Its a weird phenomenon. Its like a lot of peoples thinking has become almost entirely logarithmic. I know that there is some actual science to that, in that the brain will default to assumptions for the sake of speed, but people have lost their actual minds when it comes to thinking in such strictly binary terms.
So it must be skin color?? Lol good logic. There are a lot of variables, you’re not controlling for them all. But continue to believe whatever you want, facts aren’t fun when they don’t support your agenda.
Edit: not sure what your source is, one quick google:
Let’s pour one out for ol’ Mick28 in remembrance of those threads.
So there’s an interesting side/philosophical discussion here. As you guys mostly know, I’m a statistician. I spend a lot of my day working with probabilities and odds and trying to explain differences in absolute vs. relative risk and whatnot, but one thing that’s crystal-clear is that people have a really hard time with the concept of “probabilities” or things existing along a spectrum. So many people, even very brilliant ones, think in totally binary terms- “either it works, or it doesn’t” level thinking.
Not trying to be an asshole but that code and section have been deemed unconstitutional.
The United States Flag Code establishes advisory rules for display and care of the national flag of the United States of America.
Prior to Flag Day, June 14, 1923, neither the federal government nor the states had official guidelines governing the display of the United States’ flag. On that date, the National Flag Code was constructed by representatives of over 68 organizations, under the auspices of the National Americanism Commission of the American Legion. The code drafted by that conference was printed by the national organization of the American Legion and given nationwide distribution. On June 22, 1942, the Code became Public Law 77-623; chapter 435.[25]
The U.S. Supreme Court in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) ruled such laws were a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. constitution. This ruling and others applies to not just the flag, but to the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance as well.
More recently the prohibition was even expanded when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Eichman that prohibiting burning of the U.S. flag conflicts with the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and is therefore unconstitutional.
[quote=“Benanything, post:106, topic:234390, full:true”]
I don’t believe anything. The facts tell me that they are “inherently more violent or predisposed to criminal activity”.[/quote]
Those facts tell nothing except that, black people commit nearly half of all murders in the U.S.
What you are doing right now is drawing an interpretation based on these facts.
I already do. I’ve always stood during the national anthem, and have never considered kneeling or anything like that. Your earlier response about Boyer and his influence was largely what I was looking for though. I don’t know why you brought up Westboro… I’ve given no indication that on a personal level, that I think the kneeling is a good idea. My point is that, while it’s awesome to have a resource like you to help with my education, it seems unreasonable to expect the same out of hundreds of NFL players.
No, the flag code is a completely different code section. The national anthem code (36 USC 301) remains valid, although I do fully agree with your final conclusion that one could disregard it on First Amendment grounds based on the same logic.
But the discussion is completely irrelevant.
The important part is the Congressional findings in the notes of the statute behind the purpose of the playing of the national anthem, which is to honor the sacrifice of US servicemen. Again, it’s a mini-Memorial Day.
And, if you chose to disrespect those who served you, that’s your First Amendment right.
Go join your fellow travelers, the Westboro Baptist Church, in shitting on veterans. They died for your right to do so.
This thread seems to have gone off the rails, and this post is proof, but comparing poor whites to poor blacks to “prove” that white people, regardless of socioeconomic circumstance, are less prone to violent crime (implying that it must be something in the genes) is not comparing apples to apples. The experience of poor whites in this country is not the same as the black experience in this country. I would think that would be obvious to most everyone who has any knowledge of American history.