people who hate plastic like me. Glass has been used for 1000s of years and has less environmental impact that plastic. End. Of. Discussion.
>>9407337she cant speak out on a lefty op or blacks, so she's gonna claim white supremacists.
when does she hang?
I do not hug the murdering thief breaking into my home. I shoot them and hope the mess is easy to clean up. Dont care what race or age they are, you come to harm me and mine, you trespass, you get hurt or killed. IDK about criminals, in my mind all criminals deserve death. I suspect you never been a victim of a crime, if so you are lucky. I've been robbed, threatened and assaulted.
the victim is the criminal and the criminals are set free. no racial equality.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/04/crime_is_the_new_black_entitlement.html
Crime is the new black entitlement.
As long as black people are permanent victims of relentless white racism, cops should not chase them, juries should not convict them, judges should not sentence them, schools should not punish them, and white victims should not complain about the black crime and violence so wildly out of proportion.
This is what a growing number of lawmakers, professors and, of course, reporters are prescribing as a way to “improve the way our system serves justice.”
The latest came on NPR a few days ago when Georgetown Law professor and former federal prosecutor Paul Butler broke it down for the racially unenlightened:
“If you go to criminal court in D.C., you would think that white people don’t commit crimes,” Butler said. “White people don’t use drugs, they don’t get into fights, they don’t steal, because all you see are African American people.”
Before you pack your child off to Georgetown Law school or if you usually do not believe something too ridiculous to be true you might want to hear the distinguished professor wax at length on this video: Racial Jury Nullification at Georgetown Law.
One group of “African American people” Butler will never see in a D.C. court are the black people who beat the white husband of an NPR executive into a bloody, broken mess on the D.C. Metro line. You can find the details here from my account at the American Thinker, but not from NPR, which never covered it. NPR Another Victim of Black Violence and Denial.
Neither will Butler find the black people who attacked the NPR producer from Kentucky, in D.C. on company business. You can find the details of that in the scintillating best seller Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry. But not on NPR.
And yes, professor, black criminality is just as wildly out of proportion in Washington as it is in the rest of country. Even more so.
Butler says there are two justice systems in America, one for white people and one for black. He proposes to correct this inequity with a system of racial jury nullification to promote the new entitlement of black criminality: “I encourage any juror who thinks the police or prosecutors have crossed the line in a particular case to refuse to convict.”
To make his case, Butler trotted out some information from the National Institute of Health which he says proves that black people and white people use drugs in the same amount, but black people are arrested and convicted many times more than their drug-using white counterparts.
QED: Courtroom racism is rampant and if you do not see that, well, you know what that makes you.
That is part of the greatest lie of our generation and here is why.
The National Institute of Health and everyone else who repeats that bogus claim are using info gathered from the Census Bureau: Instead of filling out a questionnaire, sometimes the Census Bureau will go into a home and ask the occupants a series of other questions, including if they use illegal drugs.
When they do, black and white people basically give the same answers in the same amounts.
That is called self-reporting and it boils down to this: can we depend on drug users to tell the truth about their drug use? Short answer: No. Long answer, when you actually test people, doctors find there are two determinants of whether the person was actually telling the truth about their drug use: One, were they recently released from prison? (more at the link)
https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/roots-partisan-divide/
the emergency mechanisms that, in the name of ending segregation, were established under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These gave Washington the authority to override what Americans had traditionally thought of as their ordinary democratic institutions. It was widely assumed that the emergency mechanisms would be temporary and narrowly focused. But they soon escaped democratic control altogether, and they have now become the most powerful part of our governing system.
ow Civil Rights Legislation Worked
There were two noteworthy things about the civil rights legislation of 1964 and 1965.
The first was its unprecedented concentration of power. It gave Washington tools it had never before had in peacetime. It created new crimes, outlawing discrimination in almost every walk of public and private life. It revoked—or repealed—the prevailing understanding of freedom of association as protected by the First Amendment. It established agencies to hunt down these new crimes—an expanded Civil Rights Commission, an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and various offices of civil rights in the different cabinet agencies. It gave government new prerogatives, such as laying out hiring practices for all companies with more than 15 employees, filing lawsuits, conducting investigations, and ordering redress. Above all, it exposed every corner of American social, economic, and political life to direction from bureaucrats and judges.
To put it bluntly, the effect of these civil rights laws was to take a lot of decisions that had been made in the democratic parts of American government and relocate them to the bureaucracy or the judiciary. Only with that kind of arsenal, Lyndon Johnson and the drafters thought, would it be possible to root out insidious racism.
The second noteworthy thing about the civil rights legislation of the 1960s is that it was kind of a fudge. It sat uneasily not only with the First Amendment, but with the Constitution as a whole. The Voting Rights Act of 1965, passed largely to give teeth to the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal rights for all citizens, did so by creating different levels of rights for citizens of southern states like Alabama and citizens of northern states like Michigan when it came to election laws.
The goal of the civil rights laws was to bring the sham democracies of the American South into conformity with the Constitution. But nobody’s democracy is perfect, and it turned out to be much harder than anticipated to distinguish between democracy in the South and democracy elsewhere in the country. If the spirit of the law was to humiliate Southern bigots, the letter of the law put the entire country—all its institutions—under the threat of lawsuits and prosecutions for discrimination.
Still, no one was too worried about that. It is clear in retrospect that Americans outside the South understood segregation as a regional problem. As far as we can tell from polls, 70-90 percent of Americans outside the South thought that blacks in their part of the country were treated just fine, the same as anyone else. In practice, non-Southerners did not expect the new laws to be turned back on themselves.
(Very important you read the whole thing it takes 20 minutes)
why do all the leading Muslim women have immigration fraud in common?
LOL but that's not for virtue signalling Emily to decide. Does she know the rioters plans in advance?
read it, it's not about that. it's about how something was done and then used to circumvent the people's power.