Posted by: [deleted]
Posting time: 2 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 3/8/2019 10:00:00 AM
Views: 768
SCP: 40
42 upvotes, 2 downvotes (95% upvoted it)
~91 user(s) here now
Subverse anonymized: usernames are hidden and votes don't count.
NSFW: Yes
Authorized: No
Anon: Yes
Private: No
Type: Default
view the rest of the comments →
[–] 15459067? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I understand the logic you're using , but its wrong. Think of it like this - while there are indeed innocent parties, crime rates within a demographic should not be ignored. We may not know which, roughly speaking 10-20% of black males will be rapists, murders, and thieves. We can't tell from the outside. However, we can tell that that small group is so violent that as a result of ignoring them, fully 50% of the TOTAL rapes and murders will be caused by them, even despite them making up roughly 4% of the population (black males, 15-40y.o). We can therefore know with certainty that by removing them, or heavily discriminating against them, we could reduce the murder and rape rate by 50%.
A failure to do so means you are willing to trade fully half of everyone in the US raped or murdered in exchange for your desire to seem "unbiased". Their deaths are on your head - you are the equivelant of someone who fails to report a wildly suspicious person to the police who then goes on to murder someone. You don't literally have blood on your hands, but make no mistake, you are somewhat culpable, at a moral level.
Not subjecting others to the heightened violence rates of blacks is a moral cause, even if they'd rather they were able to stay and leech off whitey. The right to self defence is God given, and it is a calm and rational response to what is clearly a threat, even if the precise sources of that threat cannot be identified ahead of time. God helps those who help themselves.