Another black teenager murdered

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Seems like this was unjustified though, at least on the surface of the story. We'd have to hear from the guy that shot her I guess to hear what was going on from his perspective. who the fuck knows, sounds fucked though
 
Last edited:
It sounds like he shot her in the back of the head after she turned to run away, wtf?
 
This is very sad considering she was trying to get help.
 
Google "castle doctrine."
 
I'm with Eastoff on this. I didn't see anywhere that you are allowed to kill a young woman on your porch for no reason.

Unless there is something big not stated in that article, the shooter is going to prison for a LONG time.

Go Blazers
 
What's wrong with people? Nowhere is the race of the shooter mentioned, yet the first comment I saw was "fuck white people."
 
If the shooter was black, this wouldn't be news and there wouldn't be outrage.
 
Horribly sad story.

It's a shame so many people live in fear from all the violent break ins that they feel the need to to be over protective.
 
I saw a story on KPTV last night talking about a woman that goes around door to door in NE Portland begging for money. Apparently she knocks on people's doors at all hours of the night, begging for money for baby formula, and she actually pushed her way into one house when one woman opened the door.

The part that I found interesting was that they gave no description of the woman. They just pointed people to a facebook page that was from a NE Portland neighborhood discussing the matter. I didn't realize that they were intentionally being non-descriptive until the victim of the breakin said that the woman mentioned that she must not be racist because she "let her in."

At that point I realized that the woman going door to door was probably black, and KPTV didn't want to mention her race. This world that we live in is getting utterly ridiculous.
 
I saw a story on KPTV last night talking about a woman that goes around door to door in NE Portland begging for money. Apparently she knocks on people's doors at all hours of the night, begging for money for baby formula, and she actually pushed her way into one house when one woman opened the door.

The part that I found interesting was that they gave no description of the woman. They just pointed people to a facebook page that was from a NE Portland neighborhood discussing the matter. I didn't realize that they were intentionally being non-descriptive until the victim of the breakin said that the woman mentioned that she must not be racist because she "let her in."

At that point I realized that the woman going door to door was probably black, and KPTV didn't want to mention her race. This world that we live in is getting utterly ridiculous.

How do they really know it's even a woman? Could be a really effeminate man like El Prez.
 
How do they really know it's even a woman? Could be a really effeminate man like El Prez.

I just think it's ridiculous that the news didn't even give a description of the woman.

http://www.kptv.com/story/23900771/st-johns-neighbors-spreading-word-about-aggressive-panhandler

I looked on the facebook page and she is most definitely black.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/stjohnsportland/

Why can't KPTV say that she's black? Why wouldn't they give a description at all? It was like that case a while back where the police were looking for two black men in relation to a suspected gang shooting. In the release from the PD it clearly described them as black, yet the media wouldn't release the full description. Are we seriously so sensitive now that we can't even say that someone is black without hurting feelings?
 
Being black in a white country is hell.
 
Being black in a white country is hell.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0077552#pone-0077552-t001

I'll just agree and leave this here.

Symbolic racism is a belief structure underpinned by both anti-black affect and traditional values. The anti-black affect (racism) component of symbolic racism is said to be established in pre-adult years through exposure to negative black stereotypes (e.g. blacks as dangerous, blacks are lazy), to the point that phenomena such as crime and physical violence have become typified as black phenomena.

Psychometric work shows that while symbolic racism has a small relationship with old-fashioned or blatant racism and stereotypes, only symbolic racism is associated with policy preferences related to race after controlling for conservative and political ideology and demographic characteristics.

The anti-black affect is not necessarily conscious or deliberative, but may be felt as fear, anger, unease, and hostility towards blacks.

Symbolic racism was related to having a gun in the home and opposition to gun control policies in US whites. The findings help explain US whites’ paradoxical attitudes towards gun ownership and gun control. Such attitudes may adversely influence US gun control policy debates and decisions.

After accounting for all explanatory variables, logistic regressions found that for each 1 point increase in symbolic racism there was a 50% increase in the odds of having a gun at home. After also accounting for having a gun in the home, there was still a 28% increase in support for permits to carry concealed handguns, for each one point increase in symbolic racism.

So, basically, Stand Your Ground is racist, created by racist white gun owners for racist white gun owners, used by racist white gun owners to legally murder blacks.

God Bless 'Murrica.
 
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0077552#pone-0077552-t001

I'll just agree and leave this here.



So, basically, Stand Your Ground is racist, created by racist white gun owners for racist white gun owners, used by racist white gun owners to legally murder blacks.

God Bless 'Murrica.

I expect both ends of the political spectrum to report the findings of this research honestly.

I'm not surprised that the research was done by foreigners. This topic is so loaded that American researchers can't touch it. Hell, the editor of Guns & Ammo had to resign for even suggesting that some gun regulation is necessary.
 
Or maybe a little digging might find:

http://www.plosone.org/static/information

Publication Charges

To provide open access, PLOS journals use a business model in which our expenses—including those of peer review, journal production, and online hosting and archiving—are recovered in part by charging a publication fee to the authors or research sponsors for each article they publish. The fees vary by journal.

PLOS is committed to the widest possible global participation in open access publishing. To determine the appropriate fee, we use a country-based pricing model, which is based on the country that provides 50% or more of the primary funding for the research that is being submitted. Research articles funded by Upper Middle and High Income Countries incur our standard publication fees. Corresponding authors who are affiliated with one of our Institutional Members are eligible for a discount on this fee. Such authors will be informed of the discount applicable after submission of their manuscript.

Fees for Low and Lower Middle Income Countries are calculated according to the PLOS Global Participation Initiative pricing program for manuscripts submitted after 9am Pacific Time on September 4, 2012 (this program is not retroactive).

Group One: Countries from this list will not be charged for publishing
Group Two: Countries from this list will be charged a flat $500

Our fee waiver policy, whereby PLOS offers to waive or further reduce the payment required of authors who cannot pay the full amount charged for publication, remains in effect. Editors and reviewers have no access to whether authors are able to pay; decisions to publish are only based on editorial criteria.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top