|
|
#172
10-11-2007, 02:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The author is considering that 85% are criminals because they were arrested. No one with common sense would label someone merely arrested a criminal. [/ QUOTE ] I disagree with this so much I don't even know how to begin. [/ QUOTE ] You could start by furnishing your definition of "criminal" and explaining why it isn't the dictionary definition of "a person who commits a crime." [/ QUOTE ] That IS my definition. If somebody commits a crime, they are criminal. I am criminal. I play the poker on the internetz! Now and then I speed on the highway! I even occasionally load up a pipe and smoke! Do I have no common sense because I say that a criminal is somebody who commits a crime? crim·i·nal –adjective 1. of the nature of or involving crime. 2. guilty of crime. 3. Law. of or pertaining to crime or its punishment: a criminal proceeding. 4. senseless; foolish: It's criminal to waste so much good food. 5. exorbitant; grossly overpriced: They charge absolutely criminal prices. –noun 6. a person guilty or convicted of a crime. But hey, nobody with COMMON SENSE would label somebody a criminal if they break the law! |
|
#173
10-11-2007, 02:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
[ QUOTE ]
Do I have no common sense because I say that a criminal is somebody who commits a crime? [/ QUOTE ] You have no common sense because you think that anyone who is arrested should be labeled a criminal, even though, according to your definition, they aren't. Believe me, I'm almost as confused as you are. |
|
#174
10-11-2007, 02:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
When someone is a criminal, there is really one generally accepted definition. They have committed a crime. Change the verbage of the quote if you want...it is still a trememndous leap in logic...
Even if you didn't extrapolate based on police innefficiencies...if you just said: "x% of black men have been arrested. Therefore x% of black men are criminals" you would still be a moron who doesn't know what a criminal is. [ QUOTE ] And by the way, don't you think that 95% of people in GENERAL are "semi-criminal or criminal?" [/ QUOTE ] No, but let's assume that the author of the article does. Wouldn't it take a racist who believes that 95% of people are criminal to point out only that 95% of black people are criminal? What possible purpose could limiting it to black people serve other than to inflame and denegrate black men? [ QUOTE ] I define criminal as somebody who breaks the law. You say it's somebody who's been convicted. The writer says it's somebody who's been arrested. [/ QUOTE ] No, the write doesn't say that. The writer makes a leap in faulty logic to think that arrested = criminal. [ QUOTE ] If a criminal is somebody who's been convicted, then who's a "semi-criminal"? [/ QUOTE ] I have no idea...the author made up a word. Let's take what you think is his definition of criminal (i.e. arrested). What is a semi-criminal if criminal=arrested? Semi-arrested??? What the hell does that mean? |
|
#175
10-11-2007, 02:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Do I have no common sense because I say that a criminal is somebody who commits a crime? [/ QUOTE ] You have no common sense because you think that anyone who is arrested should be labeled a criminal, even though, according to your definition, they aren't. Believe me, I'm almost as confused as you are. [/ QUOTE ] What the hell are you talking about? If you break a law, you're a criminal if you get arrested or not. Just because nobody catches you doesn't mean you're not a criminal. |
|
#176
10-11-2007, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
[ QUOTE ]
When someone is a criminal, there is really one generally accepted definition. They have committed a crime. Change the verbage of the quote if you want...it is still a trememndous leap in logic... Even if you didn't extrapolate based on police innefficiencies...if you just said: "x% of black men have been arrested. Therefore x% of black men are criminals" you would still be a moron who doesn't know what a criminal is. [ QUOTE ] And by the way, don't you think that 95% of people in GENERAL are "semi-criminal or criminal?" [/ QUOTE ] No, but let's assume that the author of the article does. Wouldn't it take a racist who believes that 95% of people are criminal to point out only that 95% of black people are criminal? What possible purpose could limiting it to black people serve other than to inflame and denegrate black men? [ QUOTE ] I define criminal as somebody who breaks the law. You say it's somebody who's been convicted. The writer says it's somebody who's been arrested. [/ QUOTE ] No, the write doesn't say that. The writer makes a leap in faulty logic to think that arrested = criminal. [ QUOTE ] If a criminal is somebody who's been convicted, then who's a "semi-criminal"? [/ QUOTE ] I have no idea...the author made up a word. Let's take what you think is his definition of criminal (i.e. arrested). What is a semi-criminal if criminal=arrested? Semi-arrested??? What the hell does that mean? [/ QUOTE ] Criminal does NOT equal arrested IN MY DEFINITION. In YOUR definition, it does NOT, because convicted=criminal. In this case, the writer is saying that arrested=criminal. ALL OF THESE ARE CORRECT. Now, since the writer is only talking about one aspect of this, I'll assume that he's consistant until you show that he takes the leap from arrest=criminal to convicted=criminal to just breaking the law=criminal. |
|
#177
10-11-2007, 03:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
It's interesting to see RonPaulNation argue the semantics of the word 'criminal' in an attempt to rationalize Dr. Paul's comments as not being racist.
Is the assertion that the one DC crime statistic somehow excuses the rest of his racist diatribe as well? What statistic is used to assert the following: From Paul's newsletter: <font color="red">The criminals who terrorize our cities--in riots and on every non-riot day--are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to "fight the power," and to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible. Anything is justified against "The Man." And "The Woman.' </font> |
|
#178
10-11-2007, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ron Paul\'s racist comments
[ QUOTE ]
It's interesting to see RonPaulNation argue the semantics of the word 'criminal' in an attempt to rationalize Dr. Paul's comments as not being racist. [/ QUOTE ] You mean like 2 posters in this thread? |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
