Teenager shoots at cars while shouting ‘I don’t like white people in my hood’, police say

phildidge wrote:A black teenager shouted “I don’t like white people in my hood” before chasing four people with a gun and firing multiple shots at them, according to court documents.

Cincinnati Police said 18 year old Devonta Allen was filmed firing three shots at the alleged victims, hitting the two vehicles they were in but missing everyone inside.

Three of the people involved in the incident were white and the other individual was African-American, according to a criminal complaint.

After turning himself in, Mr Allen admitted to the shooting but claimed the alleged victims were armed and fired at him first.

However, police said: “This and other statements made by Allen are inconsistent with the videotape evidence and statements from the victims and witnesses.”


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/shooting-white-people-hood-teenager-devonta-allen-cincinnati-police-a9030601.html

Original Quill wrote:

phildidge wrote:A black teenager shouted “I don’t like white people in my hood” before chasing four people with a gun and firing multiple shots at them, according to court documents.

Cincinnati Police said 18 year old Devonta Allen was filmed firing three shots at the alleged victims, hitting the two vehicles they were in but missing everyone inside.

Three of the people involved in the incident were white and the other individual was African-American, according to a criminal complaint.

After turning himself in, Mr Allen admitted to the shooting but claimed the alleged victims were armed and fired at him first.

However, police said: “This and other statements made by Allen are inconsistent with the videotape evidence and statements from the victims and witnesses.”


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/shooting-white-people-hood-teenager-devonta-allen-cincinnati-police-a9030601.html

Sounds like more gang activity by high school kids.  No racial issue as a quarter of the victims were the same as the perp.  Cincinnati is a rough, gang-infested city not unlike Chicago.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Sounds like more gang activity by high school kids.  No racial issue as a quarter of the victims were the same as the perp.  Cincinnati is a rough, gang-infested city not unlike Chicago.

How can there be "no racial issue" when three-quarters of the victims were white and were nearly shot to death by a person yelling "I don't like white people in my hood"??!!

That's utter nonsense, and if you don't know that, your head is on backwards.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

How can there be "no racial issue" when three-quarters of the victims were white and were nearly shot to death by a person yelling "I don't like white people in my hood"??!!

That's utter nonsense, and if you don't know that, your head is on backwards.

Ben, you're looking for spooks under the bed.  He was firing at blacks and whites.  Where do you see that among teenagers?  Gangs?

Look for clues, not confirmation.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Ben, you're looking for spooks under the bed.  He was firing at blacks and whites.  Where do you see that among teenagers?  Gangs?

Look for clues, not confirmation.

"I don't like white people in my hood"

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

"I don't like white people in my hood"

Might have been white gangs.  For sure he didn't like 'em.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

How can there be "no racial issue" when three-quarters of the victims were white and were nearly shot to death by a person yelling "I don't like white people in my hood"??!!

That's utter nonsense, and if you don't know that, your head is on backwards.

Ben, you're looking for spooks under the bed.  He was firing at blacks and whites.  Where do you see that among teenagers?  Gangs?

Look for clues, not confirmation.

"I don't like white people in my hood"

Raggamuffin wrote:Trust Quill to defend a would-be murderer just because he's black.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Trust Quill to defend a would-be murderer just because he's black.

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

All we have to go off of is what was reported. Which was, he tried to kill three white people who HAPPENED to have a black friend, and his words, "I don't like white people in my hood."

You're trying to make 2+2=5 in a desperate attempt to seem like some non-racist hero to black people, rather than using your common sense. It's actually embarrassing to witness.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

All we have to go off of is what was reported. Which was, he tried to kill three white people who HAPPENED to have a black friend, and his words, "I don't like white people in my hood."

You're trying to make 2+2=5 in a desperate attempt to seem like some non-racist hero to black people, rather than using your common sense. It's actually embarrassing to witness.

He's "woke" dontcha know.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

All we have to go off of is what was reported. Which was, he tried to kill three white people who HAPPENED to have a black friend, and his words, "I don't like white people in my hood."

You're trying to make 2+2=5 in a desperate attempt to seem like some non-racist hero to black people, rather than using your common sense. It's actually embarrassing to witness.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

All we have to go off of is what was reported. Which was, he tried to kill three white people who HAPPENED to have a black friend, and his words, "I don't like white people in my hood."

You're trying to make 2+2=5 in a desperate attempt to seem like some non-racist hero to black people, rather than using your common sense. It's actually embarrassing to witness.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

All we have to go off of is what was reported. Which was, he tried to kill three white people who HAPPENED to have a black friend, and his words, "I don't like white people in my hood."

You're trying to make 2+2=5 in a desperate attempt to seem like some non-racist hero to black people, rather than using your common sense. It's actually embarrassing to witness.

I'd wait if I were you.  You might get embarrassed.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I'd wait if I were you.  You might get embarrassed.

There's no way to get embarrassed by reacting logically to a news article. If the account turns out to be wrong, you just say, "oh, they got it wrong."

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

There's no way to get embarrassed by reacting logically to a news article. If the account turns out to be wrong, you just say, "oh, they got it wrong."

My point is, the news article doesn't offer that much.  Has the perp copped to a motive?  Have the police searched his home?  Have they rummaged through his computer?  Have they even talked to his friends?

Have you got anything other than an ambiguous phrase and a quick judgment?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

There's no way to get embarrassed by reacting logically to a news article. If the account turns out to be wrong, you just say, "oh, they got it wrong."

My point is, the news article doesn't offer that much.  Has the perp copped to a motive?  Have the police searched his home?  Have they rummaged through his computer?  Have they even talked to his friends?

Have you got anything other than an ambiguous phrase and a quick judgment?

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I'd wait if I were you.  You might get embarrassed.

There's no way to get embarrassed by reacting logically to a news article. If the account turns out to be wrong, you just say, "oh, they got it wrong."

My point is, the news article doesn't offer that much.  Has the perp copped to a motive?  Have the police searched his home?  Have they rummaged through his computer?  Have they even talked to his friends?

Have you got anything other than an ambiguous phrase and a quick judgment?

eddie wrote:One of Quill’s threads....take a look.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20509-white-man-attack-on-blacks-at-poolside?highlight=Whites+blacks#396013

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Trust Quill to defend a would-be murderer just because he's black.

I just don't jump to conclusions off some epithet.  Wait until his manifesto comes out.

 

nicko wrote:Quill is black !

nicko wrote:Don't give a shit what colour you are , your still a Cockwomble !

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:Don't give a shit what colour you are , your still a Cockwomble !

I believe "Cockwomble" violates the new rule on gender-related abuse terms.  See, Site News & Announcements, thread: "Please note -- a class of words we don't want to see here".  But you always were good a disobeying orders, weren't you?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I believe "Cockwomble" violates the new rule on gender-related abuse terms.  See, Site News & Announcements, thread: "Please note -- a class of words we don't want to see here".  But you always were good a disobeying orders, weren't you?

Apart from the venerable Uncle Bulgaria, have any of the Wombles ever been defined by gender?

Original Quill wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Apart from the venerable Uncle Bulgaria, have any of the Wombles ever been defined by gender?

Only when gender is an offensive word in the prefix.  What if it was Cuntwomble?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Only when gender is an offensive word in the prefix.  What if it was Cuntwomble?

Far too deep a philosophical point for me, old boy. Wombles are pointy nosed furry little creatures that live in burrows and are guardians of the environment. They also live in Wimbledon, of all places. I don't think the status or appearance of their sexual organs has ever been the subject for research or study until now.

Maybe here's your chance for another PhD!

Original Quill wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Far too deep a philosophical point for me, old boy. Wombles are pointy nosed furry little creatures that live in burrows and are guardians of the environment. They also live in Wimbledon, of all places. I don't think the status or appearance of their sexual organs has ever been the subject for research or study until now.

Maybe here's your chance for another PhD!

You man rats?

Fred M. wrote:Good grief no...they're much more lovable......