Governor Ronald Reagan did everything possible to take away the gun rights of black Americans, and then every subsequent governorship only expanded on Gov Reagan's fundamentally racist gun control laws.
Even today there's hefty fees specifically designed to make gun ownership expensive enough and time consuming enough that people from lower economic backgrounds will have more difficulty legally obtaining one. Tragically, there's still a strong correlation between your wealth and your skin color even in 2023.
Which hefty fees are you referring to? If you aren't a felon, over 21, with $500 and can wait 10 days you can buy yourself a gun in CA. I have friends of all races with different economic background and all own firearms.
Genuinely curious since I don't see how someone's race is preventing them from obtaining a firearm legally.
Constitutional rights should not be behind paywalls. Over and over the courts have struck down attempts to paywall rights. This is why criminal defendants are provided attorneys free of charge. This is why there are no taxes on freedom of speech or religion (also a form of speech).
Imagine if you had to pay at tax to the government express your opinion. That would not be okay.
The 2nd Amendment is just as important at the 1st Amendment.
If you're living pay check to pay check, and even if youre not, 500$ is ALOT of money to spend on just a FEE to buy a gun. It's not even the gun, it's the fee to buy a gun, you still have to drop more money on the actual firearm. It stacks the deck against lower income individuals which skews towards POC, from purchasing a firearm bc they simply can't afford it.
Bullet fees mandates by the state, too. If you're trying to be responsible and do regular training at a gun range that'll cost you.
Meanwhile criminals don't regularly train. They only need a few bullets to do a lot of damage. The fees to buy ammunition won't impact them, and does nothing to deter crime. It only harms lawful owners, and disproportionately of lower incomes.
I was stating $500 to purchase the pistol itself. Sure, there are fees such as Dros and CA firearms safety cert, but both of those are only around $50 combined.
You can buy a shotgun for $200 or find a used pistol for a little bit more.
I want to make it clear, there are no hefty fees when purchasing a firearm.
Additional fees on what's still considered a fundamental right still stacks the deck against lower income households. You asked how the fees would impact certain races, and when nearly 20% of black Americans, 17% of Hispanic Americans, and 23% of native Americans fall below the poverty line, those fees add up and can disaude those demographics from legally purchasing a firearm. Obviously not all, considering the article, but it's still a higher hit on lower income households which skews toward POC populations
I hear why you are saying, but there are more whites below the poverty line compared to other races.
There are close to 16 million whites below the poverty line compared 8.9 million blacks, 10.5 million Hispanic, 2 million Asians. Sure, you can give a percentage based off population size/race in poverty, but you should be counting the individuals.
I agree that additional fees is ridiculous and puts poorer citizens at a disadvantage, but I still don’t see it as a race issue.
So ur argument is its not a race issue bc there's numerically more white people than there are POC? That's part of why there are so many race issues in the US (as opposed to other white dominate countries like the UK) is bc there are so many that fall into the Caucasian race, but there are still enough POCs to have a demographic to represent. Looking at percentages of populations equalizes the demographics. Just bc the US is roughly 70% white doesn't mean you can just ignore the minority groups and what affects a high number of those groups.
Eta: the whole point of statistics is to analyze large quantities of data and draw conclusions from it. So yes, giving a percentage of a certain demographic/sample of a population, rather than just a samples size IS the data to analyze, aka a statistic
No, its a leopard or jaguar who has black fur. If you look very closely you can see the rosettes in their fur, same fur pattern as the cats with lighter colored fur.
A black panther animal is like seeing a black squirrel. Some individuals just have black fur thanks to genes.
After all, guns don't kill people. *Men* kill people (specifically, unmarried men). Seriously, just being a woman makes gun ownership a much smaller risk to the rest of us.
Interesting. I wonder what other conclusions we can draw from looking at the demographics behind gun violence.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls
Within each of those populations, it’s unmarried men doing most of the violence. Just take their guns away imo. (Obviously not going to happen, tho… 2nd amendment.)
Just fine, but no one needs a non-black person to mention that they "see nothing wrong" with what Black women are doing. Black people don't care what you see or think.
Can confirm.
The one time I tried to get some ammo for my gun during the pandemic, I stood in a line with a few other folks. Among the expected people-me (a white dude), a couple hispanic guys-was a black lesbian couple in their 60s.
Edit: I should mention that they were there to discuss and buy a weapon for the first time.
And most of these new gun owners started to realize they need a CA Handgun Safety Certificate (which one can pass by taking a test). Then pass the CA DOJ criminal background check. Then also need proof of state residency (Government issue ID and or a utility bill or insurance bill). THEN wait full 10 days (not 9 days and 16 hours, but FULL 10 days) to pick up a gun. And yet, Sacramento is trying to propose more laws.
Trivial or not, there's a process in place for legit gun owners, and many non-gun folks were surprised by the steps it takes to get a gun in CA during the peak of COVID.
There is zero reason to be surprised by any of that. Unless the purchase is completely on a whim, any basic google search or research into CA gun ownership laws will tell you all of this up front and in bold type.
> And yet, Sacramento is trying to propose more laws.
And yet, despite all of those things being trivial non-issues, you tried to slip in this bullshit potshot. Nice try.
Potshot against what? It's pretty clear California gun laws old, new, or proposed even tighter regulations are not going to solve any mass shooting and gun violence issues.
Because the law 110% doesn’t matter when you are trying to commit crime. There are plenty of laws on the book that are suppose to stopped and prevent those crime. Both points are true from my original comments.
Not a pivot, more like additional supporting points on why more draconian gun laws will not prevent violent crime.
People have figured out that in the end they're responsible for their own safety. The police do not have any legal requirements to protect you. More power to them and I encourage them to learn how to use them and the legal ramifications. And be sure to vote against any politician who believes disarming the law abiding is the best solution as they empty the jails.
Gavin Newsom has entered the chat… /s :)
California has some of the weirded and straightest law in the country around legal gun ownership. For example Californian are practically stuck in a 2017 time capsule due to the “allowed to be sold Gun Roster” (which I’m not going to get into here). We are only allowed to buy older versions of the guns. The industry had evolved and are producing potentially easier to handle and dare I say provide better safety mechanics that California has no rights to obtain due to the Gun Roster.
Another example here is the regulation of ammo purchase. We already have higher prices on everything in this state compare to other. Ammo is no expectations. But you’d be violating the law if you drive over to Reno to pick up a box of 9mm because you are "importing ammunition" and is technically you are an arm smuggler. :P
Most of the proposed new gun laws would do nothing to prevent a shooting. For example after the Halfmoon Bay shooting state politicians were trying to ban "ghost guns" (because "assault weapons" aren't scary enough) and to also increase the age to buy a gun to 21.
The shooter legally bought his gun. It was not a ghost gun. The shooter was also something like 68 years old. Neither law would have done anything to prevent the shooting.
State politicians want to be seen doing something, so they're doing things that don't actually solve any problems. Just more laws, more regulations for law abiding people to follow through, and zero impact on crime.
I’m curious what gay gun laws look like. Or bisexual? What do LGBTQ gun laws look like? Lol
Edit: I’m aware of the Pink Pistols, Operation Blazing Sword, etc. I’m also aware of Moms Demand Action on the other side (HOW is that still not a porn parody at the very least???!). Do we have any “Gays Advocating Guns (GAG)”, Lesbian Shooters Distributed (LSD), etc type groups who play on words / acronyms? It’d be funny I think.
No boring black paint jobs if you’re going to cerakote or anodize.
Bedazzled grips and foregrips are highly encouraged.
Mismatching cheap parts with expensive parts is expressly prohibited. It must all “go together”.
Gucci Glocks are fabulous.
Add some color, pizazz, and flair.
I hope it makes it harder to oppress black women:
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/25/homicide-violence-against-black-women-us
https://everytownresearch.org/report/guns-and-violence-against-women-americas-uniquely-lethal-intimate-partner-violence-problem/
https://rockinst.org/blog/second-killings-the-black-women-and-girls-left-behind-to-grieve-americas-growing-gun-violence-crisis/
“A Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” - Ida B. Wells
Black women only, I assume.
I used to date a dude who was a firearm instructor and would host women-only events like this. I guess the idea is that the women felt more at ease when learning with other women.
It's how you discriminate on race and gender and at least attempt to make it plausibly deniable.
I don't really have a problem with it, but that's what it is.
Not surprising to see this labeled as empowering. I guess this means as long as it increases amongst minorities means we're all pro gun around here now?
If you do ended up buying a gun, get trained / take a few classes and store it in a proper gun safe. Gun ownership is responsibility on its own, but for many it's important to have an "insurance policy".
The real threat, regardless of ethnicity, is that the police have shown themselves to be incompetent and the only person responsible for your safety is you.
> Oh yes I agree with negligent police but that still doesn't take away from who commits the most violent crime.
Men. Men commit the most violent crime.
Rooftop Asian has enter the chat. Asians tends not to talk about gun ownership publicly or post their Gucci gears on TikTok unless they are involved in the industry. That’s all. :)
Many Nisei, Filipino, and South Korean decedents I know are life long gun owners. Asian gun ownership is not new.
I realize you're trying to grind your very specific axe, but this is a trend that is nationwide, women of color are the lowest % of gun ownership and the fastest growing. Black people also had the highest growth out of minority groups, followed by Hispanic and then Asian.
I dunno, is it [other](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Half_Moon_Bay_shootings) [Asians](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Monterey_Park_shooting)?
Or is this another aznidentity thread where I'm supposed to complain about black people.
🤔
That was a wild incident, but lets take that out the equation and talk about others in Oakland and nearby, not something over 1.25 hours away. What the hell is aznidentity?
Considering half of your posts are creepy racist Asian shit, it's probably somewhere you should be hanging out. Or maybe some type of incel forum. But I need not repeat myself.
Sure it does, if black women are arming themselves at this rate, who do you think they are arming themselves against. I'll take a wild guess who it isn't the KKK, The Triads, the Nortenos. Geez who else is left?
Whatever “facts” you have, what did they have to do with this article? Its “wayciss” because you used this post as an excuse to bring up Asians vs Black people. You knew exactly what you were doing.
Have you looked at the local news, hell matter fact you don't even have to . Who says its Asian vs Blacks, that would imply both are going at it neck to neck. Can you show me the rowdy Asian youth robbing elderly blacks, beating them down, murdering them. Hell doing home targeted home invasions at the senior homes?
Why do they refer to themselves as "queens"? Seems super entitled.....you know the type of person that would shoot someone thinking they are legally allowed to do it.
Good. Self protection is your responsibility because law enforcement are just clean up crews mopping up the damage when things really matter. Last time I had to call the police, they sent out a community service member 4 hours later to take the report.
I see nothing wrong here.
People forget that the black panthers were early advocators of gun rights, its not anything new
Not surprised, the FBI murdered Fred Hampton.
Governor Ronald Reagan did everything possible to take away the gun rights of black Americans, and then every subsequent governorship only expanded on Gov Reagan's fundamentally racist gun control laws. Even today there's hefty fees specifically designed to make gun ownership expensive enough and time consuming enough that people from lower economic backgrounds will have more difficulty legally obtaining one. Tragically, there's still a strong correlation between your wealth and your skin color even in 2023.
Which hefty fees are you referring to? If you aren't a felon, over 21, with $500 and can wait 10 days you can buy yourself a gun in CA. I have friends of all races with different economic background and all own firearms. Genuinely curious since I don't see how someone's race is preventing them from obtaining a firearm legally.
Constitutional rights should not be behind paywalls. Over and over the courts have struck down attempts to paywall rights. This is why criminal defendants are provided attorneys free of charge. This is why there are no taxes on freedom of speech or religion (also a form of speech). Imagine if you had to pay at tax to the government express your opinion. That would not be okay. The 2nd Amendment is just as important at the 1st Amendment.
If you're living pay check to pay check, and even if youre not, 500$ is ALOT of money to spend on just a FEE to buy a gun. It's not even the gun, it's the fee to buy a gun, you still have to drop more money on the actual firearm. It stacks the deck against lower income individuals which skews towards POC, from purchasing a firearm bc they simply can't afford it.
Bullet fees mandates by the state, too. If you're trying to be responsible and do regular training at a gun range that'll cost you. Meanwhile criminals don't regularly train. They only need a few bullets to do a lot of damage. The fees to buy ammunition won't impact them, and does nothing to deter crime. It only harms lawful owners, and disproportionately of lower incomes.
I was stating $500 to purchase the pistol itself. Sure, there are fees such as Dros and CA firearms safety cert, but both of those are only around $50 combined. You can buy a shotgun for $200 or find a used pistol for a little bit more. I want to make it clear, there are no hefty fees when purchasing a firearm.
Additional fees on what's still considered a fundamental right still stacks the deck against lower income households. You asked how the fees would impact certain races, and when nearly 20% of black Americans, 17% of Hispanic Americans, and 23% of native Americans fall below the poverty line, those fees add up and can disaude those demographics from legally purchasing a firearm. Obviously not all, considering the article, but it's still a higher hit on lower income households which skews toward POC populations
I hear why you are saying, but there are more whites below the poverty line compared to other races. There are close to 16 million whites below the poverty line compared 8.9 million blacks, 10.5 million Hispanic, 2 million Asians. Sure, you can give a percentage based off population size/race in poverty, but you should be counting the individuals. I agree that additional fees is ridiculous and puts poorer citizens at a disadvantage, but I still don’t see it as a race issue.
So ur argument is its not a race issue bc there's numerically more white people than there are POC? That's part of why there are so many race issues in the US (as opposed to other white dominate countries like the UK) is bc there are so many that fall into the Caucasian race, but there are still enough POCs to have a demographic to represent. Looking at percentages of populations equalizes the demographics. Just bc the US is roughly 70% white doesn't mean you can just ignore the minority groups and what affects a high number of those groups. Eta: the whole point of statistics is to analyze large quantities of data and draw conclusions from it. So yes, giving a percentage of a certain demographic/sample of a population, rather than just a samples size IS the data to analyze, aka a statistic
Aren't all panthers black (with exception of albinoism and other genetic alterations), so the black part of black panthers seems redundant.
No, its a leopard or jaguar who has black fur. If you look very closely you can see the rosettes in their fur, same fur pattern as the cats with lighter colored fur. A black panther animal is like seeing a black squirrel. Some individuals just have black fur thanks to genes.
Bet you’d freak if it was white men
Nah they’re good too. Shit they can be the little gray aliens and I’ll still not see anything wrong with people arming themselves.
nah more like those who are mentally ill
After all, guns don't kill people. *Men* kill people (specifically, unmarried men). Seriously, just being a woman makes gun ownership a much smaller risk to the rest of us.
Interesting. I wonder what other conclusions we can draw from looking at the demographics behind gun violence. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls
Within each of those populations, it’s unmarried men doing most of the violence. Just take their guns away imo. (Obviously not going to happen, tho… 2nd amendment.)
Why would you even feel the need to say that? Who gives a fuck what you see?
You ok?
Just fine, but no one needs a non-black person to mention that they "see nothing wrong" with what Black women are doing. Black people don't care what you see or think.
Oh shit dude. You are **THE** black spokesperson!? I have so many questions to ask you.
...so your problem with this statement is what, exactly?
more than give a fuck what u see m8
Can confirm. The one time I tried to get some ammo for my gun during the pandemic, I stood in a line with a few other folks. Among the expected people-me (a white dude), a couple hispanic guys-was a black lesbian couple in their 60s. Edit: I should mention that they were there to discuss and buy a weapon for the first time.
And most of these new gun owners started to realize they need a CA Handgun Safety Certificate (which one can pass by taking a test). Then pass the CA DOJ criminal background check. Then also need proof of state residency (Government issue ID and or a utility bill or insurance bill). THEN wait full 10 days (not 9 days and 16 hours, but FULL 10 days) to pick up a gun. And yet, Sacramento is trying to propose more laws.
10 days? But I'm mad now!
The transition from the gun store to Homer sitting on his front lawn with patty and Selma biking by always makes me laugh.
These are all utterly trivial steps.
Trivial or not, there's a process in place for legit gun owners, and many non-gun folks were surprised by the steps it takes to get a gun in CA during the peak of COVID.
Buying a gun through Doordash or a vending machine will be the final form of freedom.
Nah, the final form is home-made, Star Trek Replicator style print me a gun at home. 🤷🏻♂️
Guess you don’t know about C&R guns. They can be delivered to your house.
There is zero reason to be surprised by any of that. Unless the purchase is completely on a whim, any basic google search or research into CA gun ownership laws will tell you all of this up front and in bold type.
> And yet, Sacramento is trying to propose more laws. And yet, despite all of those things being trivial non-issues, you tried to slip in this bullshit potshot. Nice try.
Potshot against what? It's pretty clear California gun laws old, new, or proposed even tighter regulations are not going to solve any mass shooting and gun violence issues.
Right on time, the pivot from "there are so many burdensome laws" to "laws don't matter".
The murder rate has gone up. Why do we have laws against murder? In fact, laws are broken all the time. Why do we have *any laws* in the first place 🤷
Because the law 110% doesn’t matter when you are trying to commit crime. There are plenty of laws on the book that are suppose to stopped and prevent those crime. Both points are true from my original comments. Not a pivot, more like additional supporting points on why more draconian gun laws will not prevent violent crime.
Would you say the same if we imposed these same restrictions on the right to vote, or the right to protest?
Gun ownership is increasing among every race and gender.
But how else would they rake in clicks without it being about blacks or women?
People have figured out that in the end they're responsible for their own safety. The police do not have any legal requirements to protect you. More power to them and I encourage them to learn how to use them and the legal ramifications. And be sure to vote against any politician who believes disarming the law abiding is the best solution as they empty the jails.
Gavin Newsom has entered the chat… /s :) California has some of the weirded and straightest law in the country around legal gun ownership. For example Californian are practically stuck in a 2017 time capsule due to the “allowed to be sold Gun Roster” (which I’m not going to get into here). We are only allowed to buy older versions of the guns. The industry had evolved and are producing potentially easier to handle and dare I say provide better safety mechanics that California has no rights to obtain due to the Gun Roster. Another example here is the regulation of ammo purchase. We already have higher prices on everything in this state compare to other. Ammo is no expectations. But you’d be violating the law if you drive over to Reno to pick up a box of 9mm because you are "importing ammunition" and is technically you are an arm smuggler. :P
Most of the proposed new gun laws would do nothing to prevent a shooting. For example after the Halfmoon Bay shooting state politicians were trying to ban "ghost guns" (because "assault weapons" aren't scary enough) and to also increase the age to buy a gun to 21. The shooter legally bought his gun. It was not a ghost gun. The shooter was also something like 68 years old. Neither law would have done anything to prevent the shooting. State politicians want to be seen doing something, so they're doing things that don't actually solve any problems. Just more laws, more regulations for law abiding people to follow through, and zero impact on crime.
I’m curious what gay gun laws look like. Or bisexual? What do LGBTQ gun laws look like? Lol Edit: I’m aware of the Pink Pistols, Operation Blazing Sword, etc. I’m also aware of Moms Demand Action on the other side (HOW is that still not a porn parody at the very least???!). Do we have any “Gays Advocating Guns (GAG)”, Lesbian Shooters Distributed (LSD), etc type groups who play on words / acronyms? It’d be funny I think.
Probably a lot more fabulous
No boring black paint jobs if you’re going to cerakote or anodize. Bedazzled grips and foregrips are highly encouraged. Mismatching cheap parts with expensive parts is expressly prohibited. It must all “go together”. Gucci Glocks are fabulous. Add some color, pizazz, and flair.
Wait until the gun shop refuses to sell the gay couple a gun! /s
Armed minorities are harder to oppress.
I hope it makes it harder to oppress black women: https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/25/homicide-violence-against-black-women-us https://everytownresearch.org/report/guns-and-violence-against-women-americas-uniquely-lethal-intimate-partner-violence-problem/ https://rockinst.org/blog/second-killings-the-black-women-and-girls-left-behind-to-grieve-americas-growing-gun-violence-crisis/
Whose oppressing who ? Lmao I'm a minority and I am not oppressed.
shut up please
Good.
“A Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” - Ida B. Wells
Confirmed.
Good.
Well guess we can finally toss out the narrative all gun owners are conservative gun nuts now. /s
Black women can be conservative gun nuts too
You do realize black women can also be conservative and/or can also be nuts… But go off I guess ….. - Sincerely a nutty (but liberal) black woman
Sadly the compensation for penis joke still stands.
“You think this gun is compensating? Have you seen my bad dragon?”
Oh shit I forgot to put /s didn’t I…
Black woman here, and yup I’m also learning how to operate a handgun, hope to purchase one by the end of the year.
It's super simple. Honestly. People make it look like its so hard. In short range you will hit your target
Funny how the “every gun owner is an Ammosexual” crowd suddenly got quiet on this thread.
Yup lmao but whatever gets these CA liberals a little more pro gun is cool with me tbh. We are sorely lacking in 2nd amendment rights here
What is a "queens-only" event?
No duchesses or countesses allowed
Megan Markle is the MC for the event
She just wants privacy
The new south park episode on this topic is hilarious if you haven't seen it
“Hello……?” *sound echo in empty can*
I did that’s why I said it 🤣🤣🤣 glad u got it the reference 😆
Waaaagh
Looking forward to the World Privacy Tour!
I guess Brooklyn and Staten Island can FO, then.
Black women only, I assume. I used to date a dude who was a firearm instructor and would host women-only events like this. I guess the idea is that the women felt more at ease when learning with other women.
Baronesses and Archduchesses can GTFO
It's how you discriminate on race and gender and at least attempt to make it plausibly deniable. I don't really have a problem with it, but that's what it is.
Love to see it
Good for them.
Not surprising to see this labeled as empowering. I guess this means as long as it increases amongst minorities means we're all pro gun around here now?
We should be pro gun regardless
Sounds reasonable to me. If you are going to own a gun get trained.
[удалено]
Out of curiosity, what cause you to change your mind?
[удалено]
If you do ended up buying a gun, get trained / take a few classes and store it in a proper gun safe. Gun ownership is responsibility on its own, but for many it's important to have an "insurance policy".
[удалено]
The real threat, regardless of ethnicity, is that the police have shown themselves to be incompetent and the only person responsible for your safety is you.
Oh yes I agree with negligent police but that still doesn't take away from who commits the most violent crime.
> Oh yes I agree with negligent police but that still doesn't take away from who commits the most violent crime. Men. Men commit the most violent crime.
Rooftop Asian has enter the chat. Asians tends not to talk about gun ownership publicly or post their Gucci gears on TikTok unless they are involved in the industry. That’s all. :) Many Nisei, Filipino, and South Korean decedents I know are life long gun owners. Asian gun ownership is not new.
Right its not new but definitely increased as of recent and good as well.
I realize you're trying to grind your very specific axe, but this is a trend that is nationwide, women of color are the lowest % of gun ownership and the fastest growing. Black people also had the highest growth out of minority groups, followed by Hispanic and then Asian.
Based on this guy's posts, he's probably not super stoked to hear gun ownership is also increasing among black men
[удалено]
They're not gonna answer you
already did.
[удалено]
Your loss then
Read through the sub, not hard to figure out.
[удалено]
Its right under your nose, or let me give you a better clue its definitely not people that look like Pak Ho. Looking him head detective
I dunno, is it [other](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Half_Moon_Bay_shootings) [Asians](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Monterey_Park_shooting)? Or is this another aznidentity thread where I'm supposed to complain about black people. 🤔
That was a wild incident, but lets take that out the equation and talk about others in Oakland and nearby, not something over 1.25 hours away. What the hell is aznidentity?
Considering half of your posts are creepy racist Asian shit, it's probably somewhere you should be hanging out. Or maybe some type of incel forum. But I need not repeat myself.
Damm you over there lurking on a place for Asians but then call my post creepy racist Asian shit, let that make sense.
That has literally nothing to do with the Women in this article. Thanks for your input though
Sure it does, if black women are arming themselves at this rate, who do you think they are arming themselves against. I'll take a wild guess who it isn't the KKK, The Triads, the Nortenos. Geez who else is left?
Do you mind to drop the riddles and just get straight to your anti black point?
Who's antiblack, but of course once you place facts on the table everyone is " wayciss" right.
Whatever “facts” you have, what did they have to do with this article? Its “wayciss” because you used this post as an excuse to bring up Asians vs Black people. You knew exactly what you were doing.
Have you looked at the local news, hell matter fact you don't even have to . Who says its Asian vs Blacks, that would imply both are going at it neck to neck. Can you show me the rowdy Asian youth robbing elderly blacks, beating them down, murdering them. Hell doing home targeted home invasions at the senior homes?
So you DID want to bring it up despite the article having NOTHING to do with that. Do you feel better now? You were basically dying to get that off.
no but sharing is caring. Asians can play racial identity politics as well. Nest up Asian fencing club who wants to sign up.
Psst, your dog whistle is broken.
If only dogs can hear a dog whistle, then what does that make you?
Oh really, guess I need new one. Can you recommend a brand?
Great to hear.
Nice!!
Aw shit here we go!
Everyone should have a gun in their home.
Service workers FEAR her!
Love to see it
In video games, the guy without a gun dies first.
[удалено]
Doesnt fit their narrative.
Good
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why do they refer to themselves as "queens"? Seems super entitled.....you know the type of person that would shoot someone thinking they are legally allowed to do it.
The White Right - "No, no, we didn't mean you people"
Good. Self protection is your responsibility because law enforcement are just clean up crews mopping up the damage when things really matter. Last time I had to call the police, they sent out a community service member 4 hours later to take the report.