Well, let's be real here the Democrats want to kill everyone so that they can feed on the tortured souls of billions and achieve demonic apotheosis.

And CroakandDagger thinks that all black people are criminals, which is pretty fucking racist.

But yeah, go aheda an ignore the MOUNTAINS of data looking at how black people get half as many interviews and a quarter the offers as identically qualified white candidates, or the tons of evidence that the police are hugely biased and launch fake charges against black people all the time.

Frankly, I hope you and your kind rot in hell where you belong.

Actually most employers are equal opportunity and don't discriminate Ogion. Nice try.

Democrats want to feast on the souls of Pepe sympathizers like CroakandDagger.

"If you don't want to be murdered or denied a job try not having a criminal record."

OH WOW I BET NO ONE THOUGHT OF THAT

One minor problem with that Jeff Kuta, the "Pepe sympathisers" probably do not have souls, well not proper Christian souls.

I thought the "Pepe sympathisers" sold their souls to the Kremlin to get Trump into office?

Wasn't that the story CNN was going with?

So CroakandSwastika thinks it's ok for the police to murder anyone who has committed a crime?

- Got caught shoplifting when you were 17? THAT'S A SUMMARY EXECUTION

- Broken tail light? STATE-APPROVED DEATH FOR YOU, JIMMY!

Nice fascist white state you're building over there,

Jeez, HelenOfTroy, that's a bit racist. Surely not only white states can exist without crime?

Unless you think only non-whites are criminals...

Actually, the issue is that the do have proper Christian souls. It's the proper human souls they're a little lacking in. if ONLY the two were correlated. I'm with Gandhi "I like your Christ. So unlike your Christians"

@Croak18Dagger: What are you gibbering about? smh

There are no states with a zero crime rate.

You are standing by your view that if someone commits a crime, any crime, the police are entitled to murder them, huh?

Damn right I am, Helen, just as I expect you to stand by your statement that killing all criminals would result in a white state.

You racist.

I made no such statement.

You prick.

Yes you did. Read up.

Oh great, we have another batshit incel lunatic on this website with croak

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/01/health/utah-nurse-arrest-police-video/index.html

If you are white, you only get illegally detained for doing you job and obeying the law. What was worse was police officers from two other departments did nothing to stop this illegal police activity and the supervisor of the two officers doing the illegal activity told them to go ahead.

It turns out the unconscious man was a reserve police officer and his department is the only one that initially praised the nurse for doing her job.

I guess when you put on a badge and strap on the gun, all that blood flows down and prevents proper decision making and reading comprehension. There ought to be a study to determine intelligence and common sense lost through police training.

Croak:

Should MLK have been murdered by police for breaking unjust laws?

He was, wasn't he?

But that doesn't answer if he SHOULD have been.

Croak is the kind of guy who almost certainly thinks that MLK deserved to be killed.

On behalf of idiots, we take offence to the attempt to lump him in.

Not sure anybody here called MLK an idiot.

4 years away, and this sort of stuff still going on. /gets popcorn

"Actually most employers are equal opportunity and don't discriminate Ogion. Nice try."


@ND Em, officially, yes, the law requires employers to say they are equal opportunity, but the research Ogion was talking about proves otherwise. That many employers will discriminate despite not knowingly doing so.

There is ample evidence showing the same kind of discrimination against women in the tech industry. Look it up instead of just making blind ascertains.

Actually, discrimination in the tech industry is against men because tech firms are so desperate to hire women.

If you were a tech firm, and you couldn't get women to apply for jobs, (and you'd already hired all the men who were any good at what you did... like say google, facebook, or amazon) then it seems obvious that you'd go out of your way to recruit them.

The most talented women out there are probably 50% better than the average man who isn't already employed in tech. And getting the best employees from the sample isn't really considered discrimination.

If you look at the research, you still see that equally qualified applicants get callbacks/interviews at different rates when you just change a name or the gender. So please stop pretending otherwise.

Google aims to get parity, 50/50 men and women employed there, simply because they believe that is the best business practice (whether for PR reasons or because they think it is the easiest way to get the best people... or both). They may be wrong, but are doing their best.

And yet you somehow think that aiming for equal representation within the industry is somehow discriminating against men... Really?

Because the research that you cite where equally qualified applicants get callbacks/interviews at different rates favours women.

Studies investigating whether less or more women get hired when applications for jobs are entirely devoid of references to gender saw that men got hired more when gender was not an issue, proving that positive discrimination is in place in favour of women, and that negative discrimination is in place against men - and for the record, I never pretended otherwise.

And as a side note, 50% hiring quotas for both genders is not "equal representation". There are not proportionally equal numbers of men and women who go into tech. Let's not even get into the fact that in service to this arbitrary figure people are being hired for the shape of their genitals.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that people ought to be judged on the content of their character rather than their superfluous physical aspects. I have a dream that someday that'll be the case, and the bigots who insist on hiring quotas can be defeated.

> doesn't answer whether MLK should've been shot
> plagiarizes MLK