LAPD Chief Beck reopens case that led to the firing of Dorner / "Chocolate Rambo" day after he said - Polidicks

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;39536189]I don't know what to hope. on one hand dying in prison is a fate worse than dying by gunfire, but on the other he'll probably be a hero in prison in any case this guy deserves the worst he can get.[/QUOTE] He's was a cop, so I think him killing other cops isn't going to do much besides make it so the prison staff also hate him.

Still trying to look good after all the stupid shit that happened. Like shooting civilians for one LAPD...

[QUOTE=sHiBaN;39536320]Still trying to look good after all the stupid shit that happened. Like shooting civilians for one LAPD...[/QUOTE] Because the LAPD is just a single entity right? It's not staffed by thousands of people gathered from the third most populated city on the continent. I'd love to see you do a better job.

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39535690]k see here's the problem: whenever you point out a person's ethnicity (or whatever thing they have no control over that doesn't affect their ability to behave or act a certain way), you're maligning them by implying that they're different from the "norm", which is racist forgetting for a second the fact that black males have been made out to be one of the scariest social groups in America by the media, what exactly is it that would make a white guy any more similar to Rambo than Dorner?[/QUOTE] But in this instance, black is different from the norm. To differentiate the two, you use the most obvious difference: Rambo was white, Dorner is black. Still, it's just a joke and I think you're over-reacting.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39536733]But in this instance, black is different from the norm. To differentiate the two, you use the most obvious difference: Rambo was white, Dorner is black. Still, it's just a joke and I think you're over-reacting.[/QUOTE] You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). In light of these disparities and inequalities, to differentiate Dorner from Rambo by highlighting his race carries connotations of him being inherently different, which is racist. If such inequalities were nonexistent then we wouldn't have a problem and any mention of race would probably point to the difference in skin color and nothing more.

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39536984]You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). [B]So you see, to say that a black man is different from a white man via race, you're not only implying that he's different in skin color, you're also implying that he's different in skill, different in ability, and different in moral standing. And that, my friend, is racist.[/B][/QUOTE] What the hell are you on about? It's a harmless joke.

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39536984]You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). So you see, to say that a black man is different from a white man via race, you're not only implying that he's different in skin color, you're also implying that he's different in skill, different in ability, and different in moral standing. And that, my friend, is racist.[/QUOTE] ur name is god's pimp hand, way to glorify one of the most misogynistic symbol cause it so funny xD

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39536984]You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). So you see, to say that a black man is different from a white man via race, you're not only implying that he's different in skin color, you're also implying that he's different in skill, different in ability, and different in moral standing. And that, my friend, is racist.[/QUOTE] wtf is all this

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;39537016]ur name is god's pimp hand, way to glorify one of the most misogynistic symbol cause it so funny xD[/QUOTE] this is true. if I didn't have to pay up 10 dollars to change my name I would've changed it a long time ago

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39536984]You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). So you see, to say that a black man is different from a white man via race, you're not only implying that he's different in skin color, you're also implying that he's different in skill, different in ability, and different in moral standing. And that, my friend, is racist.[/QUOTE] tl;dr [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Meme reply" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[img]http://i.cubeupload.com/JjfdN5.jpg[/img]

I prefer Choc Norris tbh

you noobs can't handle my in-depth critical racial analysis~~~

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39536984]You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). So you see, to say that a black man is different from a white man via race, you're not only implying that he's different in skin color, you're also implying that he's different in skill, different in ability, and different in moral standing. And that, my friend, is racist.[/QUOTE] Rambo is white, Dorner is black. No idea how that inspired this little write-up. All I'm going to say is that we're all different from each other in one way or another. Pretending we're all the same is how we get retardation like standardized testing and classes pumping kids out of school like a factory.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39537535]Rambo is white, Dorner is black. No idea how that inspired this little write-up. All I'm going to say is that we're all different from each other in one way or another. Pretending we're all the same is how we get retardation like standardized testing and classes pumping kids out of school like a factory.[/QUOTE] ehhh well I don't know what pretending we're all the same has to do with this story, all I'm saying is that there isn't a good moral reason why his race should be a factor when likening him to Rambo I also typed that long-ass reply up because I thought that you were looking at the issue of white normativity in a way that individualized the situation and disregarded social context, which in turn made calling him "Chocolate Rambo" seem much more benign than it actually was

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39537790]ehhh well I don't know what pretending we're all the same has to do with this story, all I'm saying is that there isn't a good moral reason why his race should be a factor when likening him to Rambo I also typed that long-ass reply up because I thought that you were looking at the issue of white normativity in a way that individualized the situation and disregarded social context, which in turn made calling him "Chocolate Rambo" seem much more benign than it actually was[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure he's called Chocolate Rambo because if you just called him Rambo you'd get him confused with the character, and sadly LAPD Rambo doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Every time I read about this guy, I can't help but remember the Barefoot Bandit. Extremely different situations yes, but still.

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39537790]ehhh well I don't know what pretending we're all the same has to do with this story, all I'm saying is that there isn't a good moral reason why his race should be a factor when likening him to Rambo I also typed that long-ass reply up because I thought that you were looking at the issue of white normativity in a way that individualized the situation and disregarded social context, which in turn made calling him "Chocolate Rambo" seem much more benign than it actually was[/QUOTE] Why are you making a mountain out of a mere molehill?

Phelps, Galloway, we got a Chocolate Rambo on the loose. Go out to All Saint's Street to check it out.

[QUOTE=Zuimzado;39538171]Phelps, Galloway, we got a Chocolate Rambo on the loose. Go out to All Saint's Street to check it out.[/QUOTE] "Chocolate Rambo on the loose" is probably the name of a porn film

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39536984]You know, I went through several iterations of typing my post out but I finally realized that your conception of race relations is different from my own. When you say "black is different from the norm" I thought you were talking about inequity on a socioeconomic level and that not only did such an inequity exist but that you also somehow found it acceptable. I now realize that your point wasn't as malicious as I thought it was and instead attribute your lack of understanding of the situation to the belief that the concept of white normativity can and only apply on an individual basis i.e. "this famous guy is white; there's a much less-famous dude like him except he's black = white normativity" This is an incredibly shallow understanding of race relations in America. White normativity stems from almost all aspects of life in America being traditionally dominated by whites, and that dominance evinces itself through our own implicit biases and depiction of popular cultural icons as being white. Though blacks and people of color have entered the mainstream cultural scene and even become revered by the majority, the classic protagonists of American cinema are overwhelmingly white, and this is what I mean by "white norm" (if you don't believe me just contemplate the paucity of famous black film protagonists that Dorner is being likened to and you'll see that few fictional black figures have gained as much prominence as white ones such as Rambo). In light of these disparities and inequalities, to differentiate Dorner from Rambo by highlighting his race carries connotations of him being inherently different, which is racist. If such inequalities were nonexistent then we wouldn't have a problem and any mention of race would probably point to the difference in skin color and nothing more.[/QUOTE] Gotta have white guilt. It turns out color is a VERY easy to spot difference, and that's why it's used as a description when it applies.

It's the A-Team only there's just Mr. T and they're actually killing people.

Doesn't the U.S basically have automatic execution if someone murders a cop?

[QUOTE=Speedhax;39542247]Doesn't the U.S basically have automatic execution if someone murders a cop?[/QUOTE] only some states.

[QUOTE=zakedodead;39538385]Gotta have white guilt. It turns out color is a VERY easy to spot difference, and that's why it's used as a description when it applies.[/QUOTE] Do you see white people being referred to as "Vanilla X"? No, you don't (and I know the reason for why that is, but I'm making a moralistic argument here). When people of color are the only ones being singled out for their skin color then we [I]kinda[/I] have a problem. After all, I thought this was tantamount to FP's general idea of racial equality as treating everyone the same. Looking back on it now though I think I also committed the Is/Ought Fallacy. Indeed, to be black in America is to be different, though not by inherent value but rather by one's own treatment (I tried explaining that in one of my last posts albeit not very successfully it seems). And while I think there are many ways to acknowledge that difference while empowering black individuals, there are also many ways to do so that actually end up purveying that very same pre-existing inequality i.e. singling out black people for their race when the situation does not call for it, like calling Dorner "Chocolate Rambo."

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39544261]Do you see white people being referred to as "Vanilla X"? No, you don't (and I know the reason for why that is, but I'm making a moralistic argument here). When people of color are the only ones being singled out for their skin color then we [I]kinda[/I] have a problem. After all, I thought this was tantamount to FP's general idea of racial equality as treating everyone the same. Looking back on it now though I think I also committed the Is/Ought Fallacy. Indeed, to be black in America is to be different, though not by inherent value but rather by one's own treatment (I tried explaining that in one of my last posts albeit not very successfully it seems). And while I think there are many ways to acknowledge that difference while empowering black individuals, there are also many ways to do so that actually end up purveying that very same pre-existing inequality i.e. singling out black people for their race when the situation does not call for it, like calling Dorner "Chocolate Rambo."[/QUOTE] Vanilla Ice.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;39544356]Vanilla Ice.[/QUOTE] Well until you show me that whites are singled out for their race as much as blacks are, a single instance isn't going to over-turn my entire argument

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39544261]Do you see white people being referred to as "Vanilla X"? No, you don't (and I know the reason for why that is, but I'm making a moralistic argument here). When people of color are the only ones being singled out for their skin color then we [I]kinda[/I] have a problem. After all, I thought this was tantamount to FP's general idea of racial equality as treating everyone the same. Looking back on it now though I think I also committed the Is/Ought Fallacy. Indeed, to be black in America is to be different, though not by inherent value but rather by one's own treatment (I tried explaining that in one of my last posts albeit not very successfully it seems). And while I think there are many ways to acknowledge that difference while empowering black individuals, there are also many ways to do so that actually end up purveying that very same pre-existing inequality i.e. singling out black people for their race when the situation does not call for it, like calling Dorner "Chocolate Rambo."[/QUOTE] Can you refer to me as "Vanilla X" from now on please?

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39544261]Do you see white people being referred to as "Vanilla X"? No, you don't (and I know the reason for why that is, but I'm making a moralistic argument here). When people of color are the only ones being singled out for their skin color then we [I]kinda[/I] have a problem. After all, I thought this was tantamount to FP's general idea of racial equality as treating everyone the same. Looking back on it now though I think I also committed the Is/Ought Fallacy. Indeed, to be black in America is to be different, though not by inherent value but rather by one's own treatment (I tried explaining that in one of my last posts albeit not very successfully it seems). And while I think there are many ways to acknowledge that difference while empowering black individuals, there are also many ways to do so that actually end up purveying that very same pre-existing inequality i.e. singling out black people for their race when the situation does not call for it, like calling Dorner "Chocolate Rambo."[/QUOTE] Ok let's pretend skin color doesn't exist and isn't a valid means of description.

[QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39544261]Do you see white people being referred to as "Vanilla X"? No, you don't (and I know the reason for why that is, but I'm making a moralistic argument here). When people of color are the only ones being singled out for their skin color then we [I]kinda[/I] have a problem. After all, I thought this was tantamount to FP's general idea of racial equality as treating everyone the same. Looking back on it now though I think I also committed the Is/Ought Fallacy. Indeed, to be black in America is to be different, though not by inherent value but rather by one's own treatment (I tried explaining that in one of my last posts albeit not very successfully it seems). And while I think there are many ways to acknowledge that difference while empowering black individuals, there are also many ways to do so that actually end up purveying that very same pre-existing inequality i.e. singling out black people for their race when the situation does not call for it, like calling Dorner "Chocolate Rambo."[/QUOTE] I've been called a cracker before. Clearly, not only "coloured" people can be described by a physical attribute. You make it sound wrong for me to describe a person by their physical description. [editline]11th February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=God's Pimp Hand;39544388]Well until you show me that whites are singled out for their race as much as blacks are, a single instance isn't going to over-turn my entire argument[/QUOTE] But your arguments flawed in and of itself. Moralistically saying its wrong to point out characteristics that are defining one way or the other is a lot more ignorant