Should white people be banned?

[HooptieWagon]

Last edited Sun Jul 22, 2012, 06:34 PM - Edit history (1)

James Holmes, Tim McVeigh, the Norway killer, etc. What is the commonality? They're all white people. Now, you might say: " But 99% of white people are responsible, law-abiding citizens". That is true. But in order to stop the few who commit mass murder, I think we should ban all white people.

Edit: <sarcasm> alert for those incapable of making the connection.

[Aerows]

1. Yes, I'm blond

and I should be banned for being gorgeous.

[Cali_Democrat]

9. Picture?

[Cali_Democrat]

2. Please delete this post. n/t

[DontTreadOnMe]

3. Ban the white people with guns that giggle when they blow stuff up

Ever watch people on gun shows on tv.. when they "blow stuff up" they all giggle like little kids with a pack of firecrackers.

[IggleDoer]

63. Guns that giggle??????

Or white people WHO giggle?

I know ... Picky, picky.

[cali]

4. I'm sorry but your post is not only absurd and dim but

racist. And if you're attempting to mock racism in some clumsy way, you didn't succeed. If I were you I'd take this down as quickly as I posted it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

77. Being in Arizona ...

maybe I'm just sensitive to this; but isn't that exactly what sheriff joe and his supporters are doing ... making being Hispanic the basis for being suspect in an attempt to address the small percentage of Hispanics that are here illegally or have otherwise broken the law?

I think that this was the OP's intent.

[cherokeeprogressive]

5. No. But those who use blatant racism to make a point...

should have their DU posting privileges revoked.

[sadbear]

7. Few people should be banned.

Most should be well-regulated, though.

[BOG PERSON]

8. n/t

[msanthrope]

69. This is sooooo going on certain Meta threads..... nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. Attempt: reductio ad absurdum

Success: negative.

[quinnox]

11. no, but people who try and make lame arguments

excusing the fact there are many crazy white mass murderers should be.

[HooptieWagon]

12. OP is not racist. Mass murderers are white.

If you think the post is ridiculous because only a tiny percentage of white people commit mass murder, then you would agree that calling for guns to be banned is also ridiculous... after all, only the occasional crazy nut, out of 100 million gun owners, commits mass murder.

[cali]

18. Of course it's racist to suggest that any race should be "banned" based on

the fact that most mass murderers, a teeny number, out of all whites, are white. Suggesting the banning of a race is not akin to suggesting the banning of guns, genius. It's akin to suggesting the banning of any other race for any other stupid ass fucking reason.

This has to be the worst, the very worst, pro-gun post ever on DU.

And I'm not anti-gun ownership.

[B2G]

21. "the fact that most mass murderers, a teeny number, out of all whites, are white"

That's not even true. See the link I provided below.

This is not at white phenomenon, nor is it more prevalent in the US. See the link of worldwide ramage killers I listed below.

[HooptieWagon]

24. If banning white people is ridiculous

Because every so often one out of 150 million commits mass murder, then isnt it equally ridiculous to call for a ban on guns because every so often one out of 100 million commits mass murder? I'm curious how one can be justified without the other.

[cali]

34. Evidently this may come as a shock to you, but people are not things.

[HooptieWagon]

45. Yet gun OWNERS are people.

And they would be every bit as outraged if guns were banned. 100 million of them.

[cali]

47. is anyone suggesting banning all gun owners? and what does banning white people

even mean, btw?

Oh, as I mentioned, I'm not for banning guns, though I do think certain restrictions on guns and ammos make sense.

[HooptieWagon]

52. Yes, a whole bunch of DUers.

I agree that we should look at gun control and figure out what works and not. But as soon as the words "gun ban" is brought up, 100 million gun owners are gonna vote R. Say goodbye to the Dem Party and any progressive legislation passed in the last 100 years.

[slackmaster]

20. Most people who are murdered are not victims of a mass murder

But you wouldn't dare address that one honestly.

[HooptieWagon]

26. 55% of gun deaths aren't even homicide...

They're suicides.
And I agree with you... only a small percentage of homicide victims happened as a part of mass murder. So, should national gun control policy be based upon a recent tragedy?

[Fumesucker]

48. The DC sniper wasn't white..

[HooptieWagon]

54. McVeigh didnt use a gun.

[11 Bravo]

83. Holy shit! While I think I probably disagree with you in principle, the responses ...

to your post make it clear that if Jonathan Swift or Mark Fucking Twain atttempted to post a satirical thread here, someone would try to have them TSed.

[HooptieWagon]

84. LOL! You got that right.

I expected a flaming with that OP, but figured that maybe a couple people might say " over the top, but I see your point". Their position is so entrenched, they fail to see their hypocrisy. Good thing I didn't use abortion as an analogy, huh?

[slackmaster]

13. You are on a very slippery slope if you want to ban groups of people based on crime statistics

How about holding individuals responsible for their actions?

[HooptieWagon]

17. Statistics like gun ownership, for instance?

[slackmaster]

19. Gun ownership is a choice. You made this thread about race.

Enjoy the replies.

[HooptieWagon]

38. A choice given Right status by the Constitution

and upheld by several SCOTUS decisions. And yes, the race analogy is over the top. However, it serves the purpose for two reasons:
1) There are about 150 million whites in the US, and about 100 million gun owners... the numbers aren't that different.
2) The vast majority of both sub-groups are responsible and law-abiding.
That the anti-gun zealots are outraged over the notion of "banning white people" , yet are hollering for guns to be banned, is rather telling. Their hypocrisy escapes them.
Good luck with any gun ban attempts... I fear it would be a bloodbath for us, and 100 years of progress will be reversed.

[muriel_volestrangler]

39. Guns and people are equivalent categories, to you?

What else are, to you? Corporations?

[HooptieWagon]

43. Gun owners are people.

Ban gun ownership b/c of one crazy, and you get a lot of po'd people. Just like banning a race b/c of one crazy leads to a lot of po'd people (see entire thread). Maybe you see the connection now?

[muriel_volestrangler]

64. No one has suggested banning gun owners

It's the guns that some suggest banning. People are not innately 'gun owners'. They are people who currently own a gun.

[Raine]

14. Banned from where, theaters, buildings, earth?? nt

[B2G]

15. Woo Bum-kon, Nidal Hasan, Seung-Hui Cho, Farda Gadyrov, Matti Saari...

there are plenty more. And if you're serious, you are a complete and total jackhole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers

[Tuesday Afternoon]

16. ~

At Sun Jul 22, 2012, 04:30 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Should white people be banned?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021000808

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jul 22, 2012, 04:42 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Can't tell if this is supposed to be tongue in cheek or not, but it's not going to accomplish anything good.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Let the analogy play.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: Post is totally inflammatory, and serves no purpose but to inflame reactions.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Frankly, I find it funny in it's attempt to equate banning guns to banning something nobody would want to ban.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: Poster should be PPRed

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[ileus]

30. Thanks.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

33. yw.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

22. I demand this OP be PPR'd. nt

[HooptieWagon]

65. You can demand in one hand, shit in the other.

See which fills first. G'day.

[morningfog]

23. Yay! Thanks for posting. I am doing some serious updating to my ignore list!

[Pholus]

25. Oh gawd, they're trotting out THE CHEWBACCA DEFENSE

Here, let me give you your NEXT argument after this one plops harmlessly on the floor because it makes no sense whatsoever.

THERE SHOULD BE NO LAWS AT ALL!!!

After all, somebody somewhere will break the law and commit rape, murder, assault, theft or whatnot.

So it makes NO sense making things illegal given that it restricts the freedoms of those of us who abide by the law.

Or something. I smell desperation in the most recent threads. I guess all those gungeon-inspired canned arguments are not surviving outside the echo chamber...

[ileus]

27. I'm poutraged...

[baldguy]

28. How about we start with just the crazy ones? Then the irresponsible ones after that?

And you can quit posting extremist RW talking points.

[cthulu2016]

29. Internet: A tool for making dumb people think they are smart

[babsbunny]

31. yes please....

[xocet]

32. Rewrite the title with another "race" in the the place of white and see how it sounds.... n/t

[southernyankeebelle]

35. This is very silly. You should know better.

[cali]

36. it is very silly. kind of op that lowers the collective IQ here by quite a few points.

If I were the OP, I'd be embarrassed as all get out. comparing an ethnic group with an object? Not too sharp.

[Egalitarian Thug]

37. Some people don't like to see their argument turned around like this.

It's the consistent response and reaction of the authoritarian mind.

But perhaps you should add the sarcasm tag to make the point a little clearer (or perhaps I've missed your point and you are serious?).

[HooptieWagon]

40. You're right.

I overestimated the ability of some DUers to make the connection. I'll add a sarcasm thingy.

[slackmaster]

55. Nobody on DU is dumb enough to buy your transparent back-pedaling bullshit

You want a conversation about race and violent crime.

Let's see an honest start.

[HooptieWagon]

57. If you dont want your argument turned aroumd against you

Then dont use it. If you ban gun-ownership, do you have any idea how outraged 100 million gun owners would be?

[petronius]

41. Your proposal is far too modest - why not ban all people?

[Zalatix]

42. Wait, exactly WHO didn't catch the sarcasm/satire in the OP before even opening the thread?

[HooptieWagon]

44. Looks like quite a few...

And it was quite funny reading their outrage over the idea of banning a race, yet not realizing thats exactly the same outrage that would be felt by 100 million gun owners over the idea of banning guns.

[Zalatix]

46. Hell, we can go even further.

Guns kill people. But guns are made by people. We should outlaw people. I mean, that's just as logical as outlawing guns, and it gets to the root of the problem, does it not?

[cali]

51. It's an insult to Swift to call this satire.

guns are objects. Comparing humans to objects just doesn't work.

[Zalatix]

53. Sort of true. But I didn't invoke Swift, either.

Guns are made by people. So outlawing guns doesn't solve the murder problem. You have to outlaw people to stop the problem.

(One of the three sentences above was below-genius-level satire.)

[HooptieWagon]

60. You're right. Guns are objects. They have no feelings.

Gun OWNERS are human. Theres 100 million of them. Do you want them all voting Repuke? Not only wont you get your gun ban, but sayonora to Roe, social security, healthcare, equal rights, gay rights... every bit of progressive legislation in the past 100 years.

[cali]

71. oh for the love of reason. I'm not anti-gun. I'm not

and because of the shit you mention, I'm not pro more gun regulation on the federal level. I do wish states and cities had more of an ability to make laws re gun control for their own regions, but that's about it. So you're fucking as wrong about my opinions on the subject as can be.

And your op is still lousy and not exactly a sterling example of satire- to put it extremely kindly, dear.

[Pholus]

58. You know, Rush does that same lame thing...

Typically, that "it's subtle sarcasm or a joke" cop out comes when the poster's intended argument du jour goes south for being perfectly idiotic on its face.

[Posteritatis]

59. In this modern, post-parody world, one can never be sure...

I got it but can see how others wouldn't these days. That sort of thing bothers me more than a lot of other things that have been going on the last several years.

[Lex]

49. I think we should ban those trying to make analogies between guns and other things.

It's just not working. Even as sarcasm.

[Tejas]

56. YUP! The 1st Amendment is SOOOOOOO overrated.

[Lex]

68. You think this message board has something to do with the 1st Amendment?

Think again.

[Tejas]

70. *snort

[michreject]

50. Word of caution

I'm not gonna go peacefully if I'm gonna be collected for green goo.

[HooptieWagon]

61. Exactly!

And you know how gun owners would feel of their gus are collected... the same.

[longship]

85. You're talking The Blob here.

I prefer Nanobots. They have the much more congruent grey goo, it goes with everything, especially when everything else is also grey goo.


Longship's first law of robotics:

If you have an autonomous, intelligent robot at your command, never tell it to "Make me some chocolate chip cookies."

[NoPasaran]

62. Soylent Green is gun owners!

[shraby]

66. A sarcasm tag is no pass for an ignorant post.

[limpyhobbler]

67. At first I thought you might be using sarcasm to make a point about racial profiling.

Such as "see how it sucks to be racially profiled".

So I was paying attention but then once I figured out it was about guns you lost me.

[BanTheGOP]

72. I have no qualms for certain "white" taxes for reparations

While the OP is a bit drastic for banning white people, there are certain truths behind the rumor. For instance, slave labor, essentially production GIVEN to whites by blacks, seeded all corporate and even government bonding that we all enjoy today. If reparations were truly just, we would see a migration of most of the wealth today to the descendants of slaves, and a lot of the easy life that whites live, for the most part, will (and actually should) disappear.

By the way, there is a huge difference between banning an organization that exists under the guise of a "political party," which of course is the GOP, and banning people in general. So any response with regard to that laughable comparison will be duly ignored.

[KamaAina]

73. Charles Manson, Eric Rudolph, John Wayne Gacy, Marc Lepine in Montreal

You know, I think you might be on to something here. Let's brand whites as a terroristic threat to our homeland security!

[HooptieWagon]

74. Makes as much (or little) sense as banning guns, doesn't it?

[KamaAina]

75. Did I say something about banning guns?

"Cause I don't think I did. You must have me confused with someone else.

[HooptieWagon]

76. It is what the thread satirizes.

[Scootaloo]

80. No, it's what the thread is TRYING to satirize

It fails miserably in the attempt.

[Scootaloo]

78. ...

[HiPointDem]

79. middle-class white people.

[Scootaloo]

81. Well, they already believe themselves to be deeply persecuted

You know, by the NBA and BET and the NAACP and all that. Poor white people. So downtrodden.

[rl6214]

82. Seung-Hui Cho, John Allen Muhammad, Lee Boyd Malvo,

Does not fit the stereotype you are trying to put out there