donjazet:


But today, acts like these are justified by millions of Muslims around the world because it is protected by sharia law, which is the prerogative moral guide of most Moslems.
Many Moslems still do this because Mohammed did this.

The painful part about this is the fact that if you criticize this, you risk losing your neck. Shameful isn't it?

Ibime:


Your argument is devoid of facts, stats and as is the case with most of these arguments, laden with emotion rather than rationale.
Premise 1: You say the problem is not guns but racism, using Canada as an example.
- In 2019, 25% of Police killings in US were black vs 12.5% of the population (ie a Police killing is 2x more likely to be a black man than the aevrage population spread)
- In Canada, 9.3% of Police killings were black vs 3.4% of the population (ie a Canadian Police killing is 3x more likely to be a black man than the average population spread)

Are Canada Police more racist than US Police?
Premise 2 - You say the problem is not second amendment, using Canada as an example

2019 - deaths from Police in USA - 1,004 from 363 million guns in private circulation (prevalence rate of 1 death per 363,000 guns in circulation)
2018 - deaths from Police in Canada - 57 from 13 million guns in private circulation (prevalence rate of 1 police killing per 228,000 guns in circulation)

Vast majority of deaths in both countries are from weapon incidents
Conclusion - Canada Police kill more people on average per gunholders, and more black people as a percentage of population spread
Sidenote - Canadian gun ownership is low (35%) due to stricter laws than US that require two week background check and limit the no of rounds per gun unlike USA. Also guns must be kept at home in Canada unless you are going to the shooting range, and you cannot make a stop on your way to the range.
Premise 3 - lets test the hypothesis that guns is not the problem by comparing Canada against UK

Canada - 57 Police killings per year from population of 38 million people
UK - Zero to three Police killings per year from population of 67 million people

Key difference - UK Police do not carry guns unlike Canadian Police
The above establishes 3 things that disprove your theory, using your Angel country Canada as a base for comparison:

1. Canada Police disproportionally kill more black people than US Police per population spread
2. US killings are not disproportionate to Canada per gun ownership, infact lower
3. Clearly, presence of Guns are the reason for the wide disparity between Police Killings in Canada vs Police killings in Great Britain.
There are racists in the Police force, same as in every sector of Society. There are racists in UK and Europe Police also (but no killings thanks to lack of guns).

However, what I want to challenge is your narrative that the Police is a bastion for murderers who want to kill black people. What will make a racist who wants to kill black people think the Police force is the place to carry out such agenda? Lets examine using Human Psychology

1 - The minute you kill a black man unjustly, your Police career is over (no more opportunity to kill blacks). Obviously this is not appealing to someone whose intention is the murder of black people.

2 - Vast majority of black deaths are in Urban areas where many of your superiors will be black (whether Sergeant, Luitenant, DPO or Chief of Police). Obviously black people are well entrenched in power in the Police forces where most killings take place, so how is that an establishment where a would-be racist murderer would feel comfortable killing blacks with impunity without running into a black superior who will put brakes on his career as a racist killer.
3 - Why would you choose a profession (Police) to kill blacks where as soon as you do so, your cover will be exposed in all National media, you lose the ability to kill more, you lose your source of income, move away from your home, and have to watch your back for the rest of your life.

Do any of the above fit what would drive a would-be racist murderer to choose the Police force to carry out his agenda of killing blacks? Human Psychology does not support such rationale.
Point, blank, period - from all the statistics I have seen, US Police are even trying to keep casualties low in such a hyperweaponised society. I will not join in anarchy that does not stem from facts and rationale. I bet if you give UK Police guns, and give UK population guns, UK Police will have higher error percentage and be more trigger happy than their US counterparts, because they don't have experience of such dicey situations.

iamoyindamola:

Do you know how disgusted I am when I see your dp?
As in a full grown man getting fvcked in the azz, if I should ask how many pampers do you wear per day.
What should we call a man with bow tie and a fvcking lipstick
Do you think it's the right way for a man to rim his fellow man

Ibime:


Chelsea should go and get Cavani.

All 3 strikers are missing something

Segedinho:

Lols.
Until then na...

But this one na just testing.

Swear say u no like ziyech accurate passes.

seankafor:
you re a fool.. he didnt attack ur personality..now instead of you to attack his points..you re attacking his personality..

I have gay friends too doing well for themselves..

You re a fool once more..go choke on your uncle's dìck

nateevs:


There's no denying the role that religious fanatics play a huge role in the discourse; but we add to the problem when we don't separate facts from widely-held false beliefs. There are 10s of millions of southern Nigerian Muslims who don't take child wives. There are millions of southern Nigerian Muslims who don't condone the idea either.

In the UK here, there are tons of non-religious men from a certain demographic who constantly engage in sexual relations with young boys and girls. The only difference is they cannot legally marry them. I am willing to bet that if there is legal cover for these people, they too will try to marry young boys and girls.

Some people will try to do this, regardless of region or religion. It's a human thing, not a religious thing.

iamoyindamola:

Your father, mother and your gay friends are fools
He didn't attack my personality yet he used your religion indirectly calling me a pedophile
Don't go and concentrate on your waec useless boy at just 25

seankafor:
you re a fool.. he didnt attack ur personality..now instead of you to attack his points..you re attacking his personality..

I have gay friends too doing well for themselves..

You re a fool once more..go choke on your uncle's dìck

Segedinho:

Cavani is too old na


Haba.....

iamoyindamola:

Your father, mother and your gay friends are fools
He didn't attack my personality yet he used [b]your religion indirectly calling me a pedophile[/b]
Don't go and concentrate on your waec useless boy at just 25

donjazet:


I think you misunderstand me. I am perfectly aware that there are pedophiles who carry out their repulsive acts independent of religious beliefs.

The problem however is that hardly will they justify their actions as moral and right.
In ancient times, man had shorter live spans and almost every civilization accepted child marriages.

However, today we are very much evolved in our thinking and thought process. We know that it is terrible for a man to have carnal knowledge of children whose organs aren't even fully developed. Look at that picture i posted, you can see the girl hasn't even developed breasts yet.
We know the range of psychological issues and trauma that befall such infant brides.
We just know how terrible such practices are but we have a religion with billions of followers all over the word that still partake in this carnage while justifying it as normal.

Yes, humanity has its darkest side, some people do a lot of bad things irrespective of religion but those people hide and will not defend their actions because they know it is wrong, but isn't it crazy that we live in a society where you could be legally killed if you say Mohammed is a pedophile. When that was indeed true.

donjazet:

3. Better investigations into misconducts and malpractices of cops who break the law. Many cops are truly roaming freely after killing people, that is very bad.

nateevs:



There was a time in history when Christian religious fanatics in ancient England will chop your head off for blasphemy against Jesus. It's no different to what is happening now with Islamic fundamentalists. Christianity has gone through centuries of evolution. And now Christians seem more tolerant of what is considered religious slander. Islam is learning and evolving , albeit in a new world, it's evolving nonetheless.

So it's been the way of man. People been doing things under the guise of religion for eons.


The fact is that there are way more liberal Muslims now than there were decades ago, as evidenced by the millions of southern Nigerian Muslims who don't condone the acts of paedophilia. In another 50 years, there will be millions of more Muslims, born into a less conservative society, who chose not to condone it.

donjazet:


How do you know what you said about the bolded is true, seeing as there are no prominent Moslems who come out boldly to criticize the practice.

You seem to be clearly oblivious to the facts that criticizing any aspect of Islam can legally lead to your death?
Didn't you see the thread on front page that I shared here in one of my recent posts.

Muslim lawyers have endorsed and sanctioned the death sentence of a man who "blasphemed" against Mohammed?
How will the religion continue to evolve if it doesn't even entertain any form of dissent or criticism? How does it evolve when it's members are threatened upon the pain of apostasy and death if they dare question or leave the religion?

Just take a look at this thread for example, look at how damola has started throwing abuses at me simply because I asked him to scrutinize his belief.
We know that Amoto94 and fbs are Muslims and some other neutral observers here are Muslims, have you heard any of them come out and state boldly "yes, I'm a Muslim but i don't condone child marriage".

Condemning child marriage means condemning Mohammed and that is what no Moslem will dare do, which is just absolutely pitiful.

airmark:
How can you kill someone for abusing someone that died several thousands of years ago?

I hope that insanity doesn't extend to Yoruba land.

airmark:
How can you kill someone for abusing someone that died several thousands of years ago?

I hope that insanity doesn't extend to Yoruba land.

izzou:


I have lived both in the North and in the West, and I can say that Islam is clearly not the problem....Unless the West is practising another form of Islam I don't know

In the North, their women don't go to mosques to pray(I don't know why), unlike here that everyone can.
I can take a beer with my Muslim friends in public here, and no Hisbah would come for us. For heaven's sake, the Hisbah police do not exist in the West. I could go on and on, but that's not the issue

Anyone trying to hang this on Islam is just trying to stir up trouble. These issues don't come up in the West.

Ibime:


Same as Silva. One or two years will do for now till we get a younger one

Ibime:


I agree with your points but I don't think better investigations will yield different result from all the officers or killings that have gone Scott free. This is because the US law not only gives the right to bear arms but also protects the right to use arms for self defence, or the right for law enforcement to use arms if they believe themselves or the public are in danger. In addition, the bar for proving 1st degree murder is exceptionally high and hinges on premeditation. You often cannot prove premeditation in the fast paced environment triggered by a gun. At best, you then drop to manslaughter which can also be evaded by self defence laws or reasonable fear of coming to harm.

Jacob Scott shooter for example will get a light rap on the wrist for maybe use of excess force cos he can evidence many steps of escalation from physical fight to taser use.

The one that will piss black people off and add to sense of injustice is this 17 year old boy that killed two protestors. That boy will walk scott-free even though we all know he took gun to that protest hoping someone will give him a reason to use it. Why?

1. He went to a protest as a counter-protestor (the law allows him to protest)

2. He bore arms to the protest (the law allows him to bare arms)

3. He shot two protestors (the law allows him to use arms in self defence. The video which shows the protestors running him down and kicking him on the ground will easily qualify as self-defence. One of the guys he shot also had a gun drawn on him)

The verdict will come out and people will lose their minds. They will be mad at the Jury for implementing the law, when they should be mad at the stüpid 2nd amendment law that provides cover for anyone with the intention of murdering someone to go out, provoke them verbally, then shoot them when the matter escalate physically.

Same way they were mad at the George Zimmerman verdict. This guys case is no different to Zimmerman. Zimmerman was allowed by law to carry a gun, and was allowed by law to use it on Trayvon when Trayvon started kpokposing his face. Zimmermans only crime in the eyes of the law was harassing Trayvon who was just minding his own business. Harassment or cursing someone doesn't carry any sentence.

It saddens me when black people support second amendment cos they will always be on the losing side of 2nd amendment. You can't outgun who produces the guns and has laws to enshrine usage of those guns. The argument they make that "Guns don't kill people, People kill people" is actually an argument from the belly of racism, the National Rifle Association. Well, I wash my hands of any black American who thinks right to bear arms is not a problem for them. There is no racist male in America who does not own multiple high powered weapons, and the reason for that ownership is either fear of blacks and latins, or a pipe dream of subjugation of blacks and latins. Show me a redneck without a gun and I'll show you a Nigerian politican who hasn't stolen money before.

2nd Amendment repeal should be first and foremost on any BLM agenda for me to even take them serious. Until then, I wash my hands cos you can't eat your cake and have it. Obama knew this is the problem and did not bother addressing black killings often by Police cos he knew it will always happen and he will be back every two weeks to talk about the same thing. The moment he starts to address it frequently, they will hang it on his neck and hold him responsible for the fact the killings haven't stopped and he will lose political capital. He kept fairly silent on the matter and just attacked 2nd amendment repeal because he knows that is where his problem lies.

iamoyindamola:

But donj from nowhere thinks raumdeuter and ibime are black racists for having different opinion to what they see and experience whereas he depend on news platform and I am a pedophile because my religion promotes it another case of what he reads not experience.
Key words
He read about it not see or experience it

eph12:

Whilst I don't agree with donj, I understand some of his points. He feels that the other side of muslims don't do enough to speak against such practices in the north. These things are done in the name of Islam and no recognized Islamic body from the west has come out to challenge it.

eph12:

Whilst I don't agree with donj, I understand some of his points. He feels that the other side of muslims don't do enough to speak against such practices in the north. These things are done in the name of Islam and no recognized Islamic body from the west has come out to challenge it.

iamoyindamola:

Now you are talking I agree with this point
Do you the northern think he's a better Muslim compare to the west.
This is where fanatics comes to play, nihilistjnr said one something one time that Saudi where Islam originate from don't even carry it for head, izzou also said something like that this morning.
That should tell it's the people not the religion, more over Sharia or whatever is for the poor
Saudi practice Sharia too

ennyjay72:
and if anyone tries to criticize it,they will get their head chopped off

iamoyindamola:

Now you are talking I agree with this point
Do you the northern think he's a better Muslim compare to the west.
This is where fanatics comes to play, nihilistjnr said one something one time that Saudi where Islam originate from don't even carry it for head, izzou also said something like that this morning.
That should tell it's the people not the religion, more over Sharia or whatever is for the poor
Saudi practice Sharia too

eph12:

Whilst I don't agree with donj, I understand some of his points. He feels that the other side of muslims don't do enough to speak against such practices in the north. These things are done in the name of Islam and no recognized Islamic body from the west has come out to challenge it.

iamoyindamola:

Now you are talking I agree with this point
Do you the northern think he's a better Muslim compare to the west.
This is where fanatics comes to play, nihilistjnr said one something one time that Saudi where Islam originate from don't even carry it for head, izzou also said something like that this morning.
That should tell it's the people not the religion, more over Sharia or whatever is for the poor
Saudi practice Sharia too

eph12:

What is the west doing to change this narrative except cowering in silence?