Black suspect dies after Baltimore cops break his spine in ‘brutal’ police beating:

Originally posted by Star428
Oh, it most certainly is. And I question any American's loyalty who says otherwise. I'm just glad that people like u and socialists like OV have no say in deciding the matter. Fortunately, there are still many true Americans left who treat the Constitution with the respect it deserves as a binding document for all-time. 🙂

Originally posted by Omega Vision
TR is a strange president. On the one hand he did more than any other president in history to make America the world power it is today (he also basically laid the groundwork for the National Park service, government regulation of business, and social welfare programs), yet on the other hand he was literally batshit insane and once threatened to go to war with a South American country because two drunk US marines had gotten arrested there for starting a barroom brawl.

Originally posted by Star428
Better question is why some people on this forum are so arrogant to think that they know what's better for our country than the founding fathers did?

Originally posted by Star428
Oh, it most certainly is and I question any American's loyalty who says otherwise. I'm just glad that people like u and socialists like OV have no say in deciding the matter. Fortunately, there are still many true Americans left who treat the Constitution with the respect it deserves as a binding document for all-time. 🙂

Originally posted by Star428
Oh, it most certainly is and I question any American's loyalty who says otherwise. I'm just glad that people like u and socialists like OV have no say in deciding the matter. Fortunately, there are still many true Americans left who treat the Constitution with the respect it deserves as a binding document for all-time. 🙂

The Founding Fathers would have as good a shot of successfully running modern America as the Harvard football team of 1896 would have of winning the 2015 NCAA College Football Playoff.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Are you not aware of the existence of amendments?

Now if we are going to shift this into a discussion about how to solve poverty, philosophers have been wondering for years. But that's not the issue of relevance right now.

Martin L Gross, who died recently, was a government critic of social programs was a welfare advocate suggesting if folks are not able to make any money for whatever reason, to straight up get 24k a year from Uncle Sam directly. No social programs period, just a check cut to them. He studied this thoroughly and his thesis that it costs more money to pay the people to run the program, than the recipients were getting. I am in favor of that of Martin L Gross theory. Bureaucrats probably won't like it though.

The governor of the state said that more than 200 businesses were lost to the thugs that were rioting and looting.

Originally posted by Star428
The governor of the state said that more than 200 businesses were lost to the thugs that were rioting and looting.

Originally posted by Spawningpool
According to black advocates* thug is racist

*Social Justice Warriors

And to be clear, SJWs are self-righteous, "I'm offended by everything", cretins. They are also attention whores. Taking the side of thugs and trying to turn it into a "race issue" is very scummy. No, they are thugs because they do thuggish things. It has nothing to do with their skin color.

Originally posted by dadudemon
*Social Justice Warriors

And to be clear, SJWs are self-righteous, "I'm offended by everything", cretins. They are also attention whores. Taking the side of thugs and trying to turn it into a "race issue" is very scummy. No, they are thugs because they do thuggish things. It has nothing to do with their skin color.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Look at how rarely the media brands white rioters and looters as "thugs,"

I called them thugs: all of them.

But which news agencies were calling the thugs, "thugs?"

Originally posted by Omega Vision
compared to how quickly the term is reached for to describe black criminals.

Oh, I see. I don't watch the news. I was unaware of major national news companies being so obviously racist. But do you have any examples of this? Foxnews seems like it would be a good candidate.

Originally posted by Star428
The governor of the state said that more than 200 businesses were lost to the thugs that were rioting and looting.

I bet mostly Asian business were targeted, since they're helpless physically, compared to black youths. This is why shop owner need to pack some heat (guns), to protect themselves.

Thugs comes from Thugees, The Thugs traveled in groups across India for six hundred years.[1] Although the Thugs traced their origin to seven Muslim tribes, Hindus appear to have been associated with them at an early period. They were first mentioned in Ẓiyā-ud-Dīn Baranī's History of Fīrūz Shāh dated around 1356.[2] In the 1830's they were targeted for eradication by William Bentinck, Governor-General of India, and his chief captain William Henry Sleeman. The Thuggies were seemingly destroyed by this effort.[1][3]

The Thugs would join travelers and gain their confidence. This would allow them to then surprise and strangle their victims by pulling a handkerchief or noose tight around their necks. They would then rob their victims of valuables and bury their bodies.

So calling someone a thug is not racist, more of a description of religious zealots, more like gypsy cons. Leave it to ignorant people to call it racist. Honestly some folks need to Google and do some research, not at all describing someone's skin color, but choice of behavior.

Originally posted by SayWhat
Thugs comes from Thugees, The Thugs traveled in groups across India for six hundred years.[1] Although the Thugs traced their origin to seven Muslim tribes, Hindus appear to have been associated with them at an early period. They were first mentioned in Ẓiyā-ud-Dīn Baranī's History of Fīrūz Shāh dated around 1356.[2] In the 1830's they were targeted for eradication by William Bentinck, Governor-General of India, and his chief captain William Henry Sleeman. The Thuggies were seemingly destroyed by this effort.[1][3]

The Thugs would join travelers and gain their confidence. This would allow them to then surprise and strangle their victims by pulling a handkerchief or noose tight around their necks. They would then rob their victims of valuables and bury their bodies.

So calling someone a thug is not racist, more of a description of religious zealots, more like gypsy cons. Leave it to ignorant people to call it racist. Honestly some folks need to Google and do some research, not at all describing someone's skin color, but choice of behavior.

Originally posted by vansonbee
Lot of black youth is in awe of that high number, its like a badge of honor for them.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Source?

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Source?

Originally posted by Mindset
allstarhiphop.com

lol

Originally posted by Lestov16
As I stated before, I'm not sure why this looting is a big deal. It's a natural byproduct of any sort of social unrest, regardless of race, as opportunistic criminals have no specific ethnicity.

You just asked why people burning down their own city and looting the livelihoods of innocent people..is a big deal.

As has been stated many times in this thread and others, Caucasians have looted, rioted, and vandalized public property for far less.

Who cares? Why do people point this out as if it means anything? Okay, so black people in the history of the human race are not the only race to riot and loot. That is fine. Nobody said these guys invented the concept of looting. You realize you can bring up other riots until you are blue in the face, it doesn't really negate what is being said about current riots.

If you're really expecting a poor teenager to take the moral high ground and not steal just because of their race, then you're holding blacks on an unrealistically higher pedestal than other races. Some poor people steal, no matter the race. It's what they do. Not sure what else you expect to happen. If you think only black "thugs" do it, you're foolishly close-minded.

But they are not stealing because they are poor. If it was merely due to being poor they wouldn't wait until a kid they never met gets killed by cops. That is not being poor, that is being an opportunistic piece of shit.

It really seems like people are trying to focus on the looting because it's easier and more comfortable than focusing on the institutionalized racism that the actual protesters, who seem to be ignored by the media, are trying to bring to light. It also explains why people are continuously trying to make excuses for these officers, bringing up irrelevant info of the victim's past, etc. Some people will do anything to ignore racism because it involves stepping outside of their comfort zone to confront it.

See, this is the problem. People can't discuss ANYTHING about this except the death of the black man? If they do, it means they don't care and just want to focus on the looting.

The national guard was called in. Stop trying to downplay the utter destruction caused. Since no, they have no right to behave this way, I don't care how poor they are..it is no excuse. No, even the fact that 150 years ago their ancestors were slaves is no excuse either.

Just like when people point out the kid has a rap sheet a mile long you go into "they are bringing up irrelevant stuff about the victims past". So we can't even mention the long list of crimes he was charged for. We can't mention the looting, we can't mention the destruction. Tell me what we CAN mention, besides the dead black kid.

You say you aren't trying to justify what they did, but it doesn't come off that way. Maybe justification is the wrong word, but you seem to be excusing a lot. Like oh these riots are just natural byproducts of unrest...they aren't petty opportunistic thugs just taking advantage of a situation.