Ban on Menthol Cigs Is the Racist Criminalization of Black Behavior

[Youngcoach123]

5 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

There are for profit prisons all over the country who make a lot of money due to prison labor. You make a lot more profit using slave labor rather than  paying someone on the outside minimum wage. A year a so ago i posted a story about a judge who got arrested b/c he was taking payment from one of the for profit prisons to send kids there.

https://businessreview.berkeley.edu/profiting-off-of-prison-labor/

Prison should 100% be self sufficient and provide for themselves. But for profit is where the problems come in. 
 

But back to my point earlier. The cocaine was brought in by the gov (allowed) but they didn’t supply crack. That was cooked up by the chiefs in the dope houses all by themselves. Was way more addictive than coke and got much tougher sentences was the reasoning. Yes the allowance by the gov was a special kind of stupid but to sit around and blame them for anything other than harsher sentences is a stretch. Someone could give me heroin right now and I wouldn’t use it. It’s all a choice no matter where it came from. 

[CarthDawg77]

5 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

BLM is one group that has a particular fight. This is just Chicago.

https://abc7chicago.com/stop-the-violence-resources-chicago-in/3894299/

You will probably still bring up BLM after this for reason I don't understand.

What “particular fight” is that?

[ctown81]

Just now, CarthDawg77 said:

What “particular fight” is that?

Wait....so you're going to ignore the parts about the other groups? I know you don't like BLM so I won't even argue why they came about. You asked me for these groups and I gave them to you.

[CarthDawg77]

1 minute ago, ctown81 said:

Wait....so you're going to ignore the parts about the other groups? I know you don't like BLM so I won't even argue why they came about. You asked me for these groups and I gave them to you.

I’ll get to them After you explain the “particular fight” that BLM is engaged in.

[CarthDawg77]

22 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Wait....so you're going to ignore the parts about the other groups? I know you don't like BLM so I won't even argue why they came about. You asked me for these groups and I gave them to you.

Actually, I went back & read the link & then I googled the top 20 highest crime cities in America & was pleasantly surprised that Chicago came in @ #15; so perhaps They are onto something. All of the links were Chicago based, however, & black on black crime still accounts for the lion’s share of murders in America. Now if only Ms. Cullors would only use her Significant Clout and begin to Give a Damn about “That Particular Fight”, the Maybe things would turn around for All Blacks instead of just HER.

[Straw]

1 hour ago, ctown81 said:

for the 100000th time. With black on black crime, the murderer goes to prison. When a cop kills a black man, it's usually paid leave. That's the issue. Also, there are MANY groups in the black community that focus on black on black crime. So you sound very ignorant when you make this statement and everyone else does too. Unless you're around the communities to know what's going on, how can you make a comment. Oh yeah, you probably listen to the media you claim not to believe in the first place.

So as long as someone goes to prison for it, its alright. Kill all the black people you can. How pathetic is that to not talk about a real problem in the community. This is not whats going on with police. The highest percentage of blacks killed by police has one thing in common other than blacks and police. Can you guess what it is?

 

[ctown81]

3 hours ago, Straw said:

So as long as someone goes to prison for it, its alright. Kill all the black people you can. How pathetic is that to not talk about a real problem in the community. This is not whats going on with police. The highest percentage of blacks killed by police has one thing in common other than blacks and police. Can you guess what it is?

 

Never said it was alright. They are upset over cops getting away with it. If you can't understand that, I can't help you. 

[ctown81]

6 hours ago, CarthDawg77 said:

Actually, I went back & read the link & then I googled the top 20 highest crime cities in America & was pleasantly surprised that Chicago came in @ #15; so perhaps They are onto something. All of the links were Chicago based, however, & black on black crime still accounts for the lion’s share of murders in America. Now if only Ms. Cullors would only use her Significant Clout and begin to Give a Damn about “That Particular Fight”, the Maybe things would turn around for All Blacks instead of just HER.

Lion's share huh. I'm pretty sure that white on white crime is higher, but then again, you think cops treated blacks and whites the same in the 60s . That will forever be a classic. 

[CarthDawg77]

1 hour ago, ctown81 said:

Lion's share huh. I'm pretty sure that white on white crime is higher, but then again, you think cops treated blacks and whites the same in the 60s . That will forever be a classic. 

I would be glad to read any information you might have to substantiate your claim about white on white murders in America.

[ctown81]

38 minutes ago, CarthDawg77 said:

I would be glad to read any information you might have to substantiate your claim about white on white murders in America.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls

Trying to find more recent

[trashyhound]

1 minute ago, ctown81 said:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls

Trying to find more recent

13% of the population is black

 60% is white (*if you don’t count Hispanics which i believe are counted in your stats)

not really an apples to apples comparison in that data. 

[CarthDawg77]

1 hour ago, ctown81 said:

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls

Trying to find more recent

Still crunching your numbers, & as Trashy pointed out, African Americans only comprise 13% of the population, whereas Whites comprise 60%; 

White on White murder was committed by 81.56% of the figures listed, 

Black on Black murder was committed by 89.5% of the figures listed. 
 

Of the 2870  Black murders shown, 243 were committed by Whites, whereas

Of the 3499 Whites murdered, 533 were committed by Blacks; over a 50% larger figure than White on Black murder for the data you supplied...

I Rest my case, Your Honor....

[ctown81]

14 hours ago, CarthDawg77 said:

Still crunching your numbers, & as Trashy pointed out, African Americans only comprise 13% of the population, whereas Whites comprise 60%; 

White on White murder was committed by 81.56% of the figures listed, 

Black on Black murder was committed by 89.5% of the figures listed. 
 

Of the 2870  Black murders shown, 243 were committed by Whites, whereas

Of the 3499 Whites murdered, 533 were committed by Blacks; over a 50% larger figure than White on Black murder for the data you supplied...

I Rest my case, Your Honor....

Nice post but I responded to your comment about blacks having a "lion's share" which was a false statement. So you made a case for something totally different to mask the fact you were wrong, which is why I can't take your posts too seriously. You chose to crunch these numbers to prove what? The case was about your "lion's share" comment. This is another example of someone not admitting they were wrong. Hell you even brought up blacks and whites killing each other. Why? That wasn't the argument.

Say what you want, but the influx of drugs into the black neighborhoods played a role in this and you know it. The government did not put drugs in the white neighborhoods for a reason, but then again I'm speaking with the guy who believe police treated blacks and whites the same in the 60's. 

[ctown81]

15 hours ago, trashyhound said:

13% of the population is black

 60% is white (*if you don’t count Hispanics which i believe are counted in your stats)

not really an apples to apples comparison in that data. 

So you did not look at the original post I responded to either.

[trashyhound]

49 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

So you did not look at the original post I responded to either.

I guess not, what did i miss?

[ctown81]

1 hour ago, trashyhound said:

I guess not, what did i miss?

". All of the links were Chicago based, however, & black on black crime still accounts for the lion’s share of murders in America."

So I addressed this comment and that's why I posted those numbers. Then once you mentioned the "13%", it gave him an out. 

[ctown81]

On 5/4/2021 at 9:28 AM, Youngcoach123 said:

Prison should 100% be self sufficient and provide for themselves. But for profit is where the problems come in. 
 

But back to my point earlier. The cocaine was brought in by the gov (allowed) but they didn’t supply crack. That was cooked up by the chiefs in the dope houses all by themselves. Was way more addictive than coke and got much tougher sentences was the reasoning. Yes the allowance by the gov was a special kind of stupid but to sit around and blame them for anything other than harsher sentences is a stretch. Someone could give me heroin right now and I wouldn’t use it. It’s all a choice no matter where it came from. 

I don't think I ever replied to this. You make some valid points but not all are valid. 

. Starting at point one, why were the drugs allowed into the black neighborhoods and not the white? The intent of the government was definitely meant to get blacks addicted and ruin the neighborhoods. What could possibly be another purpos?

point 2: Crack is definitely more addictive but the law still targeted the poor. Here's why:

500 grams of cocaine = 5 years  5 grams of crack +5 years

Who would have 500 grams of cocaine? Drug Dealer

Who would have 5 grams of crack? Drug Dealer AND User. Seems the law targeted dealers and users. Plus, shouldn't cocaine carry the same sentence due to the fact it can be EASILY converted to crack?

Point 3: Drug use or experimenting sees no color. Both sides were taking a variation of the drug. Would I take it? No? Even with that being said, due to the history of our government, who's to say everyone took it willingly. From smallpox blankets to syphilis there have been cases of this. Any government horrible enough to give the green light for this drug to be let in is capable of anything.

Point 4: Regardless of all the stuff that happened, the government initiated it.

Again, didn't ignore this post. Somehow missed it.

[Youngcoach123]

1 hour ago, ctown81 said:

I don't think I ever replied to this. You make some valid points but not all are valid. 

. Starting at point one, why were the drugs allowed into the black neighborhoods and not the white? The intent of the government was definitely meant to get blacks addicted and ruin the neighborhoods. What could possibly be another purpos?

point 2: Crack is definitely more addictive but the law still targeted the poor. Here's why:

500 grams of cocaine = 5 years  5 grams of crack +5 years

Who would have 500 grams of cocaine? Drug Dealer

Who would have 5 grams of crack? Drug Dealer AND User. Seems the law targeted dealers and users. Plus, shouldn't cocaine carry the same sentence due to the fact it can be EASILY converted to crack?

Point 3: Drug use or experimenting sees no color. Both sides were taking a variation of the drug. Would I take it? No? Even with that being said, due to the history of our government, who's to say everyone took it willingly. From smallpox blankets to syphilis there have been cases of this. Any government horrible enough to give the green light for this drug to be let in is capable of anything.

Point 4: Regardless of all the stuff that happened, the government initiated it.

Again, didn't ignore this post. Somehow missed it.

First response is to black vs white neighborhoods. Maybe the black neighborhoods had a demand for it. I have found nothing yet that specifically indicates that the allowance of cocaine into our country was specifically designated for the black community. If you have some, I would enjoy the read. 
 

point 2: never said it was right or wrong but just that the addictive qualities was why it had harsher punishments. Kinda makes sense but it did seem to target more blacks. 
 

Point 3: I don’t trust the gov just like you. That’s why I always vote to limit them. Only one party is coming close to trying. And they #### at it also. So I agree with you there.

point 4: initiation doesn’t always equal responsible.  A ten car line and the first car brakes real hard, the 7-8 have a fender bender. Is the 1st car responsible?? Short answer is no. 

[ctown81]

3 hours ago, Youngcoach123 said:

First response is to black vs white neighborhoods. Maybe the black neighborhoods had a demand for it. I have found nothing yet that specifically indicates that the allowance of cocaine into our country was specifically designated for the black community. If you have some, I would enjoy the read. 
 

point 2: never said it was right or wrong but just that the addictive qualities was why it had harsher punishments. Kinda makes sense but it did seem to target more blacks. 
 

Point 3: I don’t trust the gov just like you. That’s why I always vote to limit them. Only one party is coming close to trying. And they #### at it also. So I agree with you there.

point 4: initiation doesn’t always equal responsible.  A ten car line and the first car brakes real hard, the 7-8 have a fender bender. Is the 1st car responsible?? Short answer is no. 

Why would black neighborhoods have a demand for it? 

[Youngcoach123]

57 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Why would black neighborhoods have a demand for it? 

[Youngcoach123]

57 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

Why would black neighborhoods have a demand for it? 

Honestly no clue, that’s why I used maybe. Excess in supply always finds the demand if there is one.

[CarthDawg77]

12 hours ago, ctown81 said:

Nice post but I responded to your comment about blacks having a "lion's share" which was a false statement. So you made a case for something totally different to mask the fact you were wrong, which is why I can't take your posts too seriously. You chose to crunch these numbers to prove what? The case was about your "lion's share" comment. This is another example of someone not admitting they were wrong. Hell you even brought up blacks and whites killing each other. Why? That wasn't the argument.

Say what you want, but the influx of drugs into the black neighborhoods played a role in this and you know it. The government did not put drugs in the white neighborhoods for a reason, but then again I'm speaking with the guy who believe police treated blacks and whites the same in the 60's. 

Ok, I’ll do this, in the interest of trying to get you to see the point I made; I will add the words “per capita” to my statement about the “Lion’s Share”. 
Surely, you saw, as did everyone else who read your chart, that even taking into account that blacks only comprise 13% of the population of America, they came very close to matching the Amount of deaths attributed to white on white murders. *Nearly 25% Fewer blacks committed only 629 fewer murders than did whites. On a “Per Capita” ratio, blacks murdered nearly 4 Times as many of their own race as did whites.... And, as you also pointed out from my original post, blacks Also murdered about Twice as many whites as did whites murdering blacks. When it comes to the Art of Murder, blacks certainly Overachieve.

[ctown81]

11 hours ago, CarthDawg77 said:

Ok, I’ll do this, in the interest of trying to get you to see the point I made; I will add the words “per capita” to my statement about the “Lion’s Share”. 
Surely, you saw, as did everyone else who read your chart, that even taking into account that blacks only comprise 13% of the population of America, they came very close to matching the Amount of deaths attributed to white on white murders. *Nearly 25% Fewer blacks committed only 629 fewer murders than did whites. On a “Per Capita” ratio, blacks murdered nearly 4 Times as many of their own race as did whites.... And, as you also pointed out from my original post, blacks Also murdered about Twice as many whites as did whites murdering blacks. When it comes to the Art of Murder, blacks certainly Overachieve.

Once again that wasn't the point I was arguing. I saw the point you made but that wasn't even the argument. 

[ctown81]

11 hours ago, CarthDawg77 said:

Ok, I’ll do this, in the interest of trying to get you to see the point I made; I will add the words “per capita” to my statement about the “Lion’s Share”. 
Surely, you saw, as did everyone else who read your chart, that even taking into account that blacks only comprise 13% of the population of America, they came very close to matching the Amount of deaths attributed to white on white murders. *Nearly 25% Fewer blacks committed only 629 fewer murders than did whites. On a “Per Capita” ratio, blacks murdered nearly 4 Times as many of their own race as did whites.... And, as you also pointed out from my original post, blacks Also murdered about Twice as many whites as did whites murdering blacks. When it comes to the Art of Murder, blacks certainly Overachieve.

That's typically what happens when your neighborhood is flooded with drugs. Chain reaction. Wonder how things would look if they allowed the drugs into white neighborhoods.

[Youngcoach123]

17 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

That's typically what happens when your neighborhood is flooded with drugs. Chain reaction. Wonder how things would look if they allowed the drugs into white neighborhoods.

I’m still curious as to if the egg or the chicken came first. We’re the drugs brought specifically into that community as the sole purpose of them, or was the neighborhood just the outlet to the drugs that flooded our country?