You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
1
LiberalAtheistBrony on scored.co
5 hours ago1 point(+0/-0/+1Score on mirror)1 child
Choosing to ignore crime because it's rare is not a victory of utilitarianism over fallacy. We aren't correspondingly jurisprudentially vexed about the spread of renal cancer because renal cancer is not a human criminal.
*Statistically speaking,* niggers are about as deadly as hepatitis, so, by your logic, I guess we can at least at start treating them as just another run-of-the-mill disease for heckin' science to eradicate while we performatively deny that non-modal events occur, because It's 250 years past the revolution and enlightenment, we're all just blase about probability and that's ezpz risk management.
If you're an average white American, your chance of being murdered by a black person within the next calendar year is 1 in 172,000. That's lower than the chance of being dealt a straight flush off the top of the deck that's Jack-high or better.
If you have any sense of rationality at all, focus on your triglycerides. That's what's actually going to kill you in the real world, as opposed to in your inane Turner Diaries fantasies.
Triglycerides are not human and possess zero human moral agency. Stop insinuating there is no difference between human crime and natural disease, and stop trying to change the subject. You are overrelying on probability as a materialist crutch and as a result you are jaded, seeing the world as an arbitrary superposition of meaningless statistical happenstances. You are trying to show off how little you have to care about someone's death as long as you can cough up an actuarial model which suffices to pass blame for it away from yourself and on to arbitrary statistical noise. You are pursuing the power to deny human life and attempting to use that power to shield yourself from culpability in the needless deaths that you are enabling. You don't get to take the needless murder of innocent White people and make it about natural disease, then dismiss it as statistically minimal now that you've compared it to something utterly irrelevant to it. You won't even give voice to whether I live longer than the next contract year. Your behavior is antisocial, dishonest, and deeply immoral. Stop lying to yourself. Also, stop staring at cards and look at the basic reality the numbers are telling you; 1 in 172k per annum is not that low, for any cause of death, even a natural one.
Sociological concepts are also not human and possess zero human moral agency. You are not talking about a crime; you are talking about statistics. So I am talking statistics back to you.
Yes, 1 in 172k per annum is extremely low for a cause of death. Homicide itself is only the 17th leading cause of death in the United States; and more than 80% of white victims of homicide were killed by other white people.
*Statistically speaking,* niggers are about as deadly as hepatitis, so, by your logic, I guess we can at least at start treating them as just another run-of-the-mill disease for heckin' science to eradicate while we performatively deny that non-modal events occur, because It's 250 years past the revolution and enlightenment, we're all just blase about probability and that's ezpz risk management.
If you have any sense of rationality at all, focus on your triglycerides. That's what's actually going to kill you in the real world, as opposed to in your inane Turner Diaries fantasies.
Yes, 1 in 172k per annum is extremely low for a cause of death. Homicide itself is only the 17th leading cause of death in the United States; and more than 80% of white victims of homicide were killed by other white people.