U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-05-2014, 01:32 PM
 
7,948 posts, read 3,736,154 times
Reputation: 10419

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaba View Post
Waddle and quack, I'll call you a duck.
Moderator cut: Don't try to mask inappropriate words
Terms like thug, goon, etc. are ways of describing people who have no problem breaking the law in an effort to intimidate people or carry out criminal acts. It has also been used to describe guys who collect debts, are enforcers in hockey, etc.
It has probably been used to describe whites more often than anyone else in years past, but is now being used to describe what is happening in black culture as well.


Let's face it, if you dress and act like a tough guy looking to intimidate people with your appearance/attitude there will be a name for it. In todays society it is called the "thug culture", and it can refer to any person, regardless of their race.
So if you have a black guy dressed in a suit and acting polite, vs. a white guy dressed like ignorant fool acting uncivil, which one do you think will be called the thug?

Last edited by Poncho_NM; 10-06-2014 at 11:36 AM.. Reason: Knock off the masked racist words...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2014, 05:26 PM
 
741 posts, read 682,358 times
Reputation: 1356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
If you are implying that the term thug equates to saying n igger, you are misinformed and way off base. Terms like thug, goon, etc. are ways of describing people who have no problem breaking the law in an effort to intimidate people or carry out criminal acts. It has also been used to describe guys who collect debts, are enforcers in hockey, etc.
It has probably been used to describe whites more often than anyone else in years past, but is now being used to describe what is happening in black culture as well.


Let's face it, if you dress and act like a tough guy looking to intimidate people with your appearance/attitude there will be a name for it. In todays society it is called the "thug culture", and it can refer to any person, regardless of their race.
So if you have a black guy dressed in a suit and acting polite, vs. a white guy dressed like ignorant fool acting uncivil, which one do you think will be called the thug?
I'm well aware of the semantic back-door escape hatch, about how 'thug' really has no racial connotation and how if you're a 'respectful' black guy wearing a 'suit', how people like you have no problem and how there are 'white thugs' too...

I'm also aware of the context in which 'thug' is so regularly prattled by people who use it as a surrogate for a word that they can't say anymore without too much consequence.

For example, we know what is being implied here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by garvan View Post
The problem is that rioters were not all gut-shot in 68, like they should have been. Would have saved so much hassle and lives since (and in the future).

... but there's a very good chance that if you called him down on it, he'd deny any racial overtone and start babbling something about 'white rioters'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2014, 06:12 PM
 
24,843 posts, read 31,273,373 times
Reputation: 11428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaba View Post




... but there's a very good chance that if you called him down on it, he'd deny any racial overtone and start babbling something about 'white rioters'.
I sure can not speak for him.....but, I will tell you I am racist.

Now what.......it does not change the facts of this thread.

The Ferguson Grand Jury might have to start over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2014, 06:34 PM
 
Location: Gods country
5,336 posts, read 4,012,241 times
Reputation: 7380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
I think social media and all the texting/tweeting/emailing is showing average Americans how stupid our fellow citizens really are. Time after time everyone reads or hears about these fools who cannot control their urges to talk, gossip, or narcissisticly brag about what they are doing, and it costs them their jobs, reputations, etc.
Yet hearing this does not dissuade others from turning around and doing the same thing. So if this all turns out to be true and they need to seat another grand jury, it is such a waste of time and resources.

Then again I've already heard they want a jury that will indite the LEO for fear that anything less, will result in riots. Apparently a black congressman has publicly stated as much.
They really want to hang DW. Even the governor is calling for a vigorous "prosecution".

Gov. Nixon Calls For 'Vigorous Prosecution' Of Darren Wilson | The Daily Caller
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2014, 07:15 PM
 
741 posts, read 682,358 times
Reputation: 1356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
I sure can not speak for him.....but, I will tell you I am racist.

Now what.......it does not change the facts of this thread.

The Ferguson Grand Jury might have to start over.
We were discussing people who invoke blatant racial overtones or surrogate verbiage, then crap all over their own credibility when they deny what it implies.

You know you can't really say n*gger but you can say "thug" instead, ergo 'thug' is the new 'n*gger' used by people who are considerably less honest about their racism than you are. You are totally entitled to be racist (I think a lot of anti-racist crusaders seriously err when they try to belittle the life experiences of people who haven't concluded as they have) but you are not entitled to use your own personal feelings on race to justify morally perverse actions against persons of the race you happen to dislike, and expect people to not mention your opinion isn't very objective.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2014, 09:37 PM
 
7,948 posts, read 3,736,154 times
Reputation: 10419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaba View Post
I'm well aware of the semantic back-door escape hatch, about how 'thug' really has no racial connotation and how if you're a 'respectful' black guy wearing a 'suit', how people like you have no problem and how there are 'white thugs' too...

I'm also aware of the context in which 'thug' is so regularly prattled by people who use it as a surrogate for a word that they can't say anymore without too much consequence.

For example, we know what is being implied here:


... but there's a very good chance that if you called him down on it, he'd deny any racial overtone and start babbling something about 'white rioters'.
It is clear that you have already made up your mind with speculative generalizations of those who use the term thug.
I could reference books or movies where the term thug is used, and it was in reference to white people, not blacks.
Heck I was just watching a movie on Showtime called "Goon" and the main character is nicknamed "Doug the Thug". He just happens to be white, but I suppose the movie was just made to reinforce a "semantic back-door escape hatch".

`
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2014, 10:45 PM
 
3,245 posts, read 4,165,811 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
At this point the entire story is based on hearsay and any discussion is pure speculation. Feel free to continue to speculate without any direct evidence.
CNN did an interview with the person named on the twitter account. She denies sending the comment and also denies knowing anyone on the Grand Jury. The CNN commentators continued to babble on, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
The juror claims she was hacked.....we will see what happens.
The person is not a juror!
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.K. View Post
The report states that the Grand Jury has been "weighing the evidence" since August 20th. ... Isn't this usually a fairly quick process? ... Why has this already taken over a month and a half with no indictment or dismissal?
It may be a Special GJ, or an Investigative GJ, which is used to subpoena witnesses and documents and generally handles only one case, not a litany of street crimes. The more normal procedure would be to investigate the case first, then eventually present the case to a GJ over a short period, perhaps a day or two. However, with protestors and activists baying for a Grand Jury, one was empanelled.

Last edited by bigjake54; 10-05-2014 at 10:56 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2014, 11:09 PM
 
3,245 posts, read 4,165,811 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaba View Post
Grand Juries are tools used by prosecutors.
Their role and function has not changed over the centuries.
Quote:
They are not a process with much integrity, anymore.
A conclusory opinion, without any basis.
Quote:
If a prosecutor wants to bring an indictment, he can. "Facts" are pretty immaterial in a one-sided process.
Nonsense. In most states, facts (not "facts") are required. The process may be one-sided, but it is a process, not an inquisition or star-chamber proceeding. BTW, not every case is indicted.
Quote:
Prosecutors and police have a collegial relationship, viewing each other as 'teammates'.
Prosecutors indict police officers all the time. Misconduct indictments don't just suddenly turn up on the court house steps, in a basket.
Quote:
In case you haven't noticed, to people on that particular team, all police shootings are always justified. When a prosecutor puts a police shooting case before a grand jury, the 'one sided' aspect of the Grand Jury that is used to indict anyone else is manipulated to favorably sway the jury away from an indictment.
Of course, it would never occur to you that a shooting might be justified, and the grand jury makes the correct decision, not to indict.
Quote:
As the old saying goes, "a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich"
The corollary is "Indict a ham sandwich, try a ham sandwich."
If insufficient or improper evidence is the basis of an indictment, the charges will be thrown out, once a judge reviews a motion to dismiss.
Quote:
When the prosecutor is railroading ..., me or our family in a grad jury hearing, it takes 3 hours.
I won't ask how many times you and yours have been indicted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Norfolk
1,574 posts, read 1,981,061 times
Reputation: 5073
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjake54 View Post

I won't ask how many times you and yours have been indicted.
Oh but you should! It's such a darn good question!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2014, 06:55 AM
 
24,843 posts, read 31,273,373 times
Reputation: 11428
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjake54 View Post
CNN did an interview with the person named on the twitter account. She denies sending the comment and also denies knowing anyone on the Grand Jury. The CNN commentators continued to babble on, though.

The person is not a juror!

It may be a Special GJ, or an Investigative GJ, which is used to subpoena witnesses and documents and generally handles only one case, not a litany of street crimes. The more normal procedure would be to investigate the case first, then eventually present the case to a GJ over a short period, perhaps a day or two. However, with protestors and activists baying for a Grand Jury, one was empanelled.
My mistake.

You are correct.....it was not the juror.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top