You think a social worker can't disarm a 15 year old girl with a knife? That's pretty easy lol. Not safe, but with proper training hardly something you need to call the police for.

You guys act like social workers are all 105lb weaklings taken off the street, instead of people who put up with more shit than cops do but aren't allowed to shoot people.

so racist individuals in a pervasively racist society create and operate a system, in which the outcome is racist due to their pervasive racist attitudes, but that doesnt mean the racist system that racists created is racist?

in any case your question is moot, postulating on whether the outcome would be the same if it were not a high profile case takes into account that it could have been a low profile case. thats not 2021, that's 1991 mentality. we dont have low profile police killings of black men in the cell phone era of the US anymore. even when its not months long national news the local aura of "pressure" we're talking about here is there and getting a jury ignorant of the case is all but impossible.



Voter ID laws have been shown time and again to disproportionately affect blacks. we can use moral arguments to claim this shouldnt be the case but it is. when u require an ID less blacks vote than whites who dont vote.

sentencing studies still show that blacks receive harsher punishments, even when controlled for legal council costs. and are also less likely to receive parole for the same crimes.

lots of examples, usually leading to "yeah but thats because they are like this ____" responses or "high drug trafficking area" excuses. all well and good, but thats doesnt change the experience of the predominately non-drug dealing black people in that area.



no it isnt. convince me otherwise. (you wont even try)

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 21 2021 09:12am

No surprise here people like Thor and snipa and all the fellow pale pasty soy boys are not operating in good faith anymore

Oh, you wanna do this again? Last time you asked I cited this case and you avoided race topics like a plague for like the past year. Good to see you've forgotten.

The appeals judge ruled that racial groups were targeted with the laws "with surgical precision" and they had evidence beyond doubt that this was the specific intent when tailoring the law.

Somebody doesn't need to write "n****rs can't vote" in a law for it to be racist. They can just as easily look up the racial demographics of areas served by different polling places and close those down, and then look up what forms of ID they should accept and not allow the ones used overwhelmingly by different racial groups, and that's exactly what happened.

And the best part, it was passed within a year of the supreme court shutting down the voting rights act.

Systemic racism exists, and idiots like you think "that can't be racist, they didn't even say the N-word"

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 21 2021 09:13am

blacks = 28.61% of the population in Georgia, aka 2.3 million people.

blacks = 3.70% in Colorado, aka 159k people.

so ummmmm lol?



good faith = wed morning church?

keep chiming in from the bench mall cop.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 21 2021 09:15am

You're the one getting worked up because if voting ID laws are the best example you can come up then most people are going to roll their eyes.

I really just don't understand how we can have different types of standards of what makes something racist and then pretend to have an honest objective conversation. Like in Colorado, and most of the world voting ID laws are totally acceptable but in swing states, they're not and it's voter suppression.

Where is the outrage about Colorado being a destination for the MLB game when they have these laws on the books there?




Okay so? Are you saying the 3.7% of Blacks in Colorado being suppressed by these laws is okay because it's a small percentage or?

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Apr 21 2021 09:19am

Hmmm, it's almost like nobody has ever claimed that voter ID laws are inherently racist, but are racist when they're used to target specific minority groups.

Oh wait... that's exactly whats happening, and you're refusing to even look into the issue where it was proven to be what's happening in federal court.

strike 1: calling CO not a swing state is a bit silly, 7/12 of the last Potus elections it voted red.

strike 2: existing laws that aren't appearing problematic arent the same as new laws that do appear problematic

strike 3: there are 15x more blacks in Georgia, with far more below the poverty line, to disproportionately affect





the "something either is or isnt racist" bereft of context narrative among conservatives is silly. stahp.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 21 2021 09:26am

It's a state law. What surgical precision are you talking about? Are whites exempt? Are rural counties exempt? Are you saying it will only be enforced in predominantly black areas?

Thanks for admitting you don't know the first thing about the law you are trying to speak with authority about. I've linked you to it multiple times already, and it seems instead of honestly engaging you've avoided it.