As "urban war" escalates, neighbors are on patrol (armed with cellphones, flashlights and Twitter)

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I've seen women do that actually. But no race isn't the only component to that example.

We do know however that blacks have been (and still are). Disproportionally targetted by police for road side traffic stops. The argument can be made that black men are more likely to commit crime, yet it is reasonable to wonder to what extent that knowledge factors into police decisions as a matter of course than of individual precedent.

But you didn't answer my question... would I be Prejudiced .. if I crossed the street to avoid men but not women?

Well yes. You're still pre-judging people based on expected behavior. By definition that's prejudice.

[Peikko 1,575]

I think it would depend what the group of men looked like. Would you cross the street if you saw these guys?

or these?

Or these?

Or perhaps these?

[Heracles 417]

I would say anytime you have a group which has some notable consistencies, Ethnic, religion, political... why would it not be part of the story?

Certainly if it were a group of Hispanic youths gathered for the purpose of "community good" it would be reported, why not if they are criminals too?

Probably the same reason that when crimes are reported on the news, the description of the suspect will include things like "he is about 5'7"", wearing a white T-shirt and blue jeans," but will conspicuously leave out any mention of ethnicity or characteristics, such as skin color, that might suggest a particular ethnicity.

Remember back in the pre-60's era when SEX was taboo ??

Perhaps we are now in a new time era where "race" is the Taboo subject, at least in public.

IN the old days if you talked about sex... you must be a pervert.

NOw if you mention Race.. you mUst be a racist.

IN the old days, Talking about sex was thought to "encourage" more immoral activity.

Now, talking about Race, will Cause "more people to be hateful.

IN the Old days if you mentioned SEX in an unfamiliar crowd, everyone felt uneasy.

NOw, the mention of Race, in an unfamiliar crowd has the same effect.

Yeah, i'ts a weak comparison but something doesn't have to be EXACTLY the same to follow the same general pattern.

Race: the new Taboo

That is also why nothing changes with regards to crime or social equality. The UK also seems to suffer from the same issue when it comes to crime. Lets be PC rather than target and allocate resources to the actual problem. Consequently nothing changes. Why target Japanese youth just to be PC when they are not doing anything wrong?

Ironically the only time race is allowed to be used is when it comes to acknowledging a minority's success. Then we are all for dividing and grouping people into race, culture and skin color. This is a double standard. On one hand we are told we are all equal and that race should never be a factor. Yet on the other hand race is slapped in our face 24/7. For example, the first black American. First black this. First black that bla bla bla. I come from a country where one in four citizens was born overseas. I have never ever seen reported the first, Greek, Italian, Vietnamese, Lebanese. Which also says something considering most migrants or their kids are first generation Australians. Rather, in a article someone might mention so and so's parents migrated from xyz country.

Edited February 5, 2009 by Aficionado

[almaty 19]

I would say anytime you have a group which has some notable consistencies, Ethnic, religion, political... why would it not be part of the story?

Certainly if it were a group of Hispanic youths gathered for the purpose of "community good" it would be reported, why not if they are criminals too?

Probably the same reason that when crimes are reported on the news, the description of the suspect will include things like "he is about 5'7"", wearing a white T-shirt and blue jeans," but will conspicuously leave out any mention of ethnicity or characteristics, such as skin color, that might suggest a particular ethnicity.

Remember back in the pre-60's era when SEX was taboo ??

Perhaps we are now in a new time era where "race" is the Taboo subject, at least in public.

IN the old days if you talked about sex... you must be a pervert.

NOw if you mention Race.. you mUst be a racist.

IN the old days, Talking about sex was thought to "encourage" more immoral activity.

Now, talking about Race, will Cause "more people to be hateful.

IN the Old days if you mentioned SEX in an unfamiliar crowd, everyone felt uneasy.

NOw, the mention of Race, in an unfamiliar crowd has the same effect.

Yeah, i'ts a weak comparison but something doesn't have to be EXACTLY the same to follow the same general pattern.

Race: the new Taboo

That is also why nothing changes with regards to crime or social equality. The UK also seems to suffer from the same issue when it comes to crime. Lets be PC rather than target and allocate resources to the actual problem. Consequently nothing changes. Why target Japanese youth just to be PC when they are not doing anything wrong?

Ironically the only time race is allowed to be used is when it comes to acknowledging a minority's success. Then we are all for dividing and grouping people into race, culture and skin color. This is a double standard. On one hand we are told we are all equal and that race should never be a factor. Yet on the other hand race is slapped in our face 24/7. For example, the first black American. First black this. First black that bla bla bla. I come from a country where one in four citizens was born overseas. I have never ever seen reported the first, Greek, Italian, Vietnamese, Lebanese. Which also says something considering most migrants or their kids are first generation Australians. Rather, in a article someone might mention so and so's parents migrated from xyz country.

yes, your country first immigrants treated the folks that lived in austrailia..quite well...and still treat them like sh!t...

[Heracles 417]

yes, your country first immigrants treated the folks that lived in austrailia..quite well...and still treat them like sh!t...

How do we treat them poorly?

They were conquered, that is the way the cookie crumbles. Something that has played over thousands of times throughout human history. Your not religious so you should understand first hand how survival of the fittest works.

Is that the best clowns like you have against Australia? I would be focusing on your dwindling living standard than that. The aborigines welfare payments are probably triple the minimum wage here. lol

Edited February 5, 2009 by Aficionado

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

And so it begins (again).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't get the outrage over these perceived "double standards".

The issue of discrimination in relation to minorities is well documented - institutions (like the police) can't justify treating a whole group of people as second class citizens simply on the basis that there are more criminals from one community than another. You can't pre-judge individuals on the basis of expected behaviour - when the result of this is infringing on the rights of those individuals.

The fact is that we know in our bones who are the minorities and who therefore should have special protection within our societies. We know what's fair. Whites can, as it were, look after themselves - they are the majority. Blacks, Hispanics and indeed - Muslims are (for the present) the minorities and cannot always look after themselves in the same way. These are ideas fundamental to societies based on humane and indeed Christian principles.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And so it begins (again).

Tick off the cliches

Australian = the best country in the world (and noone say any different)

Treatment of aborigines = not our fault

Poor living standards and social conditions of aborigines = also not our fault

America = a ####### country with dwindling living standards and high crime rates (because of the blacks)

If they (blacks) don't like it here - they should get on the boat back to Africa.

*yawn*

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I don't get the outrage over these perceived "double standards".

The issue of discrimination in relation to minorities is well documented - institutions (like the police) can't justify treating a whole group of people as second class citizens simply on the basis that there are more criminals from one community than another. You can't pre-judge individuals on the basis of expected behaviour - when the result of this is infringing on the rights of those individuals.

The fact is that we know in our bones who are the minorities and who therefore should have special protection within our societies. We know what's fair. Whites can, as it were, look after themselves - they are the majority. Blacks, Hispanics and indeed - Muslims are (for the present) the minorities and cannot always look after themselves in the same way. These are ideas fundamental to societies based on humane and indeed Christian principles.

I think that's a tad simplistic. It's not all about race, class is a big factor as well. Look no further than lily-white Appalachia, with it's enduring poverty. They need special assistance just as much as Americans who live in our decaying urban areas do.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't get the outrage over these perceived "double standards".

The issue of discrimination in relation to minorities is well documented - institutions (like the police) can't justify treating a whole group of people as second class citizens simply on the basis that there are more criminals from one community than another. You can't pre-judge individuals on the basis of expected behaviour - when the result of this is infringing on the rights of those individuals.

The fact is that we know in our bones who are the minorities and who therefore should have special protection within our societies. We know what's fair. Whites can, as it were, look after themselves - they are the majority. Blacks, Hispanics and indeed - Muslims are (for the present) the minorities and cannot always look after themselves in the same way. These are ideas fundamental to societies based on humane and indeed Christian principles.

I think that's a tad simplistic. It's not all about race, class is a big factor as well. Look no further than lily-white Appalachia, with it's enduring poverty. They need special assistance just as much as Americans who live in our decaying urban areas do.

Yeah it is simplistic admittedly - but in this country I think race has become somewhat synonymous with class.

[almaty 19]

yes, your country first immigrants treated the folks that lived in austrailia..quite well...and still treat them like sh!t...

How do we treat them poorly?

They were conquered, that is the way the cookie crumbles. Something that has played over thousands of times throughout human history. Your not religious so you should understand first hand how survival of the fittest works.

Is that the best clowns like you have against Australia? I would be focusing on your dwindling living standard than that. The aborigines welfare payments are probably triple the minimum wage here. lol

i have nothing against austrailia..think it is a fine place..and america did no better and worse...just pointing out the obvious ..and i am not a believer that if you beat someone..that you have legal or ethical rights to exploit

[Heracles 417]

I don't get the outrage over these perceived "double standards". Of course you would not.

The issue of discrimination in relation to minorities is well documented - institutions (like the police) can't justify treating a whole group of people as second class citizens simply on the basis that there are more criminals from one community than another. You can't pre-judge individuals on the basis of expected behaviour - when the result of this is infringing on the rights of those individuals.

The fact is that we know in our bones who are the minorities and who therefore should have special protection within our societies. We know what's fair. Whites can, as it were, look after themselves - they are the majority. Blacks, Hispanics and indeed - Muslims are (for the present) the minorities and cannot always look after themselves in the same way. These are ideas fundamental to societies based on humane and indeed Christian principles.

Your assumption that we are are all the same is what blinds you. Humans are culturally different on many levels. Violence is much more acceptable in some cultures than others. It is also a product of ones environment. To pretend this is not the case is naive. To pretend that someone Japanese has the same attitude towards violence as an Australian for example is just ludicrous.

For someone to sit here and deny that 'minorities' from low socioeconomic backgrounds do not represent a large percentage of criminals in America is just moronic. Like many with similar views to that of your own, I am assuming that you don't live in a ghetto or anywhere near those you staunchly defend.

Statistics are not racist. Neither is the news. When I read a months worth of local news and see that 99% of criminals and murders involved black or Hispanic Americans, it is safe to assume that if one comes in contact with these groups they should avoid them. You want to go into a ghetto and walk by a group of minorities just to be PC, you go right ahead.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... in this country I think race has become somewhat synonymous with class.

I think that's only true in urban areas and surrounding metros. There is plenty of white poverty out there in the boonies.

[Heracles 417]

And so it begins (again).

Tick off the cliches

Australian = the best country in the world (and noone say any different)

Treatment of aborigines = not our fault

Poor living standards and social conditions of aborigines = also not our fault

America = a ####### country with dwindling living standards and high crime rates (because of the blacks)

If they (blacks) don't like it here - they should get on the boat back to Africa.

*yawn*

No, it's you guys who have nothing to say but bring that one point into the equation. Something you know nothing about. Have you even been to Australia?

At least get a new point.

Edited February 5, 2009 by Aficionado

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I am assuming that you don't live in a ghetto or anywhere near those you staunchly defend.

You can't live in Jersey and not be 'near'. He is near and so am I. You're in NoVa so I suspect so are you.