Stand Up To Stand Your Ground

UncleBuck said:
not my fault you're too dumb to understand simple numbers.

not every dumb person is a racist, but all racists are pretty damn dumb.
Click to expand...

Could you explain the graph to me? It really doesnt make sense, negative percentages and some way over 100..
 
Bombur said:
Could you explain the graph to me? It really doesnt make sense, negative percentages and some way over 100..
Click to expand...

if 10% of white on white killings were found justifiable, and 40% of white on black killings were found justifiable, then white on black killings would be 400% (or four times) more likely to be found justifiable.

whereas if 10% of white on white killings were found justifiable, but only 5% of black on white killings were found justifiable, the black on white killings would be 100% (or one time) less likely to be found justifiable.

if it is more likely, it is a positive percentage. if it is less likely, it is a negative percentage.

i can't believe i have to explain simple 5th grade math to a bunch of grown adults. this is a perfect demonstration of how stupid righties are (i have noticed bombur is a righty, too).
 
UncleBuck said:
then you are for denial of rights.

choose one, you can't have both. human nature is what it is, and the desert rats of the world who would keep blacks away from their supposedly "open to the public" lunch counters do exist.
Click to expand...


Nope. At the core, people, all people, have a right to choosing who they will associate with and how they will use their property. Legislation that MAKES people associate potentially deprives at least one party, of that choice. Yes sadly racists do exist. However, does a racist "own" his property? If the answer is Yes.... then THAT person should determine its use, not you, not me, not the government. My recognition of who owns their property, doesn't mean I would make the same choices as others would.

IF a person owns something, then THEY determine it's use...or they don't own it. Choose one, you can't have both.
 
UncleBuck said:
then you are for denial of rights.

choose one, you can't have both. human nature is what it is, and the desert rats of the world who would keep blacks away from their supposedly "open to the public" lunch counters do exist.
Click to expand...

heck, if the south could, they'd be doing it right now..
 
Rob Roy said:
Nope. At the core, people, all people, have a right to choosing who they will associate with and how they will use their property. Legislation that MAKES people associate potentially deprives at least one party, of that choice. Yes sadly racists do exist. However, does a racist "own" his property? If the answer is Yes.... then THAT person should determine its use, not you, not me, not the government. My recognition of who owns their property, doesn't mean I would make the same choices as others would.

IF a person owns something, then THEY determine it's use...or they don't own it. Choose one, you can't have both.
Click to expand...

quit your whining, you sad little bitch. this has been settled already, and it's not esoteric nor is it dripping with teenage angst.

if you say you're open to the public, you have to serve the public. all of it.

you can either make them do that or you can have denial of rights to others.

can't have your ennui and eat it too, little child.
 
Proof that Buck is supercilious ass, and God hangs from his balls:

hD09567F8
 
Rob Roy said:
Nope. At the core, people, all people, have a right to choosing who they will associate with and how they will use their property. Legislation that MAKES people associate potentially deprives at least one party, of that choice. Yes sadly racists do exist. However, does a racist "own" his property? If the answer is Yes.... then THAT person should determine its use, not you, not me, not the government. My recognition of who owns their property, doesn't mean I would make the same choices as others would.

IF a person owns something, then THEY determine it's use...or they don't own it. Choose one, you can't have both.
Click to expand...

part of being a citizen of the us is living within it's law..you don't strike me a "team player" type..am i correct?
 
UncleBuck said:
if 10% of white on white killings were found justifiable, and 40% of white on black killings were found justifiable, then white on black killings would be 400% (or four times) more likely to be found justifiable.

whereas if 10% of white on white killings were found justifiable, but only 5% of black on white killings were found justifiable, the black on white killings would be 100% (or one time) less likely to be found justifiable.

if it is more likely, it is a positive percentage. if it is less likely, it is a negative percentage.

i can't believe i have to explain simple 5th grade math to a bunch of grown adults. this is a perfect demonstration of how stupid righties are (i have noticed bombur is a righty, too).
Click to expand...

Thanks for explaining, although I wish you could have done so without the insults. I'm not a "righty", I think partisanship is pathetic and counterproductive. I'm also not stupid, your graph simply did a poor job of explaining what it meant. So I asked you politely, and for some reason I expected you to answer in kind. But I forgot you are an aggressive person who would have nothing to do if you weren't constantly feuding with internet strangers. Thanks for inserting aggression and hate everywhere you post :)
 
everybody please vote 4 stars because desert dude rated me 1 and i need to counteract to bring back to 4 stars

thank you

schuylaar<3
 
schuylaar said:
heck, if the south could, they'd be doing it right now..
Click to expand...

The south is a collective term and fails to recognize that individuals exist. Some people would, some people wouldn't. As long as the person that owns the property confines his choice to his own property, he hasn't initiated aggression against anyone has he? He's just making a choice about his own property. Why do you think others should tell you what you can or cannot do with your own property?
 
schuylaar said:
everybody please vote 4 stars because desert dude rated me 1 and i need to counteract to bring back to 4 stars

thank you

schuylaar<3
Click to expand...

Everybody please rate this thread any way you desire.

Please use the following graph to determine the correct star count based on your weight/pulse ratio, but be sure to divide the result by your weighted gender disposition:
Graph_Paneling_7_en-us.gif
 
Rob Roy said:
The south is a collective term and fails to recognize that individuals exist. Some people would, some people wouldn't. As long as the person that owns the property confines his choice to his own property, he hasn't initiated aggression against anyone has he? He's just making a choice about his own property. Why do you think others should tell you what you can or cannot do with your own property?
Click to expand...

listen child, this has been settled.

if you say you're open to the public, you have to serve the public. all of it.

i get that you want "special rights" to keep black people out, while bemoaning how they get "special rights". deal with it. open a private club to serve your sandwiches if you're that racist.

the practices of the south which are now outlawed did cause harm to others, and that is when rights stop.
 
UncleBuck said:
i can't believe i have to explain simple 5th grade math to a bunch of grown adults. this is a perfect demonstration of how stupid righties are (i have noticed bombur is a righty, too).
Click to expand...

And I can't believe the guy that very recently had so much trouble with basic division and showed his ass so completely, has the gumption to insult others on basic math. I thinks it's fair to say, you're the LAST RIU member that should be explaining percentages. You should stick to your forte, screaming RACIST at anything that moves. Leave the numbers to those of us who don't suffer from dyscalculia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top