The juries would not have mattered in those cases. In the rittenhouse case, blacks would not have cared about a white guy killing a bunch of other white guys. In the Zimmerman case, it may have made more of a difference since many blacks will certainly support their own no matter what they do. But given that Zimmerman was also a POC, they wouldn't be out to convicted him as much as if he were white.
You can always tell it's going to be a thoughtful, enlightened post on race relations when someone uses the terms "blacks".
Interesting that a plural term for black individuals offends you, but no reaction from the videos of Karmelo supporters threatening to put "crackers in the grave"? Seems you may be a little biased
I asked AI if it would be accurate to describe a jury with no blacks but which includes people of color as "all-White".
No, a jury that includes non-Black people of color is not considered an "all-white" jury. It is legally and factually classified as a racially diverse, mixed, or integrated jury, distinguishing it from panels composed exclusively of white individuals.
The OP considers Asians, Hispanics, and Middle Easterners to be white adjacent.
The juries would not have mattered in those cases. In the rittenhouse case, blacks would not have cared about a white guy killing a bunch of other white guys. In the Zimmerman case, it may have made more of a difference since many blacks will certainly support their own no matter what they do. But given that Zimmerman was also a POC, they wouldn't be out to convicted him as much as if he were white.
You can always tell it's going to be a thoughtful, enlightened post on race relations when someone uses the terms "blacks".
You can always tell it's going to be a thoughtful, enlightened post on race relations when someone uses the terms "blacks".
Interesting that a plural term for black individuals offends you, but no reaction from the videos of Karmelo supporters threatening to put "crackers in the grave"? Seems you may be a little biased
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
Interesting that a plural term for black individuals offends you, but no reaction from the videos of Karmelo supporters threatening to put "crackers in the grave"? Seems you may be a little biased
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
Interesting that a plural term for black individuals offends you, but no reaction from the videos of Karmelo supporters threatening to put "crackers in the grave"? Seems you may be a little biased
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
But you chose to speak out on a perfectly normal, grammatically correct term. And you don't speak out on blacks (sorry, African american?, is that what you prefer?) literally threatening to murder innocent white people at the trial of a black person who murdered an innocent white person. And the fact that anyone is OFFENDED by the use of the term blacks shows what a bunch of oversensarive softies many in our society are.
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
But you chose to speak out on a perfectly normal, grammatically correct term. And you don't speak out on blacks (sorry, African american?, is that what you prefer?)
But you chose to speak out on a perfectly normal, grammatically correct term. And you don't speak out on blacks (sorry, African american?, is that what you prefer?)
Elon Musk is African-American.
Indeed he is. So is Charlize Theron. Better not refer to them as "whites", that will make for some very offended people in this thread
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
But you chose to speak out on a perfectly normal, grammatically correct term. And you don't speak out on blacks (sorry, African american?, is that what you prefer?) literally threatening to murder innocent white people at the trial of a black person who murdered an innocent white person. And the fact that anyone is OFFENDED by the use of the term blacks shows what a bunch of oversensarive softies many in our society are.
I didn't say I was offended, for what it's worth. I said that the use of it, in the connotation you used it in, is a pretty clear marker of what you're dealing with. A classic right-wing circle-jerk participant, itching on bated breath to make all of the dumb, bad-faith assumptions and generalizations possible.
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
But you chose to speak out on a perfectly normal, grammatically correct term. And you don't speak out on blacks (sorry, African american?, is that what you prefer?) literally threatening to murder innocent white people at the trial of a black person who murdered an innocent white person. And the fact that anyone is OFFENDED by the use of the term blacks shows what a bunch of oversensarive softies many in our society are.
Hit enter too soon, sigh. I find interesting that you're very willing to extrapolate meaning from what isn't being said by me; does that then imply that because you didn't speak up to correct the person who stated that white citizens are being hunted, you agree?
I only ask, since, you know, it's incredibly reasonable and certainly the hallmark of a good-faith participant to make those extrapolations.
Interesting that a plural term for black individuals offends you, but no reaction from the videos of Karmelo supporters threatening to put "crackers in the grave"? Seems you may be a little biased
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
Or you can be offended by neither and stop being offended by everything. You'll be happier.
Believe it or not, you can be offended by two things at the same time.
Or you can be offended by neither and stop being offended by everything. You'll be happier.
I'm not offended by either, which is the funny part. I'm not the one posting "Hey morons, get mad at this!" takes from Matt Walsh and Chaya Raichik into this thread, pissing my pants in rage.
And as already explained, I wasn't offended by someone using the term "blacks", I was commenting that the types of low-end mouthbreathers who indiscriminately throw it around in the context it was used in here, well, you know you're really going to get some prime, well-thought out, nuanced opinion. For sure.
Or you can be offended by neither and stop being offended by everything. You'll be happier.
I'm not offended by either, which is the funny part. I'm not the one posting "Hey morons, get mad at this!" takes from Matt Walsh and Chaya Raichik into this thread, pissing my pants in rage.
And as already explained, I wasn't offended by someone using the term "blacks", I was commenting that the types of low-end mouthbreathers who indiscriminately throw it around in the context it was used in here, well, you know you're really going to get some prime, well-thought out, nuanced opinion. For sure.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.