America - The Official Thread

[ryzno]

On a different forum someone mentioned that the KKK were handing out flyers near the site of the hanging.

I read that too. But I'm tired of defending my words and my potential sanity here. I did make a edit on my last post though.

 

[Roo]

The same sense as to why a bunch of officers shot & killed for something that didn't even happen in their state?

Seriously, do you need a legitimate answer to that question? They didn't want him dead because he made bomb threats.

Let's try this again.

What I don't understand is why the police would take the time to negotiate with someone attempting to kill fellow officers? Why didn't they just shoot him straight away, if other officers elsewhere are willing to shoot someone apparantly cooperating with them?

I wasn't aware when I originally posted that the incidents occured in separate states, so is it just a matter of differences in protocol? Or is it just because of the bomb threats to others in Dallas ment they wanted to minimise further loss of life by keeping him talking?

It just seems strange that a man getting his wallet is cause to instantly shoot, but actually murdering people is cause to hesitate and talk it out. I would have thought it would have been the other way round.

 

[Exorcet]

It just seems strange that a man getting his wallet is cause to instantly shoot, but actually murdering people is cause to hesitate and talk it out. I would have thought it would have been the other way round.

The cases where people get shot for holding a wallet are instances where the officers involved did their jobs poorly.

You can't always treat the police (or any group) as a single entity. It is made up of many individual people that can act in any number of ways, even ways that the police force as a whole condemns.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Dallas police have released a statement after interviewing the suspect, who claims that he "wanted to kill white people" and deliberately targeted police officers, but claims to have been acting alone and is not affiliated with any other group:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...ld-police-he-wanted-kill-white-people/7582616

 

[Danoff]

Sorry, but knowing how the US has been brought up, concern over racism will never go away, especially being black.

For you to tell us to stop worrying about racism is telling people to turn a blind eye when someone of color is shot. Really, from what I've been reading from your posts, you reek of the "white people too!" narrative...

Well , understand that everyone knows that white people get killed by police all of the time in the US, and that is because white people are the majority. Blacks are a minority, but there is a higher chance of blacks being imprisoned and killed by authority.

You seem to understand that police should not consider their lives over others, but where I think you are lacking is the ability to consider race in police/pedestrian interaction, and how it ties into how someone is likely to be treated.

I'm sure you're knowledgeable when it comes to many things, but you should take an African American history course to truly understand why the color of our or my skin is brought up so frequently.

I understand American history. For a little while, the Japanese were the enemy, and we rounded up Japanese people into camps. This happened quite a bit more recently than slavery, yet we do not talk about how the Japanese have never been able to overcome their disadvantage due to prejudice. We literally took Japenese Americans from their homes and put them into prison for being Japanese. So another thing I need people to stop is whining about slavery which ended, what, a century and a half ago. White people died by the hundreds of thousands to end it, it's done. Let's move on. Nobody alive today was enslaved, nobody alive today owned slaves, nobody alive today was involved in anything to do with slavery.

You seem to have missed my entire point... so I'll state it again. Police (not all, but a lot) are jerks. Jerks are attracted to the job. The people that shoved the other kids around in high school like shoving people around, so they become cops. It represents some of the highest authority you can get over your fellow citizens, and so people who crave authority crave the job. These same jerks end up shooting people, beating people, and harassing them - white, black, Hispanic... do Asian people break the law? Police harass, hit, and shoot because it's what they joined the police force to do. Not all of them... but more than enough of them.

There is a thing called confirmation bias. You have a statistic in your head - like that there are a disproportionate number of black people in prison, and then you form an opinion - like that there can be no rational explanation for this, and that black people must be getting picked on by police. Then when you see a news story about a black person getting picked on by police, you solidify that opinion (this is the confirmation bias part). You ignore all of the stories about white people being picked on and say "see, black people are disproportionately picked on" even though what you just saw doesn't actually confirm that. Confirmation bias is something we all do, I'm guilty, you're guilty, everyone is guilty of this. Trump uses it actively in his campaign. Hillary does too now.

The uproar when a black person gets shot by a white cop (which isn't even the case in this case, but whatever) is racist. To say this event matters more than the white guy that gets executed is racist. And racism needs to stop.

While those stories you linked are no doubt tragic for everyone involved, they are the extreme minority. How often do you think it is reported when thousands of times a day Officers deal with similar situations but with different outcomes? Not very often, so to say that "they've demonstrated such a profound inability to pay attention to weather or not there is actually a weapon" is simply dishonest. Hundreds of thousands of Officers make hundreds of thousands of stops a day, sometimes one of them makes a bad call and it unfortunately destroys the lives of just about everyone involved.

As far as waiting for deadly force to be used against me before responding with my own deadly force, I didn't throw away my rights when I was sworn in, I have just as much right to protect myself from a threat and get home to my wife and son at the end of my shift as you do.

Yes you do. Your rights don't get thrown away when you get sworn in as a police officer. Your training should be to shoot only after you are shot at - not when you see someone reach for something that might be a weapon. Let me be clear, no police officer should be trained to shoot before shot at. I'm not saying it should be illegal for a police officer to shoot before shot at, I'm saying you shouldn't be trained to do so. If you do shoot before shot at, you should be held to the same standards as any civilian doing the same - which means you may be brought up on charges and those charges may be dismissed based on the circumstances of the case.

I fully understand that police officers make lots of calls and some of them will statistically end up bad. This is a training issue. This is police officers signing up to be heroes, not signing up to cover their rear ends at every step. When a cop pulls someone over, they're risking their lives (so maybe they shouldn't do it for some of the nonsense that they do it for), and when they go to a domestic dispute call (which I understand is a lot of the job), they're risking their lives. But that's the job, the job is risk your life to protect the people - and that means not assuming everything is a gun. It also means not even assuming every gun is a threat.

What I hate about the story of the kid who got shot for holding the nintendo wii controller is that it could have been a gun and he still shouldn't have been shot. It's not against the law to have a gun in your home - and even to hold it. People need the benefit of the doubt, and I'm sure that's hard when most of the people these officers see are 'bags, but when a cop loses the ability to offer the people the benefit of the doubt it's over - they're not fit for the job anymore. Someone holding a gun in their home should get the benefit of the doubt that that gun is legal, and that the person holding it is not a murderer. Far too easily it seems police are allowed to assume that the presence of a gun (or anything slightly resembling a gun) means that the person holding it is a psychopath ready to kill anyone they see.

 

[ryzno]

This happened quite a bit more recently than slavery, yet we do not talk about how the Japanese have never been able to overcome their disadvantage due to prejudice.

The same could be said about Jews during WWII. But are either of those groups still being oppressed to this day?

Edit: The slavery comment also kills me, yeah that ended over 100 years ago but black people were still being mistreated in the '70s; 40ish years ago right? They are still alive right? Oh yeah we like to forget about that...

 

[Omnis]

Seems like people in America generally use guns to to assault people rather than to defend themselves.

That's because the media alerts the public for attacks. People that defend themselves typically aren't looking for any kind of publicity. In fact, it is kind of an understood agreement to protect their privacy.

Black people are not being oppressed by police. They're being oppressed by the laws.

 

[Swagger897]

The same could be said about Jews during WWII. But are either of those groups still being oppressed to this day?

They are actually two different things. One was of fear of attacks within the 48 (The Japanese), whilst the other was pure hatred of their ideals (Jews).

These events are more or less, fear based, which you have even said so yourself on the last page. There is some minute amount of hatred based individuals, as such here, but it's two different principles.

 

[Danoff]

Edit: The slavery comment also kills me, yeah that ended over 100 years ago but black people were still being mistreated in the '70s; 40ish years ago right? They are still alive right? Oh yeah we like to forget about that...

Oh no, if you believe the narrative they're being mistreated right now this very second. And it's true that there are people who are racist who are alive today and mistreat black people (it is legal, by the way, to be racist and hate black people, let's not forget that part). I also didn't forget about Jim Crow (ended in '65). I'm making a broader point - which is that we need to move forward. Victimhood is toxic (to everyone), and victimhood is a cherished thing these days. If you can claim victimhood to an event that happened over 150 years ago, you claim it. If you have any claim at all to victimhood these days, you claim it. Nobody is more revered in our current society than the perceived victim.

The victim never wins. The Japanese and the Jews and any other victimized group that has risen, on the whole, never does so by pointing out how they were victimized and deserve help. "Help" is as toxic today as anything. Welfare, for example, is supposed to be help, but it becomes a way of life. Victimhood is supposed to engender short-term sympathy, but it becomes a way of life - and it's a way of life that ensures that the person never gets ahead, and will always need help.

Where is our program to assist the Japanese people? Where are the affirmative action programs that insist that we hire or admit undeserving Japanese people over other applicants who are better qualified? They don't exist, and they shouldn't exist because that's not how anyone wins.

So once again, let's stop whining about slavery, which ended 150 years ago with the deaths of gazillions of what people and focus bettering ourselves today.

 

[phillgt2002]

Ah, I see. Let's just forget about everyone's race and be jolly humans.

That should be easy.

Can't believe I've lived this life acting as a victim. I should have learned..

 

[Danoff]

Ah, I see. Let's just forget about everyone's race and be jolly humans.

That should be easy.

Not entirely "forget", but stop focusing on it. It is easy, you just stop spending energy on it.

People behave differently around me because I'm a guy. I've told my wife "you should talk to them, they'll be nicer to you", because she's female and she's pretty. Do I get indignant about that? Why bother? Why waste my energy and anger over being treated differently than a pretty blonde girl? Could you imagine a black person telling a white person "you should talk to them, they'll be nicer to you" and not getting pissed off about that? But I can basically guarantee that that conversation has been had by Japanese people around WWII, and where are they now? Did they get violent? Did they get angry? Did they demand retribution or assistance? No, they, as a whole, focused on bettering themselves and ignored everything else.

Can't believe I've lived this life acting as a victim. I should have learned.

If you have lived your life acting as a victim, it's time to stop. I can claim victimhood status for a host of reasons, I just don't because it doesn't help anyone.

 

[Rallywagon]

Oh no, if you believe the narrative they're being mistreated right now this very second. And it's true that there are people who are racist who are alive today and mistreat black people (it is legal, by the way, to be racist and hate black people, let's not forget that part). I also didn't forget about Jim Crow (ended in '65). I'm making a broader point - which is that we need to move forward. Victimhood is toxic (to everyone), and victimhood is a cherished thing these days. If you can claim victimhood to an event that happened over 150 years ago, you claim it. If you have any claim at all to victimhood these days, you claim it. Nobody is more revered in our current society than the perceived victim.

The victim never wins. The Japanese and the Jews and any other victimized group that has risen, on the whole, never does so by pointing out how they were victimized and deserve help. "Help" is as toxic today as anything. Welfare, for example, is supposed to be help, but it becomes a way of life. Victimhood is supposed to engender short-term sympathy, but it becomes a way of life - and it's a way of life that ensures that the person never gets ahead, and will always need help.

Where is our program to assist the Japanese people? Where are the affirmative action programs that insist that we hire or admit undeserving Japanese people over other applicants who are better qualified? They don't exist, and they shouldn't exist because that's not how anyone wins.

So once again, let's stop whining about slavery, which ended 150 years ago with the deaths of gazillions of what people and focus bettering ourselves today.

To help galvanize this point, when was the last time you heard Native Americans, or the Irish brought here and to the isles decrying victimhood and demanding reparations and the alike? Not long after their circumstances changed. The Irish dealt with every bit as much hatred, abuse and that alike as Africans brought to this country, and you would be hard pressed to find another culture that dealt with the horrors Europeans brought upon Native Americans. Even now our Fed Gov pisses all over them, messing with land rights and the alike.
I'll have to look it up, but I wonder how Hispanics crime, violence and incarceration stats line up with that of black Americans. If there is any other group in this country that currently runs a near parallel course, it would be them.

 

[UKMikey]

Edited... I really shouldn't go there... but smh.

 

[ryzno]

Oh no, if you believe the narrative they're being mistreated right now this very second.

Oh I do believe it, and I might be white but I do live it in a respect brother. I make decent money but not enough to live in what is called a white area. I live in a cheaper side of town which happen to be mainly black. I get stopped for being the wrong race in the area. Now explain to me why our public school system is having to flush lead out of 20+ public schools in black neighborhoods.(my son happens to go to one); while the white areas are getting brand new schools. Explain to me why we get pot hole patches and white areas get the whole road repaved. Explain to me why they destroy perfectly fine apartment complex's that they could remodel, keeping the rent cheaper, but instead build $300k condos that no one in the area can afford.

I'm making a broader point - which is that we need to move forward.

We do, why not rebuild things instead of building stuff we know the majority of people can't afford.

Could you imagine a black person telling a white person "you should talk to them, they'll be nicer to you"

You know that still happens down here. It seems at times y'all don't have a clue of what really still goes on in the South. I have two black guys that help me work at time to time, I have worked in a farm areas doing deliveries down there(about 90 mile outside ATL) where I had to explain why I brought them and then had to talk for them.
Now as you said they have the right to be racist. But don't think black people aren't being oppressed. Not all of them are living the welfare life you claim, but they still can't live the life most white people have the chance of. Just go check out the quality of the schools in your local black neighborhood then compare it to where you send your kid if you're doing well in life. Let me know how that goes.

I'm not trying to bash you but I'm trying to explain to you.

And apologies if my use of the term black guys offended anyone.

 

[Carbonox]

I get stopped for being the wrong race in the area.

I'd be a lot more outraged about this if I was in your position.

 

[Danoff]

Could you imagine a black person telling a white person "you should talk to them, they'll be nicer to you"

You know that still happens down here. It seems at times y'all don't have a clue of what really still goes on in the South. I have two black guys that help me work at time to time, I have worked in a farm areas doing deliveries down there(about 90 mile outside ATL) where I had to explain why I brought them and then had to talk for them.

Could you imagine a black person telling a white person "you should talk to them, they'll be nicer to you" and not getting pissed off about that?

The part on the end matters. It changes the meaning of my statement when you crop it off - makes it easier to argue against and amounts to a strawman.

Oh I do believe it, and I might be white but I do live it in a respect brother. I make decent money but not enough to live in what is called a white area. I live in a cheaper side of town which happen to be mainly black. I get stopped for being the wrong race in the area. Now explain to me why our public school system is having to flush lead out of 20+ public schools in black neighborhoods.(my son happens to go to one); while the white areas are getting brand new schools.

Because public schools are funded by property taxes - which is a travesty. There should be no public schools.

Explain to me why we get pot hole patches and white areas get the whole road repaved.

Confirmation bias? That's possibly a squeaky wheel issue. The richer people may be more likely to complain about the quality of the roads. I'd argue that it's fair actually because we have a "progressive" tax system in which rich people pay 30 times their fair share... so maybe they should get better roads afterall. It's also possible that the budget for the road is coming form the local municipality which has a larger tax base... depends on the road I think.

Explain to me why they destroy perfectly fine apartment complex's that they could remodel, keeping the rent cheaper, but instead build $300k condos that no one in the area can afford.

Supply and demand.

We do, why not rebuild things instead of building stuff we know the majority of people can't afford.

Obviously people can because... supply and demand.

Now as you said they have the right to be racist. But don't think black people aren't being oppressed. Not all of them are living the welfare life you claim,

Quote me claiming that black people are all on welfare.

but they still can't live the life most white people have the chance of.

Black people can't achieve in the US?

Just go check out the quality of the schools in your local black neighborhood then compare it to where you send your kid if you're doing well in life. Let me know how that goes.

Again, the public school system is based on property taxes - which means areas where housing costs more will have more money for schools. Tying school revenue to property tax insulates people from better schools far more effectively than simply having tuition. For example:

Let's say property tax is at 2% per year in an area and the average house value is 100k. That's $2000 per year per household for the school (assuming it all goes to the school, which it doesn't). In an area where the average house value is 500k, that's $10,000 per year per household for the school. Now if you wanted to just buy tuition at the more expensive school, it would cost you $8k per year to make up the difference. A lot of money but not astronomical. You can't do that in the public school system though because it's not private - they get their money from tax revenue. So instead you have to find $400k to buy a house that makes up the difference - an astronomical task for many, then you get the privilege of paying the extra $8k in taxes for the school. Housing is leverage over tuition which creates a larger divide between people that can afford good schools and people that can't. Just another example of government programs and central planning hurting the people it's supposed to help.

 

[Joey D]

Oh I do believe it, and I might be white but I do live it in a respect brother. I make decent money but not enough to live in what is called a white area. I live in a cheaper side of town which happen to be mainly black. I get stopped for being the wrong race in the area. Now explain to me why our public school system is having to flush lead out of 20+ public schools in black neighborhoods.(my son happens to go to one); while the white areas are getting brand new schools. Explain to me why we get pot hole patches and white areas get the whole road repaved. Explain to me why they destroy perfectly fine apartment complex's that they could remodel, keeping the rent cheaper, but instead build $300k condos that no one in the area can afford.

Taxes. People who live in areas where housing costs more typically pay more in taxes, shouldn't they get a bigger piece of the pie if they are contributing more?

***Tree'd by @Danoff

 

[ryzno]

The part on the end matters. It changes the meaning of my statement when you crop it off - makes it easier to argue against and amounts to a strawman.

I thought you would have got the idea, neither they nor I, was happy about the situation once we figured out what we had gotten ourselves into.

Supply and demand.

So where is the new supply for the lower priced demand? They might need new expensive condos for the new money, but as I said they don't build anything that the people they kicked out can afford. You seemed to miss that.

 

[Danoff]

I thought you would have got the idea, neither they nor I, was happy about the situation once we figured out what we had gotten ourselves into.

Kinda my point actually.

So where is the new supply for the lower priced demand? They might need new expensive condos for the new money, but as I said they don't build anything that the people they kicked out can afford. You seemed to miss that.

Probably it's further out. That is what happens within cities. Eventually the interior real estate becomes so valuable for people not wanting to commute that it tailors to people who are willing to spend gobs of money to avoid commuting. People who are not willing to spend that much money to avoid commuting end up with a longer commute in exchange for lower priced housing.

Edit:

Also, generally, construction is not aimed at a low price point - especially when the old structure is demolished, which requires significant initial investment. Older buildings focus on the lower price points. It's kinda like cars. You don't see new cars in the US selling for $5k. If you want a cheaper car you buy an older one.

 

[ryzno]

Kinda my point actually.



Probably it's further out. That is what happens within cities. Eventually the interior real estate becomes so valuable for people not wanting to commute that it tailors to people who are willing to spend gobs of money to avoid commuting. People who are not willing to spend that much money to avoid commuting end up with a longer commute in exchange for lower priced housing.

Edit:

Also, generally, construction is not aimed at a low price point - especially when the old structure is demolished, which requires significant initial investment. Older buildings focus on the lower price points. It's kinda like cars. You don't see new cars in the US selling for $5k. If you want a cheaper car you buy an older one.

So you don't find it oppressive that groups who have been in the area for decades have to move just cause of their status or for someone else's convince? Sounds like something that happened in America before and it wasn't very nice. Seems we are just prolonging the process this time.
Now I'll bring up the subject of what are they supposed to do if they can't afford to move or commute after being left in the street?

 

[Danoff]

So you don't find it oppressive that groups who have been in the area for decades have to move just cause of their status or for someone else's convince?

No, actually it would be oppressive if the opposite were true - that they could insist that the property owner continue to let them live on the property owner's property against their will.

When you rent a property (and rent is what we're talking about here, otherwise the scenario makes no sense), you agree to a term - after which you have no legal right to insist that the property owner continue to rent the property to you. That's a contract, and when you sign it that's the agreement you make. When your lease is up, if the property owner does not want to continue leasing the place to you, you must find someplace else to live. This happened to me when I had a 6 month old newborn, so I fully understand it. For anything else to happen you're talking about using force against the property owner, violating their property rights, because someone wanted something they had - that's oppression.

Now I'll bring up the subject of what are they supposed to do if they can't afford to move or commute after being left in the street?

Having your lease not renewed is not "being left in the street". As I said, this happened to me and I did not come close to living in the street. I simply made other arrangements in another part of town. If they cannot afford to live close to work and cannot afford to commute, they should either find new work, or share an apartment close in, or share an apartment further out, or carpool, or take the bus, or find cheaper transportation.

 

[Northstar]

Just go check out the quality of the schools in your local black neighborhood then compare it to where you send your kid if you're doing well in life. Let me know how that goes.

I'm not going to get into a debate on the quality of schools or anything as I agree with you there. However I will say that there are options when it comes to public schools (in most states at least) and you are usually not forced to send your child to a certain one. Here is some info on Georgia's transfer policy.

 

[justin credible]

[QUOTE="ryzno,

You know that still happens down here. It seems at times y'all don't have a clue of what really still goes on in the South. I have two black guys that help me work at time to time, I have worked in a farm areas doing deliveries down there(about 90 mile outside ATL) where I had to explain why I brought them and then had to talk for them.
Now as you said they have the right to be racist.[/QUOTE]

Seriously I am seeing this line and cannot believe it. This boils my piss big time No one and I mean no one has the right to be racist.
Seriously think what is racism? it is a believe you are better than other people because of your skin colour or your sexuality or religion or hair colour is different than theirs a deep hate of someone or a race because you are so arrogant and ignorant you cannot see we are all humans regardless.
Now I understand people having a dislike for convicted peados or child murderers as their actions have caused the anger but to dislike someone because they have different skin etc is beyond ignorant stupidity it border lines insanity.
Also in America they rightly so clamp down hard on terrorists and tell me if I am right but for a ISIS supporter to stand on his soapbox and spread hate and urge acts of terrorism he would be quickly locked away I suspect.
Point being why do the KKK have meetings and a lot of the time are open they are KKK with all this white power garbage and never get taken away? they are spreading hate and violence what's the difference between KKK and terrorists apart from the majority of terrorists are none white and the majority of KKK are.
Confused Brit.

 

[Danoff]

No one and I mean no one has the right to be racist.

In the US everyone, and I mean everyone, has a right to be racist.

 

[justin credible]

In the US everyone, and I mean everyone, has a right to be racist.

Why I don' get it what gives anyone the right?

 

[Danoff]

Why I don' get it what gives anyone the right?

Freedom of speech.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Why I don' get it what gives anyone the right?

You have a right to be a racist but you don't have the right to discriminate based on race. Maybe you're confusing the two things.

 

[Carbonox]

You know that still happens down here. It seems at times y'all don't have a clue of what really still goes on in the South. I have two black guys that help me work at time to time, I have worked in a farm areas doing deliveries down there(about 90 mile outside ATL) where I had to explain why I brought them and then had to talk for them.
Now as you said they have the right to be racist.

Seriously I am seeing this line and cannot believe it. This boils my piss big time No one and I mean no one has the right to be racist.
Seriously think what is racism? it is a believe you are better than other people because of your skin colour or your sexuality or religion or hair colour is different than theirs a deep hate of someone or a race because you are so arrogant and ignorant you cannot see we are all humans regardless.
Now I understand people having a dislike for convicted peados or child murderers as their actions have caused the anger but to dislike someone because they have different skin etc is beyond ignorant stupidity it border lines insanity.
Also in America they rightly so clamp down hard on terrorists and tell me if I am right but for a ISIS supporter to stand on his soapbox and spread hate and urge acts of terrorism he would be quickly locked away I suspect.
Point being why do the KKK have meetings and a lot of the time are open they are KKK with all this white power garbage and never get taken away? they are spreading hate and violence what's the difference between KKK and terrorists apart from the majority of terrorists are none white and the majority of KKK are.
Confused Brit.

You're basically asking to police people's thoughts right now.

As for why ISIS is being treated differently, well, there's a distinct difference between a group acting superior of differently colored people and a mass-murdering criminal organization presently at war with the West. Mind you, the former do get prosecuted if they cross the line from speech to actual violent acts.

 

[justin credible]

You have a right to be a racist but you don't have the right to discriminate based on race. Maybe you're confusing the two things.

Yes I am. I get you now, still think it is borderline insanity to think or act racist though.

You're basically asking to police people's thoughts right now.

As for why ISIS is being treated differently, well, there's a distinct difference between a group acting superior of differently colored people and a mass-murdering criminal organization presently at war with the West. Mind you, the former do get prosecuted if they cross the line from speech to actual violent acts.

Well if the former do get prosecuted if they cross the line into violence then I am happy with that, That's why I asked the question. It must be just my so non racist mind and ways which would like to see the KKK outlawed.
I can understand people have the right to be racist (that hurts my brain and morals to say that) just don't understand why they do.
I would be happy if any racist speaking was illegal.

I think Carbonox it is my thoughts Isis are hate fuelled and in my eyes the KKK are to so I link the two as vile.

 

[Danoff]

No one and I mean no one has the right to be racist.

I can understand people have the right to be racist

I'm glad to see that you're actively participating rather than closed to other points of view.

(that hurts my brain and morals to say that) just don't understand why they do.
I would be happy if any racist speaking was illegal.

I don't think you would. A lot of things can be considered racist. Would you like to outlaw the ability to use the n-word? Do you think a single word should be powerful enough to land someone in jail?