Some people are just....

byke
Posts
3029
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA US

....really tired of certain types of problems in this day and age.

Poll

I am....

Choices
5
|
Dudley
Posts
525
Joined
9/10/2012
Location
Denver, CO US
6/12/2026 5:38am

If I ever had to migrate to another country or seek asylum, you can be certain that I will do everything in my power to show my host appreciation and respect. Not join a gang or behead people. It’s like the atv guys that decide to hill climb unmarked trails in the forest, they get us all kicked out eventually. 


 

8
R66
Posts
1332
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
6/12/2026 8:54am

In the US, polls show that more than 75% of citizens want ALL illegal emigrants deported. That includes republicans and democrats. Don’t shoot the messenger. Just reporting the facts. 

7
2
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/12/2026 10:47am

Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.

But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66 wants to claim.  

Assigning a crime to an entire group of people is a slippery slope.  Remember this?
 

 


image 3212.png?VersionId=bKSuU1Lk2qDd

4
R66
Posts
1332
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
6/12/2026 11:32am
APLMAN99 wrote:
Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66...

Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.

But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66 wants to claim.  

Assigning a crime to an entire group of people is a slippery slope.  Remember this?
 

 


image 3212.png?VersionId=bKSuU1Lk2qDd

Maybe you should watch the video posted above. Pay special attention to the very first thing the tv anchor says. Something about a refugee from Sudan, not sure though. Let me know what you hear. 

4

The Shop

SEEMEFIRST
Posts
13776
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX US
6/12/2026 11:34am
APLMAN99 wrote:
Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66...

Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.

But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66 wants to claim.  

Assigning a crime to an entire group of people is a slippery slope.  Remember this?
 

 


image 3212.png?VersionId=bKSuU1Lk2qDd

I was thinking of this one when he posted.

 

Beheading Attempt in Northern Ireland Sparks Violence and Protests

A brutal attempted beheading in Belfast, Northern Ireland, has triggered widespread unrest and violent riots across the city.

The Incident

On the evening of June 9, 2026, a 30-year-old Sudanese man, later identified as Hadi Alodid, was arrested after what police described as an “attempted beheading” on Kinnaird Avenue in north Belfast Yahoo+1. Video footage circulating online showed him on top of a local man, Stephen Ogilvie, 44, repeatedly slashing his head and neck with a kitchen knife before bystanders intervened Yahoo+1. The victim suffered serious injuries to his face, neck, back, and lost an eye; he remains hospitalized in critical condition Yahoo+1.

Police recovered a Stanley-style knife from the scene and have charged Alodid with attempted murder, possession of a weapon, and making threats to kill Yahoo+1. Authorities say there is no evidence the attack was terrorism-related India TV News.

2
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/12/2026 11:40am
APLMAN99 wrote:
Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66...

Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.

But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66 wants to claim.  

Assigning a crime to an entire group of people is a slippery slope.  Remember this?
 

 


image 3212.png?VersionId=bKSuU1Lk2qDd

R66 wrote:
Maybe you should watch the video posted above. Pay special attention to the very first thing the tv anchor says. Something about a refugee from Sudan...

Maybe you should watch the video posted above. Pay special attention to the very first thing the tv anchor says. Something about a refugee from Sudan, not sure though. Let me know what you hear. 

Please tell me that you understand that refugee doesn’t mean illegal immigrant…..

1
8
R66
Posts
1332
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
6/12/2026 11:46am

The fucker was from Sudan. Had he not been allowed in, legal or not, this would not have happened. 

4
5
soggy
Posts
8754
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
UT US
6/12/2026 11:50am
R66 wrote:

The fucker was from Sudan. Had he not been allowed in, legal or not, this would not have happened. 

Ok at least you’ve let your true beliefs show. 

2
7
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/12/2026 12:17pm
APLMAN99 wrote:
Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66...

Definitely a gruesome crime.  I hope he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.

But it sounds like he wasn't an illegal immigrant as R66 wants to claim.  

Assigning a crime to an entire group of people is a slippery slope.  Remember this?
 

 


image 3212.png?VersionId=bKSuU1Lk2qDd

SEEMEFIRST wrote:
I was thinking of this one when he posted. Beheading Attempt in Northern Ireland Sparks Violence and ProtestsA brutal attempted beheading in Belfast, Northern Ireland, has triggered...

I was thinking of this one when he posted.

 

Beheading Attempt in Northern Ireland Sparks Violence and Protests

A brutal attempted beheading in Belfast, Northern Ireland, has triggered widespread unrest and violent riots across the city.

The Incident

On the evening of June 9, 2026, a 30-year-old Sudanese man, later identified as Hadi Alodid, was arrested after what police described as an “attempted beheading” on Kinnaird Avenue in north Belfast Yahoo+1. Video footage circulating online showed him on top of a local man, Stephen Ogilvie, 44, repeatedly slashing his head and neck with a kitchen knife before bystanders intervened Yahoo+1. The victim suffered serious injuries to his face, neck, back, and lost an eye; he remains hospitalized in critical condition Yahoo+1.

Police recovered a Stanley-style knife from the scene and have charged Alodid with attempted murder, possession of a weapon, and making threats to kill Yahoo+1. Authorities say there is no evidence the attack was terrorism-related India TV News.

That is the event he posted about.  Horrible crime.  

3
byke
Posts
3029
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA US
6/12/2026 1:35pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2026 1:35pm

Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. All of our feelings about people from x country are meaningless, this is just a matter of statistics/odds/math. People are happy to recognize generalizations when they're positive, but there are negative ones too and they should not be ignored. And with countries like Japan, they might be introducing more crime by letting Americans in, so it's not just about "we are amazing and you are not", it's about the factual order of violent crime by nation around the globe. 

And the point is, many people are tired of these types of problems. The trends in violent crime may be heading the right direction, but it's not keeping pace with the public's decreasing tolerance for it. Legal or not, you don't see many oem UK'ers doing hard crash-outs slashing people's throats in the street, and it's extremely shocking for people's from less violent nations to see. Tolerance for that kind of stuff basically is at zero and the public doesn't always respond rationally, morally, or even legally, but they are expressing their distaste for it and legislators should to pay attention, or else an underlying movement will catch them off guard and it can be incredibly difficult for a government to regain trust once it's lost.

5
1
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/12/2026 2:14pm
byke wrote:
Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may...

Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. All of our feelings about people from x country are meaningless, this is just a matter of statistics/odds/math. People are happy to recognize generalizations when they're positive, but there are negative ones too and they should not be ignored. And with countries like Japan, they might be introducing more crime by letting Americans in, so it's not just about "we are amazing and you are not", it's about the factual order of violent crime by nation around the globe. 

And the point is, many people are tired of these types of problems. The trends in violent crime may be heading the right direction, but it's not keeping pace with the public's decreasing tolerance for it. Legal or not, you don't see many oem UK'ers doing hard crash-outs slashing people's throats in the street, and it's extremely shocking for people's from less violent nations to see. Tolerance for that kind of stuff basically is at zero and the public doesn't always respond rationally, morally, or even legally, but they are expressing their distaste for it and legislators should to pay attention, or else an underlying movement will catch them off guard and it can be incredibly difficult for a government to regain trust once it's lost.

I think you're mixing two different arguments together.

'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to commit violent crime after immigrating' is a statistical claim that requires evidence.  If this is really about math and odds, then the discussion should be about the crime rates of refugee and immigrant populations as a whole, not about one particularly horrific case.

Otherwise we're doing exactly what people always do after a shocking crime: taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.

1
4
lappedrider
Posts
1552
Joined
8/26/2006
Location
Tooele, UT US
6/12/2026 2:47pm
R66 wrote:

The fucker was from Sudan. Had he not been allowed in, legal or not, this would not have happened. 

And there it is.  

2
byke
Posts
3029
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA US
6/12/2026 2:59pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2026 3:00pm
byke wrote:
Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may...

Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. All of our feelings about people from x country are meaningless, this is just a matter of statistics/odds/math. People are happy to recognize generalizations when they're positive, but there are negative ones too and they should not be ignored. And with countries like Japan, they might be introducing more crime by letting Americans in, so it's not just about "we are amazing and you are not", it's about the factual order of violent crime by nation around the globe. 

And the point is, many people are tired of these types of problems. The trends in violent crime may be heading the right direction, but it's not keeping pace with the public's decreasing tolerance for it. Legal or not, you don't see many oem UK'ers doing hard crash-outs slashing people's throats in the street, and it's extremely shocking for people's from less violent nations to see. Tolerance for that kind of stuff basically is at zero and the public doesn't always respond rationally, morally, or even legally, but they are expressing their distaste for it and legislators should to pay attention, or else an underlying movement will catch them off guard and it can be incredibly difficult for a government to regain trust once it's lost.

APLMAN99 wrote:
I think you're mixing two different arguments together.'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to...

I think you're mixing two different arguments together.

'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to commit violent crime after immigrating' is a statistical claim that requires evidence.  If this is really about math and odds, then the discussion should be about the crime rates of refugee and immigrant populations as a whole, not about one particularly horrific case.

Otherwise we're doing exactly what people always do after a shocking crime: taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.

See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When I see people do that, most often what they're really saying is, "I'm offended", which is fine, because that's their right and being offended has never been much of a benchmark for what's true. There are millions of truths that people find offensive.  

Anyway, the vast majority in the phycological world agrees that past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior. It doesn't matter what the specific "thing" is, could be violence, could be women thought of as second class citizens, could be a dislike for homosexuality, on and on. What if I said that Americans consume more gasoline per person than the people from any other country and are more likely to use more gas when they move to a new country? These things are more palatable for left leaning people to hear because they're topics that they're already biased towards. 

But, there's a flipside of statistical likelihood that makes people unhappy and that's when the "nuh uhhh, prove it!" comes out. It's too obvious. There's nothing to prove. 

1
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/12/2026 3:54pm
byke wrote:
Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may...

Dems in particular have a problem admitting that when the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. All of our feelings about people from x country are meaningless, this is just a matter of statistics/odds/math. People are happy to recognize generalizations when they're positive, but there are negative ones too and they should not be ignored. And with countries like Japan, they might be introducing more crime by letting Americans in, so it's not just about "we are amazing and you are not", it's about the factual order of violent crime by nation around the globe. 

And the point is, many people are tired of these types of problems. The trends in violent crime may be heading the right direction, but it's not keeping pace with the public's decreasing tolerance for it. Legal or not, you don't see many oem UK'ers doing hard crash-outs slashing people's throats in the street, and it's extremely shocking for people's from less violent nations to see. Tolerance for that kind of stuff basically is at zero and the public doesn't always respond rationally, morally, or even legally, but they are expressing their distaste for it and legislators should to pay attention, or else an underlying movement will catch them off guard and it can be incredibly difficult for a government to regain trust once it's lost.

APLMAN99 wrote:
I think you're mixing two different arguments together.'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to...

I think you're mixing two different arguments together.

'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to commit violent crime after immigrating' is a statistical claim that requires evidence.  If this is really about math and odds, then the discussion should be about the crime rates of refugee and immigrant populations as a whole, not about one particularly horrific case.

Otherwise we're doing exactly what people always do after a shocking crime: taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.

byke wrote:
See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When...

See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When I see people do that, most often what they're really saying is, "I'm offended", which is fine, because that's their right and being offended has never been much of a benchmark for what's true. There are millions of truths that people find offensive.  

Anyway, the vast majority in the phycological world agrees that past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior. It doesn't matter what the specific "thing" is, could be violence, could be women thought of as second class citizens, could be a dislike for homosexuality, on and on. What if I said that Americans consume more gasoline per person than the people from any other country and are more likely to use more gas when they move to a new country? These things are more palatable for left leaning people to hear because they're topics that they're already biased towards. 

But, there's a flipside of statistical likelihood that makes people unhappy and that's when the "nuh uhhh, prove it!" comes out. It's too obvious. There's nothing to prove. 

Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.

You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims require evidence.

Your reply wasn’t statistics, odds, or math. It was an accusation of dishonesty and a claim that there’s ‘nothing to prove’.

If my reasoning is wrong, show me where. Use the data. Accusing someone of bad faith is easier than defending an argument, but it isn’t the same thing.

4
byke
Posts
3029
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA US
6/12/2026 4:10pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2026 4:11pm
APLMAN99 wrote:
I think you're mixing two different arguments together.'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to...

I think you're mixing two different arguments together.

'A refugee from Sudan committed a horrible crime' is a fact.  'People from violent countries are more likely to commit violent crime after immigrating' is a statistical claim that requires evidence.  If this is really about math and odds, then the discussion should be about the crime rates of refugee and immigrant populations as a whole, not about one particularly horrific case.

Otherwise we're doing exactly what people always do after a shocking crime: taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.

byke wrote:
See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When...

See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When I see people do that, most often what they're really saying is, "I'm offended", which is fine, because that's their right and being offended has never been much of a benchmark for what's true. There are millions of truths that people find offensive.  

Anyway, the vast majority in the phycological world agrees that past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior. It doesn't matter what the specific "thing" is, could be violence, could be women thought of as second class citizens, could be a dislike for homosexuality, on and on. What if I said that Americans consume more gasoline per person than the people from any other country and are more likely to use more gas when they move to a new country? These things are more palatable for left leaning people to hear because they're topics that they're already biased towards. 

But, there's a flipside of statistical likelihood that makes people unhappy and that's when the "nuh uhhh, prove it!" comes out. It's too obvious. There's nothing to prove. 

APLMAN99 wrote:
Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims...

Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.

You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims require evidence.

Your reply wasn’t statistics, odds, or math. It was an accusation of dishonesty and a claim that there’s ‘nothing to prove’.

If my reasoning is wrong, show me where. Use the data. Accusing someone of bad faith is easier than defending an argument, but it isn’t the same thing.

I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.". That it not even close to what I said. I said that when you bring in people from countries with more violence, you may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. 

I'm not saying that if you have a rate 10 murders per 100k and you bring in millions of people that come from a place with a murder rate of 100 murders per 100k, that it's going to math out to 100k murders per 100k. That's silly. There's no logical way to assume millions of people had anything to do with it unless those millions make up the criminal percentage from billions, but I'm unaware of any country on earth with billions of immigrants. 

1
racin mason
Posts
881
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Long Beach, WA US
6/12/2026 5:32pm

Byke, Applman is allways right, just ask him, he will tell you in great detail.

2
2
racin mason
Posts
881
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Long Beach, WA US
6/12/2026 5:34pm

Appl, thanks for pointing out that Im wrong

1
1
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/12/2026 5:36pm
byke wrote:
See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When...

See now that strikes me as intentional dishonesty. I didn't say, "they all....blah blah blah", because that's a manufactured false equivalence that was never presented. When I see people do that, most often what they're really saying is, "I'm offended", which is fine, because that's their right and being offended has never been much of a benchmark for what's true. There are millions of truths that people find offensive.  

Anyway, the vast majority in the phycological world agrees that past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior. It doesn't matter what the specific "thing" is, could be violence, could be women thought of as second class citizens, could be a dislike for homosexuality, on and on. What if I said that Americans consume more gasoline per person than the people from any other country and are more likely to use more gas when they move to a new country? These things are more palatable for left leaning people to hear because they're topics that they're already biased towards. 

But, there's a flipside of statistical likelihood that makes people unhappy and that's when the "nuh uhhh, prove it!" comes out. It's too obvious. There's nothing to prove. 

APLMAN99 wrote:
Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims...

Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.

You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims require evidence.

Your reply wasn’t statistics, odds, or math. It was an accusation of dishonesty and a claim that there’s ‘nothing to prove’.

If my reasoning is wrong, show me where. Use the data. Accusing someone of bad faith is easier than defending an argument, but it isn’t the same thing.

byke wrote:
I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking...

I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.". That it not even close to what I said. I said that when you bring in people from countries with more violence, you may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. 

I'm not saying that if you have a rate 10 murders per 100k and you bring in millions of people that come from a place with a murder rate of 100 murders per 100k, that it's going to math out to 100k murders per 100k. That's silly. There's no logical way to assume millions of people had anything to do with it unless those millions make up the criminal percentage from billions, but I'm unaware of any country on earth with billions of immigrants. 

I never claimed you said every immigrant from a violent country is violent. What I said was that you’re using characteristics of a country or society as evidence about the people coming from it.

For example:
“When the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence.”
Or:
“Past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior.”

The issue is that the ‘past behavior’ you’re referring to isn’t the behavior of the individual immigrant. It’s the behavior of the society they came from.  That’s why I asked for evidence.  

You’re making an inference from “this country has a high level of violence” to “people arriving from that country are more likely to be violent.”

That’s a statistical claim. It may be true, it may be false, or it may be true only in certain circumstances. But it isn’t self-evident, and asking for evidence isn’t dishonest.

3
byke
Posts
3029
Joined
8/12/2015
Location
Auburn, CA US
6/12/2026 5:45pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2026 5:49pm
APLMAN99 wrote:
Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims...

Calling my argument ‘intentional dishonesty’ is a convenient way to avoid answering it.

You said this was about statistics, odds, and math. I responded that statistical claims require evidence.

Your reply wasn’t statistics, odds, or math. It was an accusation of dishonesty and a claim that there’s ‘nothing to prove’.

If my reasoning is wrong, show me where. Use the data. Accusing someone of bad faith is easier than defending an argument, but it isn’t the same thing.

byke wrote:
I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking...

I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.". That it not even close to what I said. I said that when you bring in people from countries with more violence, you may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. 

I'm not saying that if you have a rate 10 murders per 100k and you bring in millions of people that come from a place with a murder rate of 100 murders per 100k, that it's going to math out to 100k murders per 100k. That's silly. There's no logical way to assume millions of people had anything to do with it unless those millions make up the criminal percentage from billions, but I'm unaware of any country on earth with billions of immigrants. 

APLMAN99 wrote:
I never claimed you said every immigrant from a violent country is violent. What I said was that you’re using characteristics of a country or society...

I never claimed you said every immigrant from a violent country is violent. What I said was that you’re using characteristics of a country or society as evidence about the people coming from it.

For example:
“When the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence.”
Or:
“Past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior.”

The issue is that the ‘past behavior’ you’re referring to isn’t the behavior of the individual immigrant. It’s the behavior of the society they came from.  That’s why I asked for evidence.  

You’re making an inference from “this country has a high level of violence” to “people arriving from that country are more likely to be violent.”

That’s a statistical claim. It may be true, it may be false, or it may be true only in certain circumstances. But it isn’t self-evident, and asking for evidence isn’t dishonest.

I didn't say that asking for evidence was dishonest, but anyway, let's slice it up a bit. Do you believe that people from other countries where women and gays are second class citizens, places where it's socially acceptable to strike your wife, stop holding those beliefs and stop striking their wives when they move to a new country where those beliefs are far less prominent? 

If you moved to Wyoming, would you start voting Republican? 

2
1
6/12/2026 9:57pm Edited Date/Time 6/12/2026 9:58pm
R66 wrote:

The fucker was from Sudan. Had he not been allowed in, legal or not, this would not have happened. 

soggy wrote:

Ok at least you’ve let your true beliefs show. 

Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you shit, you cut his head off.

Doesn't surprise me that this dude tried to cut someone's head off in another country.

Africa is a violent continent.

Ever heard of the African necklace? They pull a old car tire over a dudes head and arms trapping him. Then they lite it up with gasoline.

1
soggy
Posts
8754
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
UT US
6/13/2026 6:46am
R66 wrote:

The fucker was from Sudan. Had he not been allowed in, legal or not, this would not have happened. 

soggy wrote:

Ok at least you’ve let your true beliefs show. 

Boomslang wrote:
Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you...

Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you shit, you cut his head off.

Doesn't surprise me that this dude tried to cut someone's head off in another country.

Africa is a violent continent.

Ever heard of the African necklace? They pull a old car tire over a dudes head and arms trapping him. Then they lite it up with gasoline.

Full blown racism, nice. Please stay in SA. 

9
ShellyMX
Posts
805
Joined
3/22/2026
Location
Smyrna, GA US
6/13/2026 6:56am
soggy wrote:

Full blown racism, nice. Please stay in SA. 

Do you live where he does, soggy bottoms? No? How about you just STFU then. Thanks in advance.

5
3
SEEMEFIRST
Posts
13776
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX US
6/13/2026 7:01am
soggy wrote:

Ok at least you’ve let your true beliefs show. 

Boomslang wrote:
Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you...

Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you shit, you cut his head off.

Doesn't surprise me that this dude tried to cut someone's head off in another country.

Africa is a violent continent.

Ever heard of the African necklace? They pull a old car tire over a dudes head and arms trapping him. Then they lite it up with gasoline.

soggy wrote:

Full blown racism, nice. Please stay in SA. 

You're a dick hole.

4
2
6/13/2026 7:07am

I will not get involved.

I will not get involved. 
I will not get………….

1
ShellyMX
Posts
805
Joined
3/22/2026
Location
Smyrna, GA US
6/13/2026 7:08am Edited Date/Time 6/13/2026 7:10am
SEEMEFIRST wrote:

You're a dick hole.

Always has been. Fucking negative Nancy and a colossal asshole.

1
3
R66
Posts
1332
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA US
6/13/2026 7:09am

Funny how the democrats always side with the person who did the crime. Maryland Dad, the guy in TX that just stabbed the guy at the track meet, Etc., 

1
2
ShellyMX
Posts
805
Joined
3/22/2026
Location
Smyrna, GA US
6/13/2026 7:09am
MoogenKen wrote:

I will not get involved.

I will not get involved. 
I will not get………….

Oh, ya gotta! 😂

6/13/2026 7:38am
soggy wrote:

Ok at least you’ve let your true beliefs show. 

Boomslang wrote:
Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you...

Sudan is a violent country. Kids grow up witnessing widespread atrocities and ethnicly driven violence. Cutting a head off is a common. Your neighbor gives you shit, you cut his head off.

Doesn't surprise me that this dude tried to cut someone's head off in another country.

Africa is a violent continent.

Ever heard of the African necklace? They pull a old car tire over a dudes head and arms trapping him. Then they lite it up with gasoline.

soggy wrote:

Full blown racism, nice. Please stay in SA. 

What's your problem Soggy?  I'm far from racist.

2
1
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/13/2026 8:15am
byke wrote:
I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking...

I'm saying that the false equivalent that you created, reads as intentional dishonesty. I believe you did that when you equated what I said with, "taking an extreme example and assuming it tells us something about millions of people who had nothing to do with it.". That it not even close to what I said. I said that when you bring in people from countries with more violence, you may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence. 

I'm not saying that if you have a rate 10 murders per 100k and you bring in millions of people that come from a place with a murder rate of 100 murders per 100k, that it's going to math out to 100k murders per 100k. That's silly. There's no logical way to assume millions of people had anything to do with it unless those millions make up the criminal percentage from billions, but I'm unaware of any country on earth with billions of immigrants. 

APLMAN99 wrote:
I never claimed you said every immigrant from a violent country is violent. What I said was that you’re using characteristics of a country or society...

I never claimed you said every immigrant from a violent country is violent. What I said was that you’re using characteristics of a country or society as evidence about the people coming from it.

For example:
“When the society of a nation is more violent than yours, bringing those people to your country may be introducing people that are conditioned to solving their problems with violence.”
Or:
“Past behavior is an excellent indicator of future behavior.”

The issue is that the ‘past behavior’ you’re referring to isn’t the behavior of the individual immigrant. It’s the behavior of the society they came from.  That’s why I asked for evidence.  

You’re making an inference from “this country has a high level of violence” to “people arriving from that country are more likely to be violent.”

That’s a statistical claim. It may be true, it may be false, or it may be true only in certain circumstances. But it isn’t self-evident, and asking for evidence isn’t dishonest.

byke wrote:
I didn't say that asking for evidence was dishonest, but anyway, let's slice it up a bit. Do you believe that people from other countries where...

I didn't say that asking for evidence was dishonest, but anyway, let's slice it up a bit. Do you believe that people from other countries where women and gays are second class citizens, places where it's socially acceptable to strike your wife, stop holding those beliefs and stop striking their wives when they move to a new country where those beliefs are far less prominent? 

If you moved to Wyoming, would you start voting Republican? 

No, I wouldn’t suddenly start voting Republican if I moved to Wyoming.  I’d probably still vote for at least 60-75% Republican candidates like I currently have and continue to do.  

But that actually supports my point. People don’t instantly abandon all of their beliefs when they move, but neither do they perfectly represent the society they came from.  In fact, one of the main reasons for refugees fleeing their home country is because they don’t want to live in the society that has norms they don’t/can’t agree with.  

A woman fleeing a culture where wives are beaten may not share those beliefs. A gay person fleeing persecution almost certainly doesn’t.

That’s why I keep asking for evidence. Once we move from “some people carry beliefs with them” to claims about millions of immigrants, we’re talking about a statistical question, not a self-evident truth.
 

5
APLMAN99
Posts
12478
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
6/13/2026 8:23am
R66 wrote:
Funny how the democrats always side with the person who did the crime. Maryland Dad, the guy in TX that just stabbed the guy at the...

Funny how the democrats always side with the person who did the crime. Maryland Dad, the guy in TX that just stabbed the guy at the track meet, Etc., 

Who is siding with the person who committed this crime?  I haven’t seen a single person supporting this heinous act of violence. 

2
3

Post a reply to: Some people are just....

The Latest