 |
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
To me it boils down to this.. If you were one of the fellows who furried his brow over what clete said, you'll NEVER connect the dots.. However, if it made your skin crawl, the dots should be obvious.
excon
Everything is different in there world and you have to understand that they may NOT be as exposed to the same things as we are ex.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
I think you grew up in your small town and have never lived in the larger cities, am I correct, speech?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I have no idea what Clete said, I was concerned with what you said and my response.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
A city of 190,000 is not a small town and I grew up as one of maybe 5 white kids in my first six years of school. Our "small town" is larger than 10 state capitals. And Knoxville, TN. What's the relevance, I'm some country bumpkin?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
P.S. I still reside as a minority in that same minority neighborhood.
Hello again, Steve:
You're right. It WASN'T in his testimony. It's in the Gore Files.
Check those out, and check out what clete said.
excon
So because the newspaper reported it as "an attack by a Mexican American" then Anslinger actually meant "if they DIDN'T make it illegal, black and Mexican men would be RAPING their white daughters", even though he didn't actually say it. LOL, you're reaching deep buddy. I think that would qualify as a logical fallacy, you can't to your implication from there.
Ex I am not racist but an observer and what I observe is a certain sector of society stands out, not because of race but because of attitude, it may have something to do with race, it might have something to do with disadvantage, but it certainly has a lot to do with rebellion against the values that other sectors of the society hold as valid and reasonable, and as a result of this these people are over represented in prisons. You yourself have said they might be black or brown, to me that means you might be speaking of a number of different races, and I come back to this basic fact, these people are marginalised, as a result they have a bad attitude and from that the rest flowsQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, clete:Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Somehow I missed the "they're marginalized" part, and only got the "they're uppity" part... Makes a substantial difference.
excon
This has nothing to do with being a bumpkin, lol, the town I grew up in is the same size as yours, but I wanted to point out that you cannot know what another goes through unless you walk in their shoes. Sure I know you are a good guy, but my point is that when you sit in a one world, you may not know what goes on in a different world.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Just suggesting that maybe there is a reason why you cannot connect the dots, or see some boogy men are real.
,Quote:
QUOTE by paraclete;
Ex I am not racist but an observer and what I observe is a certain sector of society stands out, not because of race but because of attitude, it may have something to do with race, it might have something to do with disadvantage, but it certainly has a lot to do with rebellion against the values that other sectors of the society hold as valid and reasonable
Please clarify, so we can see what you mean by rebellion against the values of other sectors of the society, so I can see why your elitist mind holds as valuable, and reasonable. Where do you differientiate between race, and attitude that makes a portion of the population so unique, and not as valued as other people.
That seems a bit harsh for attitude to result in prison. WHY?Quote:
and as a result of this these people are over represented in prisons.
So HOW do they get margialized is my question, and by whom, and why? I mean what's a bad attitude that lands you in jail in Australia?Quote:
You yourself have said they might be black or brown, to me that means you might be speaking of a number of different races, and I come back to this basic fact, these people are marginalised, as a result they have a bad attitude and from that the rest flows.
Man you guys are teetering on the edge with this topic. Having lived through much of what is being talked about. I don't see any connection to the real world that people live in and the way it is being discussed here.
The real truth is that deep at heart we are all pretty much the same. We all have choices to make. For the black families when I was growing up there was a duality and for many other cultures there was the same duality that had their lives going in 2 directions at once. The public eye and the private one. I have experienced both sides from many different backgrounds. Are there some cultural differences in the public eye. Yes you bet there is. But behind closed doors no not really. It is that difference that is driving the prison populations to be what they are. When the peoples decide as a group to straighten out the mess they are in then it will stop. Until then you can spin it any way you like and life goes on just the way it really is.
[QUOTE=tomder55;3049457 So the premise that somehow the laws regarding illegal drugs are the equivalence of Jim Crow laws is a grotesque fallacy.[/QUOTE]
Hi Tom,
Could be, but the idea of separate but equal always lends itself to social economic and legal opportunities favouring one group over another. This is historically true and has gone under a number of names in the past. "Living apart" in South Africa is the most obvious example.
My above observation really means very little, except for the fact that I accidentally came across this.
War on Drugs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia needs to be treated carefully in some areas, but can anyone explain away the section on 'Sentincing Disparity'. I am interested in the 100 to 1 disparity.
If no one can explain this away then I can see what Ex, and possibly Alexander are on about.
Tut
Please explain how race becomes a determinant that someone would break the law ? Perhaps the difference between myself and the liberal crowd is that I look at people as individuals instead of groups . As I recall MLK spoke of that also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hi Tom,
I don't need to explain how race has become a determinant factor in braking the law because from my point of view it is not a factor.
That's not the question I am asking. I was asking about the disparity in sentencing.
I am sure you do. But, again I don't see how this is relevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tut
You did not suggest that sentencing was now the issue under discussion . The Wiki link did not give me an indication that the discussion had shifted to sentencing .
My position on that for years is that sentencing needs serious reform . A user is not as big a problem as a dealer . A non-violent offender is not as big a problem as a violent one.
Hi Tom,Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Sorry about the lack of notice.
If the link is accurate then I am interested as to why it is the case that a drug of choice for a particular socio-economic group. Crack cocaine in this case receives much harsher sentences for offenders. The same drug in a different form is the drug of choice for the more affluent. Offenders tend to attract a much lighter sentence.
Why the disparity? Is this what Ex and Alexander are on about?
Tut
Sorry about the tough questions but you don't have to be a lawyer to see a link between 'disparity of sentencing' and 'separate but equal'
Tut
What I would like to see is the proof that the sentencing guidelines suggest institutional racism. If we are talking sentencing reform ,I'm all for it. But do I think that crack cocaine sale or possession should be legalized... absolutely not.
And ,this is not a separate but equal issue. Anyone who is caught selling or using crack cocaine is subject the same sentencing . What is Ex and the author suggesting,, that whitey is going into the "ghetto" (Excon's word) and pushing crack and forcing anyone to use it ?
There is a case to be made for reforms of existing drug laws ,and it's been forwarded on this forum many times. This race argument is grasping at straw.
Hello Tut:
The sentencing disparity you found is only the outward manifestation of the racism built into the system. You can imagine, can you not, just how much racism is simmering under the surface, if we have the temerity to actually SENTENCE black offenders too much longer prison terms than we do to WHITE offenders who use the SAME amount of cocaine?
excon
Ex ,you have not until your last comment suggested that the problem was sentencing disparity . Your position is the make it all legal . If your position is to end sentencing disparity I'm on board .However ,I would also point out that there is no penalty for someone who doesn't break the law.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Since we've began, I've been showing you DOTS, hoping that you'll connect them.. Ain't happening...
TUT just showed you a DOT - a real simple DOT to confirm, too. Yet you didn't. Your argument SOUNDS like it, too. So, I'm going to throw down a gauntlet for you. I challenge you to learn about the disparity in sentencing between the SAME amount of cocaine in ROCK form, (preferred by blacks), and the same amount of cocaine in POWDER form, (preferred by whites).
It's hard to argue when your correspondents are ignorant of the law.
excon
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The problem is NOT sentencing disparity. The problem is racism. The sentencing disparity TUT pointed out is simply the most glaring manifestation of that racism.
excon
No I think the problem for you is that you want illegal drugs legal. I think this racism argument is just the latest grasp at straws attempt to justify it.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Given that you're NOT going to take my challenge to educate yourself about the subject, I think it's fair to say you just want to keep drugs illegal, and don't want to be bothered with facts..
excon
Making marijuana legal will do nothing for the publicly defended poor guy caught with two rocks, who gets 3 years, while the lawyered up suburban kid who has a lawyer, and gets probation for a year, and community service for a .25 grams of powder cocaine. One goes home under bail, or bond the other can't pay bail so they sit in jail.
For 3 dots guess who sits in jail?
Kid gets picked up and lives in the good part of town for smoking a joint, another kid gets picked up for having a joint after a traffic stop.
For 5 dots who goes home, who goes to jail?
We haven't even started on the race disparity, not even warmed up yet.
You missed that dot, it is in the book.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Ex ,you have not until your last comment suggested that the problem was sentencing disparity .
And don't possess crack or cocaine... no jail time.
So this has really been about reforming sentencing and not about making illegal drugs legal. I thought so... All those dots I've lead you down has finally got you to admit what the real issue was.
I would have thought Ex that someone who has contributed here for so long would have learned to read between the lines and understand that attitude has a cause. I notice this thread has taken a turn to suggest there is racism in sentencing. I can't speak for your country but in mine being black is likely to get you a lighter sentence on account of that mitigating circumstance "marginalisation" but eventually it won't keep you out of jail because if you go to the court house on any day guess who most of the people you find there are? Seems some people can't take the hintQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hi Tom,
Ex claimed that the drug war was racist and he made reference to a book by Professor Alexander as evidence.
I hadn't read Alexander's book but I made reference to a Wikipedia section. It was then I realized there was a link between 'disparity in sentencing' and the 'separate but equal' claim also being made here.
Separate but equal means that two recognised racial groups in a society have equal opportunity to go about their lives living apart where practiable. History has shown this to be a very bad idea for a number of reasons. One of the important reasons being that one group usually holds the social, economic, and legal tools to favour their group at the expense of the other.
It thought it was rather obvious that one of the tools being employed here was the legal tool. This was done by way of differentiated sentencing as per the Wiki article.
I think this is what Tal picked up on. Sentencing per se is not the issue.
Tut
I am not unfamiliar with the disparity of sentencing issue ,and have stated already here and in other postings that they need reform .
Again... that at best leads to justification of sentencing reform... not making illegal drugs legal .
By the way ;both drug laws were passed in Democrat dominant Congresses. So the OP claims of "intensified by Ronald Reagan" are not quite accurate . The sentencing was perhaps an over reaction to designer drugs . The bill was passed after the death of basketball star Len Bias ;and the Dems ,looking to outflank the Republicans on the law and order issue passed the sentencing bill .
But I would not accuse the Dems of racism . They were reacting to the best most accurate information they had ;which was that crack was a much more dangerous drug form than cocaine.
Is it a stretch then if racism is not the criteria for control, and marginalism of people then maybe its social, and economic motives behind this inequality?
Yes a big stretch .The fact that the result has been that more Blacks are incarcerated because of the law is an unintended consequence that is on it's way to being corrected or have you not noticed that the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 was signed into law ?
Again... no possession of illegal drugs... no crime committed.. no jail time .
Tut ,your definition of separate but equal does not work for me.Historically in this country it meant that a White could do something legally that a Black couldn't do... eat in certain establishments ,use certain public facilities ,ride in the front of the bus etc.
In this case ;the sentencing for crack was the same for all races and the different sentencing for coke applied to all races .
This issue of sentencing is a beatup, judges have discretion in sentencing and exercise it. The community generally thinks sentences are too light and the criminals think sentencing is too heavy, thus claims of racism. As far as drugs are concerned criminalisation has not solved the problem, but the violence and corruption associated with drug distribution must be dealt with
This is a point that seems to be lost in all the arguments. Do the crime.. Do the time. Yes it does infringe upon your liberty, but then you were at liberty not to do the crime. You could even say it is a failure of the education system that people don't get the point early enough in life. So how about you take a vote, all those who want to do drugs could be given a democratic opportunity to voice their opposition to existing laws or is allowing democracy to operate too dangerous a concept. You might even get a 100% voter turnoutQuote:
Again... no possession of illegal drugs... no crime committed.. no jail time .
Or we could re examine how the law is applied and make better adjustments. But of course the laws are never voted on because there is no equal and fair representation, Not even where you are Clete, and since influence is regional, there is no one law that fits all but the majority over the minority.
In many parts of the world, tribal law is what's taught, and it often conflicts with national law, and we get a lot of poor and minorities caught up, and the ruling elites not subject to the same thing. It's a global issue to be fair, and ideology, and racism are a privilege not all enjoy.
From our observation Tal tribal law would be useless. It has been applied in parts of Australia but hasn't yielded results in lessening addiction, The tribal elders are often victims of addiction themselves. We were forced into a position of government intervention which of course was seen as racist because the people affected were under-privileged, indigenous persons with severe social problems in their communities. I am uncertain whether these measures actually led to any long term improvement but it certainly gave someone an excuse to say we are dealing with the problemQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I don't understand something you have said
I don't see racism as a privilege but the inevietable result of certain ideology and it appears to be the norm in tribal societies. The negro races practiced racism in Africa when they participated in the slave trade and sold their neighbours and they were abetted by the white races who used racism for profit. This is where tribalism gets you. The Arabs still take negro slaves in Africa. The Chinese practice racism in Tibet.Quote:
It's a global issue to be fair, and ideology, and racism are a privilege not all enjoy.[/
I can't speak to regional influences in your country, but it is clear it has only recently emerged from racist practices with regional overtones. Such thinking takes many generations to be completely removed from society
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It all boils down to this. There's only a few ways to make cash when you live in the hood.
If you believe that the hood represents government POLICY, and NOT the choices of the residents, and I DO, then the drug war looks like ENTRAPMENT.
"Here, young black man... Live in this part of town where the schools suck, unemployment is HIGH, and most of the FATHER FIGURES are ALREADY in jail. But, don't sell drugs.."
Right...
excon
To be a true racist you must have power. You cannot just hate and do nothing about it. You have to be able to actually suppress or victimize because of the hate. With no power, you are just another mother who is prejudice, and powerless. Power is reserved for the privileged.
Racism is always justified by saying its best for the heathens own good, that he be controlled, and reeducated in to the ways of the oppressor, whether he wants to or not. Slavery among tribes was a prejudice to keep the gene pool fresh, and not subjugation and free labor. Nor dehumanizing as practised by the self entitled races. They think they are more civilized than the tribes are. Only an excuse for what they do.
But your last sentence is dead on.
Tal you can't justify racism or slavery under any pretext, nor can it be said that one man's slavery or racism is purer than another. The fact is that some were more civilised than others but this obviously didn't prevent the profit motive from overcoming sensibilityQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
What a copout, Ex, the hood is the result of government policy, like your nazi government set up these ghettos and forced people to live there, built a wall around them to keep them there. Where do you live? Look if this were true who would care if the inhabitants sold drugs to each other. As long as the problem was quaranteened who would care, but the reality is differentQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
This nobody loves me crap so I've got to do drugs and shoot up my neighbours is just a copout fornot getting up and moving yourself. The reality is there are too many people in your country and parts of it are third world and those jobs you shipped offshore should have been moved into your ghettos but that takes social engineering and a nanny state and a removal of some of those freedoms you swark about.
You see ex and take a look at Mexico if you can't find a local example, wherever there are drugs and disadvantage there is violence so the real logic says drugs are a bad thing and to remove them is not to repress the black population but to liberate them. Now I've observed that this is a continuing theme with you. You ask the same question over and over again and argue the same bankrupt theories over and over again. Like, give it a rest man!
I justify NOTHING Clete, but should I paste the quotes from you justifying your own acceptance of institutional racism?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I think you might say black people are born with a chip on their shoulder and this gets them into trouble both in their own community and in the community at large.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:45 PM. |