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.
It doesn't make any logical sense, but we can try to theorize it.
The left needs the black vote, and will do whatever it takes to keep it. To include exonerating criminals and punishing law abiding citizens.
The sad thing is the clerk is DOMINICAN so the woke DA is literally punishing a person of color, and their own voter base, to save face for a career criminal.
It all makes sense when considering the power play you mention and deconstructionism. The left has become full on deconstructionists. Anything traditional including law and order they want to tear down. Unfortunately, the tactics they are deploying at the DA and other government levels are giving them both of those. Pray to God enough people wake up and vote all of these scum out. It does not look good for the future if we don’t.
And even that doesn't make sense. The career criminals don't vote, most victims do. Yet, the inner cities continue to vote Democrat. Again, how did our society become so stupid ?
How? The Democrats' insistence on propping up our largely deficient public education system. Beginning in the 1960s, the actual goal of a public school education was dumbed-down equal educational outcomes (aimed at the below average level as that's where most students could succeed) because it was theorized that such would create more socioeconomic equity and therefore social cohesion. Of course, that DIDN'T happen and all we got was a dumbed-down populace, increasing wealth and income gaps, and escalating societal strife.
This article explores the roots of the problem:
Quote:
"While students in the bottom quartile have shown slow but steady improvement since the 1960s, average test scores have nonetheless gone down, primarily because of the performance of those in the top quartile. This "highest cohort of achievers," Rudman writes, has shown "the greatest declines across a variety of subjects as well as across age-level groups." Analysts have also found "a substantial drop among those children in the middle range of achievement"
...The contrast was stark: schools that had "severely declining test scores" had "moved determinedly toward heterogeneous grouping" (that is, mixed students of differing ability levels in the same classes), while the "schools who have maintained good SAT [Stanford Achievement Test, for grades K-12] scores" tended "to prefer homogeneous grouping [ability/skill-level grouping, aka tracking]."
If attaining educational excellence is this simple, why have these high-quality schools become so rare? The answer lies in the cultural ferment of the 1960s.
THE INCUBUS OF THE SIXTIES
In every conceivable fashion the reigning ethos of those times was hostile to excellence in education. Individual achievement fell under intense suspicion, as did attempts to maintain standards. Discriminating among students on the basis of ability or performance was branded "elitist." Educational gurus of the day called for essentially nonacademic schools, whose main purpose would be to build habits of social cooperation and equality rather than to train the mind."
How? The Democrats' insistence on propping up our largely deficient public education system. Beginning in the 1960s, the actual goal of a public school education was dumbed-down equal educational outcomes (aimed at the below average level as that's where most students could succeed) because it was theorized that such would create more socioeconomic equity and therefore social cohesion. Of course, that DIDN'T happen and all we got was a dumbed-down populace, increasing wealth and income gaps, and escalating societal strife.
I knew this has been happening, just didn't realize it started that long ago. It definitely explains how our older generations were so much smarter, had more common sense, and moxie even with many lacking higher education.
And the biggest aspect of self-defense is running away; NOT using deadly force. In the face of deadly force a person is privileged to use deadly force to defend him or herself. That's where the privilege comes in.
Wrong !
(where did you go to school)?
You have no duty to retreat....none. Self defense means just that....'you enjoy the right to DEFEND YOURSELF!'
Your definition of self-defense is cowardness...(more liberal gaslighting).
Enjoy your stay in New York City please do not leave.
After weeks of mounting pressure, Manhattan’s district attorney on Tuesday morning dropped all charges against a bodega clerk who fatally stabbed an attacker.
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.
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.
