Dallas Mayor says he is more scared of white men with guns than he is of Syrian refugees - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Samiam22;51442920]Spot on. The (presumably) white men getting indignant and defensive here are pretty much proving his point.[/QUOTE] I almost never comment in SH articles, but this statement is such a ridiculous kafkatrap that I just have to call bullshit. Regardless of the race being talked about, what do you expect is going to happen if someone says an inflammatory statement towards a person/certain group?

[QUOTE=Hinterlight;51443711]I almost never comment in SH articles, but this statement is such a ridiculous kafkatrap that I just have to call bullshit. Regardless of the race being talked about, what do you expect is going to happen if someone says an inflammatory statement towards a person/certain group?[/QUOTE] Agreed, as long as you understand that this same line of thought applies to Muslims. Repeatedly targeting one particular group with hateful, divisive rhetoric, action, and policy alienates and provokes that group into returning similar hostilities. On a large enough scale, and a long enough timeline, you will the see fringes of [I]any[/I] such group resorting to more extreme forms of retaliation, up to (and including) physical violence. The increasingly hostile behavior towards Muslims in the Western world is only feeding the problem. Fools like Trump are alienating the entire Muslim world, thus empowering the propaganda of extremist organizations and dialing more people towards violent ideology.

[QUOTE=wewt!;51440262]What is with this "white men with guns"shit, why not "citizens with guns"? Why is america so obsessed with race?[/QUOTE] A lot of reasons, probably. First of all the way that the media constantly spins it as a race issue. And that as a white man in the US you're [URL="https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls"]more likely[/URL] to be killed by another white man

[QUOTE=wewt!;51440262]What is with this "white men with guns"shit, why not "citizens with guns"? Why is america so obsessed with race?[/QUOTE] Race has been a pretty extreme part of our historical development, and continues to play a major role in our national dialog surrounding things such as poverty rates, social mobility, law enforcement, etc. It's a fair argument that the media is exploiting these conditions for the sake of revenue, thus exaggerating or misrepresenting the forces involved, but racial inequality and racial injustice [B]are[/B] very real and central issues in modern America.

[QUOTE=Hinterlight;51443711]I almost never comment in SH articles, but this statement is such a ridiculous kafkatrap that I just have to call bullshit. Regardless of the race being talked about, what do you expect is going to happen if someone says an inflammatory statement towards a person/certain group?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say it if I didn't mean it. The truth is that there have been many mass shootings perpetrated by whites (the only one I can remember off the top of my head who wasn't is Seung Hui Cho), and not only that, there is often more people defending their actions, or at least attempting to justify them by claiming that they were mentally ill or such, and the somewhat lenient legal dealings with the Oregon militia haven't really helped this image. Then there are the people who open carry, in rallies, or even by themselves, who look a hair trigger away from shooting ([url=http://i.imgur.com/1Jscbaz.jpg]like this dude[/url]), many of these gun owners are often a hair trigger away from gunning down someone, be it themselves, family, or a bunch of people in public, and it's very hard to actually separate who in the crowd of supposed responsible gun owners won't go haywire some day. Take James Holmes for example, he had no criminal record and was a responsible gun owner right up until he lit up a whole bunch of people at a movie theater. And the stats show that you really are more likely to die to one of these types than you are to die to a terrorist, considering that you are a civilian in the US. What Mike Rawlings is saying here is really the truth, you ought to be more afraid of "white men with guns" than refugees, because they are more likely to kill you.

You don't have to be white or male to shoot up a school. You have to be a muslim to become muslim terrorist. Being male and white (or any color for that matter) is irrelevant. Being a muslim is a requirement to become a muslim extremist. You guys are making it look like islamic terrorism has nothing to do with islam. I mean you are happy to say "it's very hard to actually separate who in the crowd of supposed responsible gun owners won't go haywire some day" but if someone was to replace "gun owners" with "muslims" you'd go nuts. And another requirement to becoming a muslim extremist is alienation, so lets not do that either. And I'd appreciate if you didn't even pretend that I'm saying that all muslims are terrorists because I'm not doing that.

His point was pointing out the ridiculousness of the type of logic he stated. An argument from absurdism. Though I broadly agree with your points.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51444157]You don't have to be white or male to shoot up a school. You have to be a muslim to become muslim terrorist. Being male and white (or any color for that matter) is irrelevant. Being a muslim is a requirement to become a muslim extremist. You guys are making it look like islamic terrorism has nothing to do with islam. I mean you are happy to say "it's very hard to actually separate who in the crowd of supposed responsible gun owners won't go haywire some day" but if someone was to replace "gun owners" with "muslims" you'd go nuts. And another requirement to becoming a muslim extremist is alienation, so lets not do that either. And I'd appreciate if you didn't even pretend that I'm saying that all muslims are terrorists because I'm not doing that.[/QUOTE] It's like what he said was intentionally flawed. Also he specifically mentioned people in the Middle East by the way, and refugees, not just Muslims. There will be christian, and non-religious refugees. Christians are about 10% of Syria's population for example.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51444360]It's like what he said was intentionally flawed. Also he specifically mentioned people in the Middle East by the way, and refugees, not just Muslims. There will be christian, and non-religious refugees. Christians are about 10% of Syria's population for example.[/QUOTE] I know what he was trying to do. But there are few reasons I don't think it's was a good move. 1. While technically the analogy works, nobody's scared of christian refugees. Those who are scared of refugees are scared of muslim refugees. And for someone who's scared that there might be a muslim extremist hiding between the refugees the mayor could have as well said "Muslim refugees" not "Syrian refugees". And because of that this analogy is not going to be received by the people this was aimed at as intended. They will not get it. All they will see is a dumb liberal who's either out of touch with reality or too politically correct to talk about muslim terrorism and probably wants to take away our guns. 2. Because of the above they will see this as dismissing their concern that there might be a muslim extremist hiding between the refugees and at the next mayor election these people will vote for someone who is going to address their concern, even if he would want to ban all muslims from Dallas. I think he had good intentions but it's not going to have a positive effect in my opinion. I think it would be much better received if he said something like "Yeah we realize there might be a muslim extremist among Syrian refugees trying to get to US, as slim chance as it is, and we will take all possible safety measures to sort them out while we take x number of refugees in. There's no reason to be afraid of Muslims because statistically speaking there's a bigger chance of your fellow American shooting you."

Why does he say white men? Isn't more than 50% of violent crime in US committed by blacks and don't they also make up 40% of prisoners while being 12% of population? But when you mention black men and crime - boom, racist! If I lived in US, I'd be far more scared of black men with guns than "Syrian refugees".

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51444816]In the current discussion in the USA, the wording has almost always have been "Syrian Refugees". So its pretty reasonable for satire to directly use what its making a satire of. Also I doubt any American would think of any Christians when "Syrian" is thrown around. The peple that are concerned by "Syrian Refugees" arent generally people that look at facts and statistics, it is quite possible they arent even aware of the existence of Syrian Christians, let alone think about the object in this Mayor's statement as anything else than Muslims.[/QUOTE] So you just confirmed what I said in a condescending way... [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51444816]Which is a ridicilous concern that doesnt need to be addressed.[/QUOTE] How is this a ridiculous concern if german police says they have leads on dozens of suspected terrorists that entered Germany as refugees? The more you dismiss this concern the more frustrated people will get about it and go even further in the opposite direction to yours. You are making things worse. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51444816]The solution, vetting, is already doen to the possible maximum extent (what could be [I]possibly [/I]added on top is indefinite detention in Guantanamo for any refugees that need extra checking) and these people have concerns regardless. [/QUOTE] They are concerned these measures are not being implemented correctly. They need to be reassured that it's implemented right and that it's working. Shove some stats in their face, tell them you are on top of things and there's nothing to worry about. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51444816]Changing any policy short of a Muslim ban wont make any of these people happy. As I said above, this statement wouldnt accomplish anything either. Nobody believes it when a politician says "everything possible is being done", especially not in this crowd.[/QUOTE] You are again making it worse by demonizing them. Not everyone wants a ban, but they will turn to someone who's going to implement a ban [I]if he's going to be the only one who's going to address their concern[/I]. You need to show you understand their concern and that it's being dealt with in the best way possible and that it's working. The more you go "there's no problem you islamophobic racist idiots" the more likely it is that they will turn to someone who's not going to call them names and who's going to say that there is a problem, even if his solution is too extreme for their first choice, they would rather have too extreme solution to their problem than having it dismissed.

[QUOTE=justanothergu;51444870]Why does he say white men? Isn't more than 50% of violent crime in US committed by blacks and don't they also make up 40% of prisoners while being 12% of population? But when you mention black men and crime - boom, racist! If I lived in US, I'd be far more scared of black men with guns than "Syrian refugees".[/QUOTE] Because black men aren't doing the public mass shootings we keep getting shown in the news. Most killings are within your own race btw, when we talk about that stuff it's a pretty complicated and nuanced issue overall. Which is why he's not making a serious claim. He's making the case against sensationalist shit like "the muslim refugees are ISIS sleeper cells coming to get us" by making the silly case of "white men with guns won't stop shooting up schools and movie theaters" and saying that going either way is dumb.

[QUOTE=justanothergu;51444870]Why does he say white men? Isn't more than 50% of violent crime in US committed by blacks and don't they also make up 40% of prisoners while being 12% of population? But when you mention black men and crime - boom, racist! If I lived in US, I'd be far more scared of black men with guns than "Syrian refugees".[/QUOTE] Because, as a white person living in the US, [URL="http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/02/sally-kohn/sally-kohn-white-men-69-percent-arrested-violent/"]you are more likely[/URL] to get assaulted/killed by another white person

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51444907]Because black men aren't doing the public mass shootings we keep getting shown in the news. Most killings are within your own race btw, when we talk about that stuff it's a pretty complicated and nuanced issue overall. Which is why he's not making a serious claim. He's making the case against sensationalist shit like "the muslim refugees are ISIS sleeper cells coming to get us" by making the silly case of "white men with guns won't stop shooting up schools and movie theaters" and saying that going either way is dumb.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=gokiyono;51444959]Because, as a white person living in the US, [URL="http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/02/sally-kohn/sally-kohn-white-men-69-percent-arrested-violent/"]you are more likely[/URL] to get assaulted/killed by another white person[/QUOTE] Haven't we agreed that the whole point is that it's unlikely. presenting any evidence that whites are more likely to kill than blacks is just weakening the mayor's point. Fear of being mugged and killed by a black guy can be addressed another day, don't go all occupy Wall Street here picking too many points to defend.

[QUOTE=01271;51445306]Haven't we agreed that the whole point is that it's unlikely. presenting any evidence that whites are more likely to kill than blacks is just weakening the mayor's point. Fear of being mugged and killed by a black guy can be addressed another day, don't go all occupy Wall Street here picking too many points to defend.[/QUOTE] Doesn't the fact that he as a white guy is more likely to get killed by another white guy strengthen his opinion? Or am I missing something?

The thing is, muslim citizens are not dangerous. However, the general refugee population is very arguably much, much more dangerous than the general population. Fiscally [I]and[/I] physically.

[QUOTE=Radical_ed;51445968]The thing is, muslim citizens are not dangerous. However, the general refugee population is very arguably much, much more dangerous than the general population. Fiscally [I]and[/I] physically.[/QUOTE] You mean immigrants are of a lower socioeconomic class and doesn't have the strong foundations of American life? No way. I guess I agree with the premise that they are "more dangerous", but beacuse of the unknown factor. In practice they're no more dangerous than anyone else.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51446005]You mean immigrants are of a lower socioeconomic class and doesn't have the strong foundations of American life? No way. I guess I agree with the premise that they are "more dangerous", but beacuse of the unknown factor. In practice they're no more dangerous than anyone else.[/QUOTE] It really comes down to a person's individual values and beliefs as to whether mass refugees should be coming in. I'd say it boils down to this; - Do you believe a nation has more of a responsibility to her own citizens, or the greater good of the world? - If you think a nation has more of a responsibility to the greater good than it's own citizens, to what degree do you believe this? Is there a certain ratio of "goodness" that should be met? - Why do you believe refugees are coming in? - Do you believe refugees are actually refugees, or economic migrants? - Do you believe your country is properly equipped, fiscally, socially, and leadership wise to accept mass migration? - Do you believe refugees will integrate? Do you care?