01-01-2011, 02:21 PM
Huh?
|
Disturbing, racist post
|
|
01-01-2011, 02:28 PM
knieft, I was not setting up a straw man argument.
By "people say" I was referring to and paraphrasing quite accurately a very common type of post that appears on Punaweb, which any regular reader ought to be so familiar with that little explanation should be needed. My remark was not directed at Jon's situation or post in any respect, but to the earlier posts. Further, I did not DEFINE stuff. I did not try to make a legal definition of stuff. I used Stuff as a casual shorthand for the category of personal and real property as opposed to life and limb. I would have thought that was clear enough. You're just nitpicking. This is a message board, not a legal memorandum. I do not feel I would succeed in killing or seriously disabling an attacker, even if I tried. That's why I said that I would flee. I understand the concepts of how to hurt someone, but I have no training or experience, so I'd probably just screw it up and make the person even madder, and I know that. Mauka, I'm fairly sure that was the case we studied. All this said, I thought about home invasions while I slept plenty when I lived in Oakland, but not so much now. The home invasions near me on island happen in the daytime when people are gone. 
01-01-2011, 02:53 PM
KathyH,
Your reply was to jon, You didn't reply to his content, which had little to do with "going to be dead, tough". I know well that you didn't DEFINE stuff. Probably I should have put a lol after that like you did after "sociopathic serial killers". KathyH: "There's always a slim chance that understanding the reasoning behind law will make a dent in emotionally based thinking." There may be reasoning behind the "Castle laws" some states have adopted. And it may be that your arguments are laced with emotionally based thinking. I should return to lurking, of course, but birdmoves/jon may well have deserved a more reasonable response to his heartfelt and reasonable post. And you likely deserved a more reasoned response to your post than I gave. My apologies... Over and out, Kirt
01-01-2011, 03:01 PM
No don't return to lurking, knieft. I like the way you write. I just don't like being told I'm going straw man when I know better than to do that.
My first two lines were to jon. After that it was to everybody, although it kind of referenced some of his post. I've not yet figured out the right way to transition without sticking in an awkward "and now, this is a general comment" remark after I start my post with an opening that is to one person. I rarely write a post that is addressed to one person all the way through. I do have a crummy headache today, so my writing is most likely more sloppy than usual. I'll call it a night and go slap an ice pack on my neck.
01-01-2011, 05:16 PM
I should probably mention that, It's not that I enjoy talking about the dude that smashed his way into my home on my 22nd birthday (I'm now 57-that's 35 years ago-time does fly!!). But the thing is one always hears about homeowners having there own guns used against them in a break in, or the homeowner botches things and gets killed. Noone keeps statistics on homewoners/gun owners succesfully using a firearm in self defense. Therefore, I have felt obligated over the years to stand up and say that I did use a firearm during a break in and it turned out well.It can and does occur.The bad guy got caught and noone got shot. So, having explained why I even mentioned it, I will try to shut up about it from here out. I like this forum, because, even when people dissagree, they tend to treat each other with respect. I love the Big Island and am not worried or paranoid about these things. Also, our first grandchild lives in HPP. Her name is Robin and we want to come over and spoil her.We're coming on Feb 6th!! jon Jon in Puyallup, Wa.
Jon in Keaau/HPP
01-01-2011, 05:43 PM
quote:Good point that a successful outcome is worth talking about too. There is no reason to censor yourself and not share your experience. My post about legalities was in response to people who are talking about hypothetical Big Island home invasions, in which they imagine shooting and killing the intruder (who has no gun) and that's end of story, the guy got what he deserved and it should be obvious to all it was the right thing to do. That's just not a realistic scenario in Hawai'i unless you have the right relatives to keep the heat off you -- and maybe not then. Sharing actual stories instead of imagined scenarios is good stuff as far as I'm concerned.
01-01-2011, 06:05 PM
[quote]Originally posted by John S. Rabi
I believe the people who take these kind of jokes offensive are more racist than the OP. (I remember when I was labeled a racist once, but the person saying so didn't know my wife was an Asian!) John, I don't know you, and I don't know if you are racist or not. But, I do feel you are not above giving a "wink wink" to a biased or bigoted compadre. Case in point, you went to The Lack's site and made a questionable "joke" in which the size of African-American males' *****es loomed large (pun not intended). At The Lack's site, that kind of discourse is fine and welcomed. Yet, I find it hard to believe you would post such a questionable comment on Puna Web, where the support for such material is considerably less, and where folks will call you on it. It seemed you gave The Lack tacit approval and support for his "joke" where it was relatively safe to do so. Having a spouse of another ethnicity - and proclaiming that you do - does not necessarily mean biases do not exist. I know men who prefer Asian women because they have bought into the docility and passivity stereotypes. Again, I don't know you or what you're about and it matters very little that I should. Yet, something about the circumstances associated with your "joke" says that the person who accused you of being a racist might have had reasonable suspicion to do so.
01-01-2011, 06:47 PM
quote: Thankfully for all of us, Rob is a more tolerant moderator than you would prove to be, were you to find yourself in a position to "moderate this place." Thus far he has allowed me the freedom to challenge some of his ideas, from time to time, and defended himself vigorously when he felt the need (rather than merely booting me off the forum for daring to have an independent thought) and for that I am and shall remain in his debt. And in the meantime, I will write what I please, thank you. Respect is something to be earned. Rob has earned mine. You have yet to. @KathyH: Yours was a well placed reminder of the dignity of the Hawaiian monarchy at the time of its usurpation by the forces of greed. It was not a proud moment for America, to be sure.
01-02-2011, 01:23 AM
quote: Oh goody! A new game! Lets see how many people we can pin the racist lable on. That should help make punaweb more open community. Pua`a S. FL Big Islander to be.
Pua`a
S. FL Big Islander to be.
01-02-2011, 02:08 AM
Dehumanization is the process by which members of a group of people assert the "inferiority" of another group through subtle or overt acts or statements.[citation needed] Dehumanization may be directed by an organization (such as a state) or may be the composite of individual sentiments and actions, as with some types of de facto racism. State-organized dehumanization has been directed against perceived racial or ethnic groups, nationalities (or "foreigners" in general), religious groups, genders, minorities of various sexual orientations (e.g., homosexuals), disabled people as a class, economic (e.g., the homeless) and social classes, and many other groups.
is this about racism or denhumanization? While I support the right of an individual to be racist - do in your home and believe what ever you want............ In many western societies it is illegal to insult a class of folks, while totaly legal to isult a member of the class "that white guy is lazy" - ok "all white guys are lazy " - not ok keeps the hate mongers on a tighter leash dehumanization as displayed in these posts is what crosses the line in my opinion wikipedia concludes: Sociologists and historians often view dehumanization as central to some or all types of wars. Governments sometimes present "enemy" civilians or soldiers as less than human so that voters will be more likely to support a war they may otherwise consider mass murder. Dictatorships use the same process to prevent opposition by citizens. Such efforts often depend on preexisting racist, sectarian or otherwise biased beliefs, which governments play upon through various types of media, presenting "enemies" as barbaric, undeserving of rights, and a threat to the nation. Alternately, states sometimes present the enemy government or way of life as barbaric and its citizens as childlike and incapable of managing their own affairs. Such arguments have been used as a pretext for colonialism. see any parralels in Hawaii and Arizona - I rest my case |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
] [8D]Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)