Racist Chanting

[bocadillo]

If it was proved to be racially motivated, rather than just accompanied with racist language, then yes.

Would you say that the chants which are being discussed about are "racially motivated" or simply "racist language"? It seems to me that by making this differentiation in the case of an assault, you are leaving a great escape route for people who wish to use racist language in their chants.

 

[Macky]

The great irony is if you dare to mention these facts the usual mealy mouthed PC buzzwords are thrown about to silence the realists. I couldn't care less what buzzwords you throw at me because they are meaningless due to their over use.

There is absolutely nothing whatsoever ironic about that statement, in any way.
Speaking of buzzwords though, it's interesting that you use the word "realists". That's a buzzword used by the likes of the BNP and the EDL and other ignorant racist fools.

The only problem was the victims were white and the attackers were black, so no racial charges were brought.

Yet another moronic assertion without evidence. Typical of the type of bollocks used by the likes of the BNP and the EDL and other ignorant racist fools.

Just sayin like

 

[Miles Away]

There are other stats on the page I linked to, including things like the percentage who were unemployed.

Excellent. I'll have a look when in front of a computer as opposed to my phone.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Would you say that the chants which are being discussed about are "racially motivated" or simply "racist language"? It seems to me that by making this differentiation in the case of an assault, you are leaving a great escape route for people who wish to use racist language in their chants.

We're talking about two very different things. One is a crime being assessed by the judicial system, one is whether it's wrong to use racist language. Racism is always wrong, but there's an important distinction in criminal cases between racial motivation and the language used during an assault.

 

[bocadillo]

We're talking about two very different things. One is a crime being assessed by the judicial system, one is whether it's wrong to use racist language. Racism is always wrong, but there's an important distinction in criminal cases between racial motivation and the language used during an assault.

I'm on your side. But I think there's a danger in differentiating between 'racially motivated' and 'accompanied by racist language'.

 

[Richie]

No, hence saying 'I believe', you muppet.

Typical anti racist tactics already at work, name calling. But I'm glad your belief isn't fact then, as long as you can admit your belief isn't fact that's what I was looking for.

I don't have a biased viewpoint.

Right. Where to begin.

The riots involved people of all different ethnicities. There were a high proportion of black people, yes. This is because the people in these areas who are of low economic status have a high proportion of black people amongst their number. It has nothing to do with black people having a greater propensity for rioting or crime of any nature which is implicit in your argument.

The riots in the 80s were of a very different nature. The Met Police were far more institutionally racist back then, with appalling treatment of people simply by virtue of their skin colour. I don't think you can make a direct comparison.

You don't think I can make a direct comparison because it doesn't fit in with your multicultural view of the world.

But typically the minute the people of colour start acting up the excuses come out. I didn't have much when I was a teenager who'd just left school, but my answer wasn't to go rioting with a load of similar minded **** wits, I worked hard, saved hard and made the best of the situation, if only I knew then I could have rioted, set fire to buildings and looted shops safe in the knowledge that some PC right on types would be on hand to excuse my blatant criminality.

Gun crime, yes, there is very high levels of black on black gun crime. It's lessened due to Operation Trident, but it's still a problem. There is a certain amount of Jamaican gang culture at play here. Lots of machismo. But again, that's a cultural thing from one country. Not an ethnicity. So again, skin pigmentation has naff all to do with a propensity for high levels of gun crime.

If I was to take this argument at face value, I'd ask why anybody would think it was/is a good idea to allow people with this backward mindset into this country?

And as for your harking back to an all white golden age, how utterly depressing.

How ironic of you to state I was harking back to a white golden age? Not that I did of course, but if it fits your prejudice then so be it.

All the things you cite can and should be attributed to economic status and oppression. It's got nothing - literally NOTHING - to do with people's ethnicities.

I'm a bit skint at the moment, will you excuse me if I go rioting and cause millions of pounds worth of damage?

 

[ChrisFilter]

I'm on your side. But I think there's a danger in differentiating between 'racially motivated' and 'accompanied by racist language'.

Yeah, I would agree, but it has to be the case when dealing with two distinct crimes.

 

[Richie]

46% of those appearing in court were from black or mixed black backgrounds, 42% were white, 7% were Asian and 5% were classified as "other".

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-st...e-gang-members-115875-23511628/#ixzz1j9GK68FM

Those 5% other will be those "organ-visible" types I mentioned earlier.

 

[Miles Away]

Richie. You didn't answer my question...

 

[Richie]

Cool - thanks. I was wrong. The point still stands that it certainly was in no way a vast majority of black or mixed race people involved in the riots.

The overriding link between the people involved in the rights is economic status, not ethnicity.

Let's go rioting then, all costs, damages, business's ruined and people hurt are excused, as long as you are skint.

 

[Macky]

How ironic of you to state I was harking back to a white golden age? Not that I did of course, but if it fits your prejudice then so be it.

The only ironic thing, is that you keep calling things that are not ironic, ironic.



It's like raayeeeaaaaiiin, on your wedding day...

 

[indierich06]

Let's go rioting then, all costs, damages, business's ruined and people hurt are excused, as long as you are skint.

Pretty much ruins your idea that the riots were all down to the naughty black people though eh?

 

[Miles Away]

Still no answer, perhaps I'm on ignore.

 

[gregs_y2k]

Typical anti racist tactics already at work, name calling. But I'm glad your belief isn't fact then, as long as you can admit your belief isn't fact that's what I was looking for.


You don't think I can make a direct comparison because it doesn't fit in with your multicultural view of the world.

But typically the minute the people of colour start acting up the excuses come out. I didn't have much when I was a teenager who'd just left school, but my answer wasn't to go rioting with a load of similar minded **** wits, I worked hard, saved hard and made the best of the situation, if only I knew then I could have rioted, set fire to buildings and looted shops safe in the knowledge that some PC right on types would be on hand to explain my blatant criminality.



If I was to take this argument at face value, I'd ask why anybody would think it was/is a good idea to allow people with this backward mindset into this country?

And as for your harking back to an all white golden age, how utterly depressing.

How ironic of you to state I was harking back to a white golden age? Not that I did of course, but if it fits your prejudice then so be it.



I'm a bit skint at the moment, will you excuse me if I go rioting and cause millions of pounds worth of damage?

In all honesty, I think it's a cultural and generation thing rather than being linked to race. A large segment of today's youth have very little respect for society and the law. There's a massive disconnect. Personally I think part of the problem is that parent's are no longer allowed to discipline their children, although I accept it goes deeper than that as well. You've also got the music and film industries glamourising violence and a softening of censorship laws which allows younger people to witness more and more violent and rebellious material. I'm happy to admit I got a smack when I acted up as a kid and I'm glad I did. It taught me as a child right from wrong. Obviously I'm not saying beat a kid to within an inch of it's life or bruising them when I say smacking them....there's a massive difference there.

 

[ChrisFilter]

You don't think I can make a direct comparison because it doesn't fit in with your multicultural view of the world.

Magic. Imagine me having a multicultural view of a multicultural world!

But typically the minute the people of colour start acting up the excuses come out. I didn't have much when I was a teenager who'd just left school, but my answer wasn't to go rioting with a load of similar minded **** wits, I worked hard, saved hard and made the best of the situation, if only I knew then I could have rioted, set fire to buildings and looted shops safe in the knowledge that some PC right on types would be on hand to explain my blatant criminality.

And, you know what, the vast majority of black people of low economic status leave school, go out, work hard, save hard and make the best of their situation. Do you really believe there's a difference?

If I was to take this argument at face value, I'd ask why anybody would think it was/is a good idea to allow people with this backward mindset into this country?

I would imagine that a significant percentage of people involved in black on black guncrime are British. It's not about 'allowing people in'.

By the same token, can we disallow people with your backwards mindset from the country?

How ironic of you to state I was harking back to a white golden age? Not that I did of course, but if it fits your prejudice then so be it.

What were you inferring by wanting to go back the 'dark ages' then? Come on - have the balls to stand by you imply.

I'm a bit skint at the moment, will you excuse me if I go rioting and cause millions of pounds worth of damage?

I don't recall excusing the riots in any way, shape or form.

 

[Richie]

So Richie, you genuinely believe skin color/genetics actually has a direct line to behavior?

That is, there were more black rioters because that is what people of different creed are disposed to do?

I wouldn't know, I am questioning why it always seems to be a disproportionate amount of people of colour who act up at the slightest thing? But I think we have our answer now, they are in the main skint, so they are excused.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Let's go rioting then, all costs, damages, business's ruined and people hurt are excused, as long as you are skint.

Again, where are you getting the excusing thing from? I don't think anyone's excused the riots.

Interesting to note that Anthony Worrall-Thompson was giving a caution for multiple thefts from Tescos, but someone was given six months for stealing two bottles of water from Lidl during the riots. I'm not sure that equates to being excused or getting off lightly.

 

[BlueBlood]

We can still say what we like about the yellow ones, right? Or have the PC brigade clamped down on this too?

This flippant attempt at humour (or just trivialising racism) from another Notts based fellow seems to justify that people from Notts (a hotbed of BNP activists) are just not aware of their own ignorance. Using 'coloured' 'darkie' 'yellow ones'...just shows that people in that piss-hole county are stuck in an era where it was not illegal to racially abuse people - 50s, 60s and 70s

What's with the 'PC Brigade' rubbish? It's an offence to racially abuse someone whatever their skin colour you little ignoramus!

 

[Macky]

I'm happy to admit I got a smack when I acted up as a kid and I'm glad I did. It taught me as a child right from wrong. Obviously I'm not saying beat a kid to within an inch of it's life or bruising them when I say smacking them....there's a massive difference there.

Sadly, it also seems to have taught you that using violence to get your way is a valid approach. You don't need to use violence to teach kids right from wrong.

 

[camberwell fox]

And let's not forget the usual chants aimed at the wlesh sides.

You're just a small town of dyslexia's, small town of dyslexia's....