the most unsavoury aspects of Trump's dogwhistling, for example, is the degree of cynical calculation. I've a degree of sympathy for the poorly educated person who falls for the dogwhistle. Yes, Trump is playing on latent racism but he's embedding it rather than dismantling it, and it's yet another reason to hold him in contempt. I say all this to make the laboured point that some racists just seem to have prejudice dripping from every pore of the body, others just seem to be, well, a bit gullible, but this at least gives us a chance to address their ignorance.

Yeah, but you know, how do you go through life being "innocently" ignorant, or ignorantly racist? If I turned up to the office or workplace and was all racist, I would be on a HR course on racial diversity in 3 seconds flat. I don't believe you can innocently or ignorantly hate anyone. Trump supporters
largely came from the educated middle classes, who have self serving contempt for anyone not like them.it serves them to have contempt for different groups of people, so they do. Self serving contempt goes way beyond "innocent" hatred.

You're unnecessarily confounding racism and hatred.

[robmatic]

Yeah, but you know, how do you go through life being "innocently" ignorant, or ignorantly racist? If I turned up to the office or workplace and was all racist, I would be on a HR course on racial diversity in 3 seconds flat. I don't believe you can innocently or ignorantly hate anyone. Trump supporters
largely came from the educated middle classes, who have self serving contempt for anyone not like them.it serves them to have contempt for different groups of people, so they do. Self serving contempt goes way beyond "innocent" hatred.

I have a bit more sympathy for the ignorant because I only learned this week that the phrases 'people of colour' and 'coloured people' are not the same and in fact one of them is a massively racist slur.

[Slick]

Yeah, but you know, how do you go through life being "innocently" ignorant, or ignorantly racist? If I turned up to the office or workplace and was all racist, I would be on a HR course on racial diversity in 3 seconds flat. I don't believe you can innocently or ignorantly hate anyone. Trump supporters
largely came from the educated middle classes, who have self serving contempt for anyone not like them.it serves them to have contempt for different groups of people, so they do. Self serving contempt goes way beyond "innocent" hatred.

I have a bit more sympathy for the ignorant because I only learned this week that the phrases 'people of colour' and 'coloured people' are not the same and in fact one of them is a massively racist slur.

Except in some places where it's the other way round. It's tough, don't be hard on yourself.

[fishfoodie]

Here we go again

Texas, 18 yo Incel, 14 dead children, & a dead teacher..


Lets start giving guns to 5 years olds, it's the only possible solution

[sefton]

Here we go again

Texas, 18 yo Incel, 14 dead children, & a dead teacher..


Lets start giving guns to 5 years olds, it's the only possible solution

When I saw that pop up on my phone it just left me speechless.

[Wyndham Upalot]

Land of the free, and right to bear arms, stupid cunts don't learn, RIP those innocent kids and people. It won't change because ... dollar signs dominate. Thank fuck I have the mobility and freedom that those poor bastards didn't. Love visiting the US, fuck living there.

[Slick]

Here we go again

Texas, 18 yo Incel, 14 dead children, & a dead teacher..


Lets start giving guns to 5 years olds, it's the only possible solution

Primary school.

Genuinely upset by this. Speech from the President incoming. Nothing will change. What a fucked up situation.

[Gumboot]

[Kawazaki]

[fishfoodie]

Biden needs to come in & announce a plan to take the GOP template for allowing individual citizens to sue abortion providers, & make it a Federal law to allow individuals to sue gun brokers, makers, licensees (i.e. States), for punitive damages, if they supply, or authorize a gun in a mass shooting.

There are 15 bereaved families today, that should be able to sue the, Great State Of Texas for a billion dollars each, & for whatever bunch of death merchants put the gun in his hands,

[Kiwias]

Feelings expressed best with this gif from the previous page, because we know there will be no concrete steps taken to reduce the insanity.

[Biffer]

Feelings expressed best with this gif from the previous page, because we know there will be no concrete steps taken to reduce the insanity.

Exactly.

[Gumboot]

Feelings expressed best with this gif from the previous page, because we know there will be no concrete steps taken to reduce the insanity.

Exactly.

Blah blah blah Second Amendment blah blah blah... as if nothing's changed in the last 230 years.

So far in 2022, there have been at least 212 mass shootings in the US, according to the nonprofit organisational Gun Violence Archive, which CNN reported. This means there have been more mass shootings this year than there have been days this year.

Oh well, I guess thoughts and prayers will have to do.

[Hal Jordan]

21 dead. Significantly less than Sandy Hook so the guns lobby will be somewhat relieved this morning. Republicans had the house in 2012 and will again in a few months. Not that Democrats can get fuck all done with a majority either way. The lobby will always turn a few red neck Democrats until it all dies down

Manchin and Sinema are Republican in all but name.

[Slick]

Ted Cruz out to prove he is the biggest cunt in America again.

[Raggs]

Fuck me. Just read that the parents are being dna swabbed to help with identification due to the damage done.

I'm getting my boy ready for school right now, this is just sickening.

[petej]

Ted Cruz out to prove he is the biggest cunt in America again.

Just playing to his audience. Americans love guns.

[Blackmac]

22 kids shot every day and 5 killed. This will barely raise the average.

[robmatic]

Who'd raise or willingly bring kids there all the same. The violence is too random and frequent. Even if you could block that you have fucking scanners in schools. My kids are scaredy cats as it is so that would just tip them over the edge

They have police officers stationed in schools so that the kids are 'safe'. You get all the trappings of a repressive police state and excessive violence at the same time.

[Guy Smiley]

Basketball coach Steve Kerr lays down some hard truths...

[I like neeps]

They should release the crime scene photos. Those poor kids can't be identified by sight because of what an AR15 does to someone. Release the pictures, even the nutjobs can't see something like that and stay the course of the guns aren't the problem.

[Gumboot]

They should release the crime scene photos. Those poor kids can't be identified by sight because of what an AR15 does to someone. Release the pictures, even the nutjobs can't see something like that and stay the course of the guns aren't the problem.

Did it make any difference to the nutjobs that shared the live stream of the ChCh mosque massacres?

[I like neeps]

They should release the crime scene photos. Those poor kids can't be identified by sight because of what an AR15 does to someone. Release the pictures, even the nutjobs can't see something like that and stay the course of the guns aren't the problem.

Did it make any difference to the nutjobs that shared the live stream of the ChCh mosque massacres?

They took that down pretty quickly with minimal views though. You'd need to know where to look to find it nowadays.

[Tichtheid]

I wondered how many mass shootings there had been in the US this year, I knew it was a high number, but I was amazed that this is the 49th, not this year but this month, and we've still got another week to go

[TB63]

[TB63]

[petej]

They should release the crime scene photos. Those poor kids can't be identified by sight because of what an AR15 does to someone. Release the pictures, even the nutjobs can't see something like that and stay the course of the guns aren't the problem.

Did it make any difference to the nutjobs that shared the live stream of the ChCh mosque massacres?

Not about the nutjobs. They are a small minority. The issue remains that America loves guns. I think you would reach a tipping point at about 25% of households having guns. From the link below it is about 1/3. More households have guns in Oregon than Texas which surprised me.
https://www.rand.org/research/gun-polic ... rship.html

[TB63]

[PCPhil]

In the UK I think we were surprised at how a single issue, Brexit in our case, could totally dominate politics and become tribal like supporting a football team. People who had never took a strong position on anything political before took sides on their emotional feeling and nothing could convince them otherwise.

In the states it is like that but magnified 10 times on guns. Powerful people know that and use it cleverly. Can’t ever see it changing.