Was it Racist to Not Send the Feds Earlier?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean? Do you mean if Sidwell students were killed there would be more police presence? what exactly are you asking?

Have no idea how the original post was confusing if you had any historical knowledge of the city. In the 1990s, when DC was recording 300+ and sometimes 400+ murders a year, was it racist to not extend federal support? Do you think federal support would have been extended if rich white kids were being murdered at the same staggering volume?

It is confusing because 1. children were not being murdered at that rate walking home from school 2. What is "federal support"... troops? jobs? addiction counseling? jobs programs?

The question was based on a false premise then used non-specific language like "federal support".

that is why it is confusing.

We can simplify it. It 400+ UMC and rich white men and children, mostly in WOTP neighborhoods, were being murdered per year in DC from 1989 to 1996, what do you think the federal response would have been?

Is that clear enough?

It’s still based on a false premise that 400+ people were being murdered per year.

But, yes, if white people were dying at a high rate, we would provide them with jobs, healthcare, and counseling.

But when Black people are dying, we jail them taking fathers out of the home and leaving children and women in poverty.

We don’t have to ask with the response have been different. We already know from history that our response to the black community is to jail them and our response to the white community is to help them.

Since you seem to be have a sophomore understanding of these things, I would suggest educating yourself. A good start with be a documentary called the 13th.

On a brighter scale, your question is is their systematic racism.

Yes, of course there is systematic racism. When white people need help the federal government helps them… They do this by making soft laws (like bankruptcy laws), lowering interest rates, and sending them to college (GI bill).

I personally believe you wanted to send more cops in… that would’ve given the opposite result of helping.

The things that have lowered crime and murders in Baltimore and Boston our jobs, healthcare, teen summer programs, etc … not more cops

You seem to be delusional at best or arguing in bad faith at worst. There were 400+ murders in DC a year from 1989-1996. Look up the MPD report that was posted earlier in the thread.

To your second point, are you implying that Black people who murder other Black people shouldn’t be put in jail? I don’t even understand your point. Your post reads like someone who copied and pasted the content of some anti racist books without bothering to add their own thoughts or engage in the actual argument at hand.

I did write that quickly, but what I should’ve said is when a black father is found with a dime bag he has sent to jail, leaving a black child without money and sent into poverty, and that black child is more likely to be the one who grows up to kill.

Also, if that father is found with a dime bag 3× 3 strikes, you’re out and mandatory minimum send him to jail for an inordinate amount of time creating poverty. While a white guy found with cocaine is sent to rehab and his record is expunged.

It’s the laws that have created this mess, and the lack of services for children left behind.

And yes, Baltimore was able to turn it around in less than a year with services not cops.

No one said the disparity between crack and cocaine laws weren’t racist. At least I didn’t.

The point of the thread was to ask if not sending the National Guard in when 400+ Black people were getting murdered a year was racist. Would you agree that if 400+ white people were getting murdered by Black people during this same time period the federal response would have been a lot more aggressive or do you think the nation at the time valued Black lives as much as white lives?

You are too obtuse to connect crack laws and sending NG in to police ... more cops = not good. More services, jobs, healthcare, etc = good for the community...black, white, etc...

Why are you so against giving services to black communities and giving them to white communities.

Again, if your false claim of 400 people even happened which it didn't... let's make it 40,000... if 40,000 white people were dying in the 90's we would not have deployed NG, we would have given people money, jobs and healthcare.

Why didn't we deploy NG during COVID when people were dying in the parking lots of hospitals?

So the MPD and the FBI are lying about the total murder numbers per year from 1989 to 1996? Are you serious?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean? Do you mean if Sidwell students were killed there would be more police presence? what exactly are you asking?

Have no idea how the original post was confusing if you had any historical knowledge of the city. In the 1990s, when DC was recording 300+ and sometimes 400+ murders a year, was it racist to not extend federal support? Do you think federal support would have been extended if rich white kids were being murdered at the same staggering volume?

It is confusing because 1. children were not being murdered at that rate walking home from school 2. What is "federal support"... troops? jobs? addiction counseling? jobs programs?

The question was based on a false premise then used non-specific language like "federal support".

that is why it is confusing.

We can simplify it. It 400+ UMC and rich white men and children, mostly in WOTP neighborhoods, were being murdered per year in DC from 1989 to 1996, what do you think the federal response would have been?

Is that clear enough?

It’s still based on a false premise that 400+ people were being murdered per year.

But, yes, if white people were dying at a high rate, we would provide them with jobs, healthcare, and counseling.

But when Black people are dying, we jail them taking fathers out of the home and leaving children and women in poverty.

We don’t have to ask with the response have been different. We already know from history that our response to the black community is to jail them and our response to the white community is to help them.

Since you seem to be have a sophomore understanding of these things, I would suggest educating yourself. A good start with be a documentary called the 13th.

On a brighter scale, your question is is their systematic racism.

Yes, of course there is systematic racism. When white people need help the federal government helps them… They do this by making soft laws (like bankruptcy laws), lowering interest rates, and sending them to college (GI bill).

I personally believe you wanted to send more cops in… that would’ve given the opposite result of helping.

The things that have lowered crime and murders in Baltimore and Boston our jobs, healthcare, teen summer programs, etc … not more cops

You seem to be delusional at best or arguing in bad faith at worst. There were 400+ murders in DC a year from 1989-1996. Look up the MPD report that was posted earlier in the thread.

To your second point, are you implying that Black people who murder other Black people shouldn’t be put in jail? I don’t even understand your point. Your post reads like someone who copied and pasted the content of some anti racist books without bothering to add their own thoughts or engage in the actual argument at hand.

I did write that quickly, but what I should’ve said is when a black father is found with a dime bag he has sent to jail, leaving a black child without money and sent into poverty, and that black child is more likely to be the one who grows up to kill.

Also, if that father is found with a dime bag 3× 3 strikes, you’re out and mandatory minimum send him to jail for an inordinate amount of time creating poverty. While a white guy found with cocaine is sent to rehab and his record is expunged.

It’s the laws that have created this mess, and the lack of services for children left behind.

And yes, Baltimore was able to turn it around in less than a year with services not cops.

No one said the disparity between crack and cocaine laws weren’t racist. At least I didn’t.

The point of the thread was to ask if not sending the National Guard in when 400+ Black people were getting murdered a year was racist. Would you agree that if 400+ white people were getting murdered by Black people during this same time period the federal response would have been a lot more aggressive or do you think the nation at the time valued Black lives as much as white lives?

You are too obtuse to connect crack laws and sending NG in to police ... more cops = not good. More services, jobs, healthcare, etc = good for the community...black, white, etc...

Why are you so against giving services to black communities and giving them to white communities.

Again, if your false claim of 400 people even happened which it didn't... let's make it 40,000... if 40,000 white people were dying in the 90's we would not have deployed NG, we would have given people money, jobs and healthcare.

Why didn't we deploy NG during COVID when people were dying in the parking lots of hospitals?

So the MPD and the FBI are lying about the total murder numbers per year from 1989 to 1996? Are you serious?

No, you’re lying about the numbers. MPD and the FBI have never posted those numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes people don't want help. Ask people from the projects whether they want more cops in the neighborhood. Let me know what you find out.

It's hard to change, and the medicine of justice and order is difficult to accept once you become unaccustomed to it. Disorder, chaos, drama becomes familiar.

Kind of like how an overweight person has difficulty getting into an exercise routine.

This is a great example of why the programs that right wing people recommend make no sense.

If you ask somebody From the “projects“ which is not a word normal people use by the way of course they don’t want more cops or arresting innocent young people just like immigrants don’t want cops arresting American citizens.

But if you ask somebody who is in a poverty situation if they would like a job, housing, healthcare yeah they’re gonna say yes.

And if you ask somebody, who’s overweight, would they like free, healthy food and medical care and mental health assistance they’re gonna say yes, but if you ask them if they want somebody to train them for a marathon, they’re gonna say no.

Is beyond my comprehension that you do not understand that. I wonder how f@cking stupid you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean? Do you mean if Sidwell students were killed there would be more police presence? what exactly are you asking?

Have no idea how the original post was confusing if you had any historical knowledge of the city. In the 1990s, when DC was recording 300+ and sometimes 400+ murders a year, was it racist to not extend federal support? Do you think federal support would have been extended if rich white kids were being murdered at the same staggering volume?

It is confusing because 1. children were not being murdered at that rate walking home from school 2. What is "federal support"... troops? jobs? addiction counseling? jobs programs?

The question was based on a false premise then used non-specific language like "federal support".

that is why it is confusing.

We can simplify it. It 400+ UMC and rich white men and children, mostly in WOTP neighborhoods, were being murdered per year in DC from 1989 to 1996, what do you think the federal response would have been?

Is that clear enough?

It’s still based on a false premise that 400+ people were being murdered per year.

But, yes, if white people were dying at a high rate, we would provide them with jobs, healthcare, and counseling.

But when Black people are dying, we jail them taking fathers out of the home and leaving children and women in poverty.

We don’t have to ask with the response have been different. We already know from history that our response to the black community is to jail them and our response to the white community is to help them.

Since you seem to be have a sophomore understanding of these things, I would suggest educating yourself. A good start with be a documentary called the 13th.

On a brighter scale, your question is is their systematic racism.

Yes, of course there is systematic racism. When white people need help the federal government helps them… They do this by making soft laws (like bankruptcy laws), lowering interest rates, and sending them to college (GI bill).

I personally believe you wanted to send more cops in… that would’ve given the opposite result of helping.

The things that have lowered crime and murders in Baltimore and Boston our jobs, healthcare, teen summer programs, etc … not more cops

You seem to be delusional at best or arguing in bad faith at worst. There were 400+ murders in DC a year from 1989-1996. Look up the MPD report that was posted earlier in the thread.

To your second point, are you implying that Black people who murder other Black people shouldn’t be put in jail? I don’t even understand your point. Your post reads like someone who copied and pasted the content of some anti racist books without bothering to add their own thoughts or engage in the actual argument at hand.

I did write that quickly, but what I should’ve said is when a black father is found with a dime bag he has sent to jail, leaving a black child without money and sent into poverty, and that black child is more likely to be the one who grows up to kill.

Also, if that father is found with a dime bag 3× 3 strikes, you’re out and mandatory minimum send him to jail for an inordinate amount of time creating poverty. While a white guy found with cocaine is sent to rehab and his record is expunged.

It’s the laws that have created this mess, and the lack of services for children left behind.

And yes, Baltimore was able to turn it around in less than a year with services not cops.

No one said the disparity between crack and cocaine laws weren’t racist. At least I didn’t.

The point of the thread was to ask if not sending the National Guard in when 400+ Black people were getting murdered a year was racist. Would you agree that if 400+ white people were getting murdered by Black people during this same time period the federal response would have been a lot more aggressive or do you think the nation at the time valued Black lives as much as white lives?

You are too obtuse to connect crack laws and sending NG in to police ... more cops = not good. More services, jobs, healthcare, etc = good for the community...black, white, etc...

Why are you so against giving services to black communities and giving them to white communities.

Again, if your false claim of 400 people even happened which it didn't... let's make it 40,000... if 40,000 white people were dying in the 90's we would not have deployed NG, we would have given people money, jobs and healthcare.

Why didn't we deploy NG during COVID when people were dying in the parking lots of hospitals?

So the MPD and the FBI are lying about the total murder numbers per year from 1989 to 1996? Are you serious?

No, you’re lying about the numbers. MPD and the FBI have never posted those numbers.

Page 4 of this report. Next?

https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/homicidereport_2005.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean? Do you mean if Sidwell students were killed there would be more police presence? what exactly are you asking?

Have no idea how the original post was confusing if you had any historical knowledge of the city. In the 1990s, when DC was recording 300+ and sometimes 400+ murders a year, was it racist to not extend federal support? Do you think federal support would have been extended if rich white kids were being murdered at the same staggering volume?

It is confusing because 1. children were not being murdered at that rate walking home from school 2. What is "federal support"... troops? jobs? addiction counseling? jobs programs?

The question was based on a false premise then used non-specific language like "federal support".

that is why it is confusing.

We can simplify it. It 400+ UMC and rich white men and children, mostly in WOTP neighborhoods, were being murdered per year in DC from 1989 to 1996, what do you think the federal response would have been?

Is that clear enough?

It’s still based on a false premise that 400+ people were being murdered per year.

But, yes, if white people were dying at a high rate, we would provide them with jobs, healthcare, and counseling.

But when Black people are dying, we jail them taking fathers out of the home and leaving children and women in poverty.

We don’t have to ask with the response have been different. We already know from history that our response to the black community is to jail them and our response to the white community is to help them.

Since you seem to be have a sophomore understanding of these things, I would suggest educating yourself. A good start with be a documentary called the 13th.

On a brighter scale, your question is is their systematic racism.

Yes, of course there is systematic racism. When white people need help the federal government helps them… They do this by making soft laws (like bankruptcy laws), lowering interest rates, and sending them to college (GI bill).

I personally believe you wanted to send more cops in… that would’ve given the opposite result of helping.

The things that have lowered crime and murders in Baltimore and Boston our jobs, healthcare, teen summer programs, etc … not more cops

You seem to be delusional at best or arguing in bad faith at worst. There were 400+ murders in DC a year from 1989-1996. Look up the MPD report that was posted earlier in the thread.

To your second point, are you implying that Black people who murder other Black people shouldn’t be put in jail? I don’t even understand your point. Your post reads like someone who copied and pasted the content of some anti racist books without bothering to add their own thoughts or engage in the actual argument at hand.

I did write that quickly, but what I should’ve said is when a black father is found with a dime bag he has sent to jail, leaving a black child without money and sent into poverty, and that black child is more likely to be the one who grows up to kill.

Also, if that father is found with a dime bag 3× 3 strikes, you’re out and mandatory minimum send him to jail for an inordinate amount of time creating poverty. While a white guy found with cocaine is sent to rehab and his record is expunged.

It’s the laws that have created this mess, and the lack of services for children left behind.

And yes, Baltimore was able to turn it around in less than a year with services not cops.

No one said the disparity between crack and cocaine laws weren’t racist. At least I didn’t.

The point of the thread was to ask if not sending the National Guard in when 400+ Black people were getting murdered a year was racist. Would you agree that if 400+ white people were getting murdered by Black people during this same time period the federal response would have been a lot more aggressive or do you think the nation at the time valued Black lives as much as white lives?

You are too obtuse to connect crack laws and sending NG in to police ... more cops = not good. More services, jobs, healthcare, etc = good for the community...black, white, etc...

Why are you so against giving services to black communities and giving them to white communities.

Again, if your false claim of 400 people even happened which it didn't... let's make it 40,000... if 40,000 white people were dying in the 90's we would not have deployed NG, we would have given people money, jobs and healthcare.

Why didn't we deploy NG during COVID when people were dying in the parking lots of hospitals?

So the MPD and the FBI are lying about the total murder numbers per year from 1989 to 1996? Are you serious?

No, you’re lying about the numbers. MPD and the FBI have never posted those numbers.

And this is from the DC Medical Examiner, page 9. Have no idea why they’re reporting more murders than MPD, except maybe MPD was deducting homicides in self defense.

https://ocme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocme/publication/attachments/APPENDIX%20A%20-%2030%20year.pdf

And this is from Wikipedia.

Despite being the headquarters of multiple federal law enforcement agencies, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the nationwide crack epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s greatly affected the city and led to large increases in crime.[1] The number of homicides in Washington peaked in 1991 at 482,[2] a rate of 80.6 homicides per 100,000 residents,[3] and the city eventually became known as the "murder capital" of the United States.[4]

But I guess all these numbers are forged and Trump changed the PDFs and went back in time and edited all the murder stats that were posted in the last 20-30 years.

[Anonymous]

Again, I'm not sure what we're arguing about. The only thing in DC that has materially changed/fluctuated over the years when it comes to murder is the rate. The demographics involved has always been constant. The overwhelming majority of both perpetrators and victims have been black and male and between the ages of 18 and 40.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean? Do you mean if Sidwell students were killed there would be more police presence? what exactly are you asking?

Have no idea how the original post was confusing if you had any historical knowledge of the city. In the 1990s, when DC was recording 300+ and sometimes 400+ murders a year, was it racist to not extend federal support? Do you think federal support would have been extended if rich white kids were being murdered at the same staggering volume?

It is confusing because 1. children were not being murdered at that rate walking home from school 2. What is "federal support"... troops? jobs? addiction counseling? jobs programs?

The question was based on a false premise then used non-specific language like "federal support".

that is why it is confusing.

We can simplify it. It 400+ UMC and rich white men and children, mostly in WOTP neighborhoods, were being murdered per year in DC from 1989 to 1996, what do you think the federal response would have been?

Is that clear enough?

It’s still based on a false premise that 400+ people were being murdered per year.

But, yes, if white people were dying at a high rate, we would provide them with jobs, healthcare, and counseling.

But when Black people are dying, we jail them taking fathers out of the home and leaving children and women in poverty.

We don’t have to ask with the response have been different. We already know from history that our response to the black community is to jail them and our response to the white community is to help them.

Since you seem to be have a sophomore understanding of these things, I would suggest educating yourself. A good start with be a documentary called the 13th.

On a brighter scale, your question is is their systematic racism.

Yes, of course there is systematic racism. When white people need help the federal government helps them… They do this by making soft laws (like bankruptcy laws), lowering interest rates, and sending them to college (GI bill).

I personally believe you wanted to send more cops in… that would’ve given the opposite result of helping.

The things that have lowered crime and murders in Baltimore and Boston our jobs, healthcare, teen summer programs, etc … not more cops

You seem to be delusional at best or arguing in bad faith at worst. There were 400+ murders in DC a year from 1989-1996. Look up the MPD report that was posted earlier in the thread.

To your second point, are you implying that Black people who murder other Black people shouldn’t be put in jail? I don’t even understand your point. Your post reads like someone who copied and pasted the content of some anti racist books without bothering to add their own thoughts or engage in the actual argument at hand.

I did write that quickly, but what I should’ve said is when a black father is found with a dime bag he has sent to jail, leaving a black child without money and sent into poverty, and that black child is more likely to be the one who grows up to kill.

Also, if that father is found with a dime bag 3× 3 strikes, you’re out and mandatory minimum send him to jail for an inordinate amount of time creating poverty. While a white guy found with cocaine is sent to rehab and his record is expunged.

It’s the laws that have created this mess, and the lack of services for children left behind.

And yes, Baltimore was able to turn it around in less than a year with services not cops.

No one said the disparity between crack and cocaine laws weren’t racist. At least I didn’t.

The point of the thread was to ask if not sending the National Guard in when 400+ Black people were getting murdered a year was racist. Would you agree that if 400+ white people were getting murdered by Black people during this same time period the federal response would have been a lot more aggressive or do you think the nation at the time valued Black lives as much as white lives?

You are too obtuse to connect crack laws and sending NG in to police ... more cops = not good. More services, jobs, healthcare, etc = good for the community...black, white, etc...

Why are you so against giving services to black communities and giving them to white communities.

Again, if your false claim of 400 people even happened which it didn't... let's make it 40,000... if 40,000 white people were dying in the 90's we would not have deployed NG, we would have given people money, jobs and healthcare.

Why didn't we deploy NG during COVID when people were dying in the parking lots of hospitals?

So the MPD and the FBI are lying about the total murder numbers per year from 1989 to 1996? Are you serious?

No, you’re lying about the numbers. MPD and the FBI have never posted those numbers.

And this is from the DC Medical Examiner, page 9. Have no idea why they’re reporting more murders than MPD, except maybe MPD was deducting homicides in self defense.

https://ocme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocme/publication/attachments/APPENDIX%20A%20-%2030%20year.pdf

And this is from Wikipedia.

Despite being the headquarters of multiple federal law enforcement agencies, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the nationwide crack epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s greatly affected the city and led to large increases in crime.[1] The number of homicides in Washington peaked in 1991 at 482,[2] a rate of 80.6 homicides per 100,000 residents,[3] and the city eventually became known as the "murder capital" of the United States.[4]

But I guess all these numbers are forged and Trump changed the PDFs and went back in time and edited all the murder stats that were posted in the last 20-30 years.

You might be on to something. I think Pam Bondi has a new Men in Black division that wipes the memory or everyone who lived in DC in the early 90s and replaced images of a care free, safe and prosperous 14th St NW from Thomas Circle to Columbia Heights with confabulations of prostitutes and nodding off junkies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, I'm not sure what we're arguing about. The only thing in DC that has materially changed/fluctuated over the years when it comes to murder is the rate. The demographics involved has always been constant. The overwhelming majority of both perpetrators and victims have been black and male and between the ages of 18 and 40.

So…this whole time you thought DC was as safe as any other big city and there weren’t 400+ murders in the 90s and this was all made up, but we’re all supposed to take your opinion seriously?

Okay…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, I'm not sure what we're arguing about. The only thing in DC that has materially changed/fluctuated over the years when it comes to murder is the rate. The demographics involved has always been constant. The overwhelming majority of both perpetrators and victims have been black and male and between the ages of 18 and 40.

So…this whole time you thought DC was as safe as any other big city and there weren’t 400+ murders in the 90s and this was all made up, but we’re all supposed to take your opinion seriously?

Okay…

I never said anything of the sort. There's more than two posters on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes people don't want help. Ask people from the projects whether they want more cops in the neighborhood. Let me know what you find out.

It's hard to change, and the medicine of justice and order is difficult to accept once you become unaccustomed to it. Disorder, chaos, drama becomes familiar.

Kind of like how an overweight person has difficulty getting into an exercise routine.

This is a great example of why the programs that right wing people recommend make no sense.

If you ask somebody From the “projects“ which is not a word normal people use by the way of course they don’t want more cops or arresting innocent young people just like immigrants don’t want cops arresting American citizens.

But if you ask somebody who is in a poverty situation if they would like a job, housing, healthcare yeah they’re gonna say yes.

And if you ask somebody, who’s overweight, would they like free, healthy food and medical care and mental health assistance they’re gonna say yes, but if you ask them if they want somebody to train them for a marathon, they’re gonna say no.

Is beyond my comprehension that you do not understand that. I wonder how f@cking stupid you are.

You are conflating desires. People want free housing and medical care. A job? Not much, that's working to help someone else self-actualize. People want access to the food they like, not healthy food.

The mentally ill regularly turn away from mental health assistance because they don't believe there is anything wrong with them. It's everyone else that has a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is just trolling.

They might just learn something though if they are open to it.

Not trolling. Do you think the federal response would have been as nonexistent if UMC and rich white men and children (that is, teenagers) were being murdered?

It’s a simple yes or no question.

I understand in your sophomore brain. It seems like a yes or no question and it also sounds simple but because you lack basic understanding, it’s not simple. It’s complex and I did provide you an answer in the other post.

I really think you need to watch the documentary the 13th so that you can at least least have an elementary understanding so that you could actually have an educated conversation about this.

Thank you for trying, PP. I think the OP is just brain poisoned and bored now that CK is no longer making content, so he's trying to "debate" on this board without any of the fact, nuance, or details that would be needed to have an informed discussion.

I appreciate you (and others) trying, and maybe other folks will learn from this thread even if OP doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is just trolling.

They might just learn something though if they are open to it.

Not trolling. Do you think the federal response would have been as nonexistent if UMC and rich white men and children (that is, teenagers) were being murdered?

It’s a simple yes or no question.

I understand in your sophomore brain. It seems like a yes or no question and it also sounds simple but because you lack basic understanding, it’s not simple. It’s complex and I did provide you an answer in the other post.

I really think you need to watch the documentary the 13th so that you can at least least have an elementary understanding so that you could actually have an educated conversation about this.

Thank you for trying, PP. I think the OP is just brain poisoned and bored now that CK is no longer making content, so he's trying to "debate" on this board without any of the fact, nuance, or details that would be needed to have an informed discussion.

I appreciate you (and others) trying, and maybe other folks will learn from this thread even if OP doesn't.

A master class in deflection. Bravo! When all else fails retreat to banal platitudes and tell other people to watch someone else’s content and “do the work.”

Excellent job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean? Do you mean if Sidwell students were killed there would be more police presence? what exactly are you asking?

Have no idea how the original post was confusing if you had any historical knowledge of the city. In the 1990s, when DC was recording 300+ and sometimes 400+ murders a year, was it racist to not extend federal support? Do you think federal support would have been extended if rich white kids were being murdered at the same staggering volume?

It is confusing because 1. children were not being murdered at that rate walking home from school 2. What is "federal support"... troops? jobs? addiction counseling? jobs programs?

The question was based on a false premise then used non-specific language like "federal support".

that is why it is confusing.

We can simplify it. It 400+ UMC and rich white men and children, mostly in WOTP neighborhoods, were being murdered per year in DC from 1989 to 1996, what do you think the federal response would have been?

Is that clear enough?

It’s still based on a false premise that 400+ people were being murdered per year.

But, yes, if white people were dying at a high rate, we would provide them with jobs, healthcare, and counseling.

But when Black people are dying, we jail them taking fathers out of the home and leaving children and women in poverty.

We don’t have to ask with the response have been different. We already know from history that our response to the black community is to jail them and our response to the white community is to help them.

Since you seem to be have a sophomore understanding of these things, I would suggest educating yourself. A good start with be a documentary called the 13th.

On a brighter scale, your question is is their systematic racism.

Yes, of course there is systematic racism. When white people need help the federal government helps them… They do this by making soft laws (like bankruptcy laws), lowering interest rates, and sending them to college (GI bill).

I personally believe you wanted to send more cops in… that would’ve given the opposite result of helping.

The things that have lowered crime and murders in Baltimore and Boston our jobs, healthcare, teen summer programs, etc … not more cops

You are delusional about the treatment of white criminals. And obviously young. Washington DC spent SO much money during the Marion Barry years to provide youth employment, after school enrichment, summer programs, etc. and hired lots of people into city jobs as welfare.

The problem is single parenthood. Black families were actually discriminated against during a large part of the 20th century, but did not see this dysfunction because most families were whole (and the churches were influential).

[Anonymous]

OP's hypothetical assumes that if 400+ white kids in upper NW were being killed walking home from school, the cause would be identical to the reasons these murders happen east of the river. Of course they would not.

If a murder rate like that occurred in a high income, low/no poverty neighborhood with little to no history of generational violence, where most adults are gainfully employed, we'd ALL be saying WTF. What would cause that kind of violence in a place where people have lots of ability to live comfortable, profitable, safe lives? It would almost certainly be an external force coming into the neighborhood and causing violence that otherwise, statistically, would be incredibly unlikely. And if it's an external force, it can be eradicated and fixed, likely within a relatively short period of time.

But of course that's not how it works. Violence in cities tends to be localized in the poorest communities, where people have the fewest options, and the hardest lives. And the violence tends to be linked to historical trends in violence, including violence by the state or the ruling class towards those without power or wealth.

Liberals don't accept violence in poor, historically black neighborhoods as fine or inevitable. But we are smart enough to understand that violence didn't just spontaneously occur. And even if you could lock up all the murderers (which, by the way, I strongly support -- let's do that) it wouldn't actually end those cycles of violence. Because the cause is embedded in the community itself, and unless you do something to address the cause of the violence, it will just reoccur.

[Anonymous]

DC crime is so bad our whole company of 300 employees moved to Maryland suburbs. After two employees were shot and killed and several mugged and robbed, the president of the company said we are moving. DC is out of control.