Tufte in The Forum
-
my understanding is that I am in compliance (except maybe for lack of resonator)
-
T ! N wrote:
Based on the previous 17 pages...StormWalker is a racist whitey, and an idiot. Your comment makes MLK jr. wanna crawl out of his grave and bitch slap you.
Hi. Please don't call me racist unless I posted racist material. Pointing out that people use profiling, even relating to car noise ordinances, does not constitute one as racist. Saying profiling exists and that everyone does it is simply stating a fact. There is no reason to call anyone racist, obviously you don't even know what racism is.
-
Jim wrote:
gawd tin go back to vietnam you commie99slowgsx wrote:
.........and whats up with your sig tin? You dont get your dick sucked by bitches.........You guys are assholes...:)
-
darkelvis wrote:
Anyone else notice that when someone calls stormwalker a racist, or a hick, etc... his response is "Obviously you don't even know what a (insert called name here) is, so you are stupid."?The definition of "racist"
Definition: [n] a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others [adj] discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
[adj] based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks"Comment:
If you are trying to create a profile of someone you are looking for, you have to use race as a factor in the profile. There is no way around it.
Race is used everyday in profiling. If you are looking for someone that killed someone in Minneapolis and an eye witness says it was a white male 6' 4" about 200 lbs, obviously you'll be looking for a white male matching that description.
Would you be sexist for saying it was a male or female that you are looking for?I have yet to call someone stupid. Don't put words in my mouth.
I talked about racial profiling. There is a bit of "tabooness" to this subject. It is surprising to see how many people leap up, make a knee jerk reaction, and assume that anyone who talks about "race" is automatically "racist". I don't care if you call me a hick. Actually, it is kind of funny to hear someone from Fargo, call someone from the Twin Cities, a "hick". That's fine, I prefer rural areas to urban areas, but I am comfortable in either.
I laid out the definition of "racism" above. If you wish to change this definition of racism to try to apply it to me, then I am probably one of the least racist people here, go ahead and scroll back through this thread as proof of this. If I am racist, then so are you, probably even more so. And especially every law enforcement agency in the country.
I invite you AGAIN to read this quote:
68GTO wrote:
The overall profiling question, racial or some other characteristic, is an easy one to answer. It is less easy to put into action well, however.Profiling example #1: Someone steals your '03 cobra. You witness this from 100 ft away and see that this male person, (build, hair, skin as described by you) was wearing a North Carolina Baseball cap, a sleeveless t-shirt and baggy blue jeans. You report this to the police. They then begin to look anyone fitting this "description". The police have just created a "profile" and will seek to speak with anyone fitting this description because they know that someone like this has just committed a crime. Profiling.
Profiling example #2: As in this discussion thread, perpetrators of terroist crimes against the USA and throughout the world share common characteristics. They are race, religion, gender and age group. Authorities then create a "profile" on the information at hand to help "filter out" persons who meet these "criteria". Other than locating, watching and questioning people who fit this profile, there is NO HIDDEN AGENDA here. Profiling.
Profiling example #3: Murders are reported in Minneapolis with a certain ethnic group as the target and a certain ethnic group as the perpetrators. Police begin to look for these people based on the characteristics known. They may be poor. They may drive certain types of cars. They may dress a certain way or have a trademark fashion statement. All help to create a profile of that suspect/suspect group. If most of these crimes against one group are committed by another group, then to profile the suspect group is not bad. Profiles are created based on CHARACTERISTICS. Some are racial, behavioral, attitudinal, fashion-based, etc. Profiling.
You see, we do it all day - everyday! In job postings, in seeking a woman, in looking for a car. WE all have a list of criteria that helps us narrow our searches.
Profiling by itself is a neutral thing. Profiling is a useful tool. We ALL do it.
I posted this question on another forum as well, which is where I have been getting some of these responses. You are welcome to read that as well:
http://www.tcstangs.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24218&page=1&pp=15Yeah, I am a nice guy. I don't go out of my way to offend people. It can happen however. But being labled something I am not is not quite fair.
-
Ya know something, Stormwalker, you are one hell of a mature guy. Not many people on here would be able to keep your side of this argument as civilized a conversation as you have tried to keep it. Regardless of what people have said in response to your posts, you have remained calm and have refraned from putting people down.
I think people have been a little too quick to raise the racist flag in here and it is, in my opinion, not justified. -
HandoEX wrote:
Ya know something, Stormwalker, you are one hell of a mature guy. Not many people on here would be able to keep your side of this argument as civilized a conversation as you have tried to keep it. Regardless of what people have said in response to your posts, you have remained calm and have refraned from putting people down.
I think people have been a little too quick to raise the racist flag in here and it is, in my opinion, not justified.Thank you Hando. I appreciate that.
-
this has been particularly impressive. here i thought i was the only person capable of maintaining a strongly opposed viewpoint on a touchy subject without resorting to ad hominems and name-calling.
good work, this is one storm you managed to navigate well.
i must agree with a large portion of what stormwalker has said. however, if you want to see just why racial profiling CAN be better than the absence of it (at least, in security situations), look at it from a utilitarian point of view.
in london- let's assume the man in the trench coat that was unarmed (explosive device or firearm) and gunned down happens again, it happens 5 times, 10, 30. is it still wrong?
yes.
now, what if one of those 30 men that were gunned down had been carrying an explosive device and getting onto a crowded bus? what would you rather have happen, 1 innocent person dead, or 100?
in my opinion, when it comes to security, i'd rather be responsible for the deaths of 10 innocent people if it means saving 100. -
While I agree that you do handle yourself well, I have to respond at least a little to your list of examples of profiling.
Yes, profiling can be used justly, and it can be done in a manner that is not racially insensitive. If someone is a witness to a crime and they give the police a description (profile) of the criminal, then it is within law enforcements rights to say Ok..."we are looking for a 6'1" White male with brown hair and brown eyes, approximately 225 lbs., approximately 24-32 years of age, driving a white 4 door import car with loud exhaust....last seen in the 32nd Ave S and 25th St locations." I would fully expect to be questioned as I meet that profile. However, if they said "we are looking for a white guy in Fargo with a loud car" I don't think that merits questioning me or anyone else.
Edit: FWIW, I only thought you were an idiot for failing to see my point that I think 100% of cars with loud exhausts should be ticketed, regardless of manufacturer/country of origin.
-
DaveH wrote:
Just FYI, this is a pic that one of our surveyors at work sent me from when he was out "working" .... LOL
It was Stephen, wasn't it?
-
tjamz wrote:
While I agree that you do handle yourself well, I have to respond at least a little to your list of examples of profiling.Yes, profiling can be used justly, and it can be done in a manner that is not racially insensitive. If someone is a witness to a crime and they give the police a description (profile) of the criminal, then it is within law enforcements rights to say Ok..."we are looking for a 6'1" White male with brown hair and brown eyes, approximately 225 lbs., approximately 24-32 years of age, driving a white 4 door import car with loud exhaust....last seen in the 32nd Ave S and 25th St locations." I would fully expect to be questioned as I meet that profile. However, if they said "we are looking for a white guy in Fargo with a loud car" I don't think that merits questioning me or anyone else.
That is comparing apples to oranges. Lets go into an airport, you get pulled out of line and asked to strip down. Your a white male in a business suit with no criminal record. You have nothing on you and your detained because your name came on a list. Is this proper profiling since you have the same name as someone on the list? Profiling is done by everybody in almost every situation. This is a never ending argument. Some profiling is necessary, some is unfair. No matter how you look at it each and everyone of us profiles something or someone everyday.......
-
out there wrote:
this has been particularly impressive. here i thought i was the only person capable of maintaining a strongly opposed viewpoint on a touchy subject without resorting to ad hominems and name-calling.
good work, this is one storm you managed to navigate well.
i must agree with a large portion of what stormwalker has said. however, if you want to see just why racial profiling CAN be better than the absence of it (at least, in security situations), look at it from a utilitarian point of view.
in london- let's assume the man in the trench coat that was unarmed (explosive device or firearm) and gunned down happens again, it happens 5 times, 10, 30. is it still wrong?
yes.
now, what if one of those 30 men that were gunned down had been carrying an explosive device and getting onto a crowded bus? what would you rather have happen, 1 innocent person dead, or 100?
in my opinion, when it comes to security, i'd rather be responsible for the deaths of 10 innocent people if it means saving 100.you are in essence saying that some people's lives are worth more then others. that is where i disagree with everything anyone says who leans on the utilitarian viewpoint. I agree that saving 100 people's lives is important but at what cost? Why is it justifiable that THOSE ten people should have to give up their own lives to save others? Who are you to decide what ten people must give up their right to live for another? If you agree to play god sort of speak the argument gets pretty complicated when stem cell research, abortion, euthenasia, ect gets brought up as a reslut.
-
this thread is spinning out of control, I see no solution other than to close it.
Stormwalker, none of this was personal and it was a good debate. Lets just agree to disagree on a number of things, ok?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login