When does a dangerous minority of a demographic require action?

[Leagon]

Thankfully the GOP nomination circus has stalled some of the Islam talk on this forum, and I don't want to be the one responsible to bring it back, but I have a question.

There is a lot of talk on this board about percentages. For example, many people oppose letting Syrian refugees because there's the very real possibility that some of the refugees are terrorists. Even if it's just .001%, that can result in hundreds of lost lives. Or if even 1% of Muslims are radicalized, it may be worth monitoring mosques or preventing Muslims from coming to the United States. Or if a percentage of people in a wedding are terrorists, it could be worth drone striking the building and accepting civilian loses.

I'm living abroad right now, watching all the unrest in the States, and it's got me wondering: what percentage of white people are racists? I left my family in the States and I worry about their safety. If .0001% of 10,000 Syrians are dangerous, its not worth the risk letting them into the country. Now what if .0001% of 200 million+ white Americans are racists? Violent racists? What percentage of those people are police officers?

At what point is action justified? Is the threshold higher for domestic dangers? Should places of white congregation be monitored? Should white men be prevented from owning guns? As a black young man, do I have a duty to arm myself and monitor the white people in my neighborhood? Is this the rationale the recent cop killers were acting under? If a black killer was specifically targeting who they deemed as "corrupt" cops, would he be justified under the same logic that justifies our drone strikes on innocents?

Does it go the other way? Should white cops profile black people? Should they stop and frisk young black men at a higher rate? Should they pull over black people at a higher rate? Should black neighborhoods have more police activity--and more aggressive police tactics--if a certain percentage of black people are criminals? Should they be more likely to point a gun at black people and more likely to pull the trigger?

Is it a percentage issue or is there another metric?

 

[panamaican]

It's a thought provoking question. I won't rush an answer.

 

[ObsoleteSoul]

100% is the only answer. All of us hate minorities.

 

[ripskater]

It requires some action now. Shore up our borders as best we can. Keep Islamists from immigrating to the USA right now.

The USA also has some racist and moral problems that really only can be fixed by turning to God. People have to forgive.

 

[Abezal]

At any degree when the threat if of the most serious type, 1% 10% .01% is irrelevant. When they come from a ideology that is time and time again proven to be psychotic and murderous.

Cops already profile and it works.

 

[Leagon]

At any degree when the threat if of the most serious type, 1% 10% .01% is irrelevant. When they come from a ideology that is time and time again proven to be psychotic and murderous.

Cops already profile and it works.

White supremacy is a proven psychotic and murderous ideology. So I should be taking action against white Americans? Or should our government? What sort of action would you deem necessary?

 

[Undying Poster]

What percentage of Blacks are criminals and at what point point is action justified? I fear for my family living in the city. A significant amount of black people are proven to be psychotic and murderous.

If you're seriously looking for answers, just know I'm not trying to be a dick in that scenario. It just seems like this is a target whitey thread.

 

[ObsoleteSoul]

White supremacy is a proven psychotic and murderous ideology. So I should be taking action against white Americans? Or should our government? What sort of action would you deem necessary?

You should start first. Be the change you wish to see in the world.

 

[TehGwarch]

Thankfully the GOP nomination circus has stalled some of the Islam talk on this forum, and I don't want to be the one responsible to bring it back, but I have a question.

There is a lot of talk on this board about percentages. For example, many people oppose letting Syrian refugees because there's the very real possibility that some of the refugees are terrorists. Even if it's just .001%, that can result in hundreds of lost lives. Or if even 1% of Muslims are radicalized, it may be worth monitoring mosques or preventing Muslims from coming to the United States. Or if a percentage of people in a wedding are terrorists, it could be worth drone striking the building and accepting civilian loses.

I'm living abroad right now, watching all the unrest in the States, and it's got me wondering: what percentage of white people are racists? I left my family in the States and I worry about their safety. If .0001% of 10,000 Syrians are dangerous, its not worth the risk letting them into the country. Now what if .0001% of 200 million+ white Americans are racists? Violent racists? What percentage of those people are police officers?

At what point is action justified? Is the threshold higher for domestic dangers? Should places of white congregation be monitored? Should white men be prevented from owning guns? As a black young man, do I have a duty to arm myself and monitor the white people in my neighborhood? Is this the rationale the recent cop killers were acting under? If a black killer was specifically targeting who they deemed as "corrupt" cops, would he be justified under the same logic that justifies our drone strikes on innocents?

Does it go the other way? Should white cops profile black people? Should they stop and frisk young black men at a higher rate? Should they pull over black people at a higher rate? Should black neighborhoods have more police activity--and more aggressive police tactics--if a certain percentage of black people are criminals? Should they be more likely to point a gun at black people and more likely to pull the trigger?

Is it a percentage issue or is there another metric?

Because America was founded by white people, not moslems. We wrote the constitution, the bill of rights, all the bullshit you invoke about your alleged "rights"...it's ours and was only ever intended to apply to us.

This is not a moslem country and it's not for them. They weren't even allowed here until after the '60s. We can kick them all out if we decide to, there is plenty of precedent for that in our history.

Europe has been at war with Islam for 1400 years, Europe is not for moslems either. There's no way even one moslem should be in Europe after the invasions and bloodshed they caused.

Honestly, we could go back and forth on this forever but I think we just need to fight it out and see who wins.

The truth is we have been outright challenged so let the games begin.

 

[MicroBrew]

They are a minority in the West but in many ways they have more power than most everyone else because they have got everyone either scared to criticize them for fear of being called Islamophobes or critics are scared of being assassinated.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz both need security detail because of death threats against them.

Muslims are a minority in the West but they are 1/5 of the World population and in Muslim majority countries they are consummate bullies.

 

[Leagon]

What percentage of Blacks are criminals and at what point point is action justified? I fear for my family living in the city. A significant amount of black people are proven to be psychotic and murderous.

If you're seriously looking for answers, just know I'm not trying to be a dick in that scenario. It just seems like this is a target whitey thread.

Did you read the OP? I already asked the question you asked.

 

[Leagon]

They are a minority in the West but in many ways they have more power than most everyone else because they have got everyone either scared to criticize them for fear of being called Islamophobes or critics are scared of being assassinated.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz both need security detail because of death threats against them.

Muslims are a minority in the West but they are 1/5 of the World population and in Muslim majority countries they are consummate bullies.

I think you misread. I didn't say Muslims are a minority, necessarily. I was referring to the dangerous minority of Muslims who may be mingled among otherwise harmless Muslims. Or the dangerous white people amongst whites. Or the dangerous black people amongst blacks.

 

[Undying Poster]

Because America was founded by white people, not moslems. We wrote the constitution, the bill of rights, all the bullshit you invoke about your alleged "rights"...it's ours and was only ever intended to apply to us.

This is not a moslem country and it's not for them. They weren't even allowed here until after the '60s. We can kick them all out if we decide to, there is plenty of precedent for that in our history.

Europe has been at war with Islam for 1400 years, Europe is not for moslems either. There's no way even one moslem should be in Europe after the invasions and bloodshed they caused.

Honestly, we could go back and forth on this forever but I think we just need to fight it out and see who wins.

The truth is we have been outright challenged so let the games begin.

Factually incorrect. Muslims have been here since the start. Mainly as African slaves but several weren't and came here during the peak of European immigration. The guy who started the Nation of Islam was an actual Muslim from Afghanistan, for example.

 

[Undying Poster]

Did you read the OP? I already asked the question you asked.

Yes and I even read the post about white supremacy being a dangerous ideology. I just wanted to drive that point home because at first I thought you were bring dishonest.

 

[Leagon]

Yes and I even read the post about white supremacy being a dangerous ideology. I just wanted to drive that point home because at first I thought you were bring dishonest.

Fair. I'm being a bit dishonest (or, misleading, rather) as an attempt to balance the board. Lots of bigoted shit around here and I have some time to kill, so I figured I'd make a post.

 

[Bald1]

Good questions, and worth contemplating. As Pan said thought provoking.

I'm going to presume you're in agreement with western values and way of life. In case that's true, would you rather be a minority in a country of 200 + million Christians, or 200 + million followers of Islam?

The rest of your post requires more thought, but the above just came jumping out at me.

 

[Leagon]

Good questions, and worth contemplating. As Pan said thought provoking.

I'm going to presume you're in agreement with western values and way of life. In case that's true, would you rather be a minority in a country of 200 + million Christians, or 200 + million followers of Islam?

The rest of your post requires more thought, but the above just came jumping out at me.

Most Christians would probably say the former, but I have friends all over the world and I enjoy traveling. It would depend on the country for me. I wouldn't mind living in Malaysia or Indonesia, for example, and would pick either country over Argentina or Russia or Mexico.

Even if I said the former, though, I don't see what that would indicate.

 

[snakedafunky]

Interesting question, when you go by numbers as in lives lost. You could also make a counter argument that if you let 100.000 Moslem in, 10 might end up as terrorist and kill people.
But you could also end up with maybe 10 heart doctors that save an equal amount of people. Or you could have 5 scientist that will be essential in coming up with effective medication. Or help researching renewable energies that benefit whole mankind, they would have never had that chance back in Syria or Afghanistan.

But you have to use common sense when it comes to immigration. Not like we did it in Europe just letting anyone in, I cant see how that can end good. Not just because they are Moslem's its just to many of them. We should also be looking to let people in from everywhere. If you take in one group of immigrants it gets harder to integrate them. But we shouldn't be scared of it.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

You're right, white people are dangerous. Even 0.01% of them being dangerous is too much. You should move your immigrant family out of the country back to the safe and wealthy country they came here from.

Look at the support for things like Shariah or various terrorist groups among normal Muslims. It's disturbingly high. I'm confident that if you polled white people, or Hispanic people, or black people or whoever about whether they supported violence against people different than them, the numbers would be a fraction of those numbers for Shariah or ISIS support among the Muslim population.

 

[chosey whales]

Thankfully the GOP nomination circus has stalled some of the Islam talk on this forum, and I don't want to be the one responsible to bring it back, but I have a question.

There is a lot of talk on this board about percentages. For example, many people oppose letting Syrian refugees because there's the very real possibility that some of the refugees are terrorists. Even if it's just .001%, that can result in hundreds of lost lives. Or if even 1% of Muslims are radicalized, it may be worth monitoring mosques or preventing Muslims from coming to the United States. Or if a percentage of people in a wedding are terrorists, it could be worth drone striking the building and accepting civilian loses.

I'm living abroad right now, watching all the unrest in the States, and it's got me wondering: what percentage of white people are racists? I left my family in the States and I worry about their safety. If .0001% of 10,000 Syrians are dangerous, its not worth the risk letting them into the country. Now what if .0001% of 200 million+ white Americans are racists? Violent racists? What percentage of those people are police officers?

At what point is action justified? Is the threshold higher for domestic dangers? Should places of white congregation be monitored? Should white men be prevented from owning guns? As a black young man, do I have a duty to arm myself and monitor the white people in my neighborhood? Is this the rationale the recent cop killers were acting under? If a black killer was specifically targeting who they deemed as "corrupt" cops, would he be justified under the same logic that justifies our drone strikes on innocents?

Does it go the other way? Should white cops profile black people? Should they stop and frisk young black men at a higher rate? Should they pull over black people at a higher rate? Should black neighborhoods have more police activity--and more aggressive police tactics--if a certain percentage of black people are criminals? Should they be more likely to point a gun at black people and more likely to pull the trigger?

Is it a percentage issue or is there another metric?

U sound racist ,are U trying to stir the pot.asking a bunch of dum questions that dont have answres .there is good people and bad people .