White Privilege
Comments
-
Sure yay. So you're good with the not guilty verdict, right?Hobbes said:
No. I'm saying POC should be protected by a justice system that currently favors white people. Ya know, equity.mrussel1 said:
So your solution is that more white people should be wrongly convicted rather than better justice for POC?Hobbes said:
There was a young black girl who sat in a Kenosha jail for two years awaiting trial having been accused of killing her sexual abuser. Why wasn't she touted as a hero by the right wing? Nothing "unique" about Rittenhouse. Your profit? Um, you were acquitted in that scenario.mrussel1 said:
Rittenhouse's 'profit' is unique to him, because he became a right wing hero. If I was accused of beating my wife and subsequently acquitted, how would I have profited from that ordeal?Hobbes said:
She is stating that historically white people have benefited from a criminal justice system that was designed to protect them. Rittenhouse is yet another example. POC do not profit from the criminal justice system in the same way white people do.mrussel1 said:
How does a shooting involving white people have anything to do with that? If he was black, yeah maybe he would have been guilty. But that means nothing because it's hypothetical. I mean is she saying that every white person acquitted from here on out is a beneficiary of white privilege even when the 'victims' are white? Is she saying that POC should not ever go to trial? IMO she is turning a crime that has zero to do with race, into a racial crime.Hobbes said:
The "justice" system was designed by white males to ensure that other white males would profit and be protected. Kyle profited from being white. From that night in Kenosha all the way to the verdict. Had Kyle been black, this would have had a different outcome. There is nothing "reasonable" about this regarding race.mrussel1 said:
Didn’t a white guy shoot three white guys?Hobbes said:
what does her post even mean? Is she upset that beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard?
From the trial evidence, he should not have been charged with murder. A weapons charge, as a minor, would have stuck probably. But all three of these dummies made aggressive moves towards him. Just because you are illegally carrying a weapon doesn't mean everything subsequent to that minor crime is now a slam dunk guilty verdict.
I'm being glib but again, one thing has nothing to do with the other. Do you think Rittenhouse should have been found guilty to right some wrongs with other cases?0 -
Yeah, I edited.mace1229 said:
Not any gun. Just long rifles with a barrel over 12” (or maybe it was 16”, I don’t have it memorized).Merkin Baller said:
So, it’s legal for minors in WI to possess other people’s guns.mace1229 said:
According to WI law he can posses long rifles, but not own it. So that charge was dropped.Merkin Baller said:
17 year olds are allowed to possess certain guns in WI? Or was it just a loophole in the wording of the law?Ledbetterman10 said:
It is noteworthy, but Rittenhouse’s gun wasn’t illegal. Maybe it should’ve been. That’s a gun law discussion though. As far as the law goes, Rittenhouse was able to have his and Coffee wasn’t because he had four felony convictions.Merkin Baller said:
He wasn’t completely acquitted though:Ledbetterman10 said:
A black guy that opened fire on sheriff deputies that were serving a warrant was acquitted due to claiming self-defense yesterday at almost the same time Rittenhouse was.Hobbes said:
She is stating that historically white people have benefited from a criminal justice system that was designed to protect them. Rittenhouse is yet another example. POC do not profit from the criminal justice system in the same way white people do.mrussel1 said:
How does a shooting involving white people have anything to do with that? If he was black, yeah maybe he would have been guilty. But that means nothing because it's hypothetical. I mean is she saying that every white person acquitted from here on out is a beneficiary of white privilege even when the 'victims' are white? Is she saying that POC should not ever go to trial? IMO she is turning a crime that has zero to do with race, into a racial crime.Hobbes said:
The "justice" system was designed by white males to ensure that other white males would profit and be protected. Kyle profited from being white. From that night in Kenosha all the way to the verdict. Had Kyle been black, this would have had a different outcome. There is nothing "reasonable" about this regarding race.mrussel1 said:
Didn’t a white guy shoot three white guys?Hobbes said:
what does her post even mean? Is she upset that beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard?“In a separate proceeding Friday, the same jury convicted Coffee IV of one count of possession of a firearm by a felon.
At his sentencing Jan. 13, he faces a maximum prison term of 30 years.
“The state will be seeking that maximum 30 years upon him,” Assistant State Attorney Chris Taylor said after court.“
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy to see gun laws being enforced, but if you’re going to use that story as a comparison to Rittenhouse, I think that’s a noteworthy distinction.
I don’t know. I’m not complaining about the felon or his punishment, I’m in favor of it. But I genuinely don’t understand how Rittenhouse walked on the possession charge (or reckless endangerment for that matter).I spoke about the endangerment charges before, if you acquit on the murder you had to acquit on the endangerment. The endangerment chargers were specific to the 2 individuals he shot at but missed. So if you’re going to say shooting and killing was justified, how are you going to find him guilty of shooting and missing?Good to know.I fail to see the relevance in barrel length in relation to 16 & 17 year olds being able to possess, but wtf do I know.Edited to include ages as opposed to ‘minors’.Post edited by Merkin Baller on0 -
Holy shit I can’t believe how varied gun laws are in this country, state to state.0
-
I assume it has to do with concealability. Just like hand guns aren’t legal for them to possess.Merkin Baller said:
Yeah, I edited.mace1229 said:
Not any gun. Just long rifles with a barrel over 12” (or maybe it was 16”, I don’t have it memorized).Merkin Baller said:
So, it’s legal for minors in WI to possess other people’s guns.mace1229 said:
According to WI law he can posses long rifles, but not own it. So that charge was dropped.Merkin Baller said:
17 year olds are allowed to possess certain guns in WI? Or was it just a loophole in the wording of the law?Ledbetterman10 said:
It is noteworthy, but Rittenhouse’s gun wasn’t illegal. Maybe it should’ve been. That’s a gun law discussion though. As far as the law goes, Rittenhouse was able to have his and Coffee wasn’t because he had four felony convictions.Merkin Baller said:
He wasn’t completely acquitted though:Ledbetterman10 said:
A black guy that opened fire on sheriff deputies that were serving a warrant was acquitted due to claiming self-defense yesterday at almost the same time Rittenhouse was.Hobbes said:
She is stating that historically white people have benefited from a criminal justice system that was designed to protect them. Rittenhouse is yet another example. POC do not profit from the criminal justice system in the same way white people do.mrussel1 said:
How does a shooting involving white people have anything to do with that? If he was black, yeah maybe he would have been guilty. But that means nothing because it's hypothetical. I mean is she saying that every white person acquitted from here on out is a beneficiary of white privilege even when the 'victims' are white? Is she saying that POC should not ever go to trial? IMO she is turning a crime that has zero to do with race, into a racial crime.Hobbes said:
The "justice" system was designed by white males to ensure that other white males would profit and be protected. Kyle profited from being white. From that night in Kenosha all the way to the verdict. Had Kyle been black, this would have had a different outcome. There is nothing "reasonable" about this regarding race.mrussel1 said:
Didn’t a white guy shoot three white guys?Hobbes said:
what does her post even mean? Is she upset that beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard?“In a separate proceeding Friday, the same jury convicted Coffee IV of one count of possession of a firearm by a felon.
At his sentencing Jan. 13, he faces a maximum prison term of 30 years.
“The state will be seeking that maximum 30 years upon him,” Assistant State Attorney Chris Taylor said after court.“
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy to see gun laws being enforced, but if you’re going to use that story as a comparison to Rittenhouse, I think that’s a noteworthy distinction.
I don’t know. I’m not complaining about the felon or his punishment, I’m in favor of it. But I genuinely don’t understand how Rittenhouse walked on the possession charge (or reckless endangerment for that matter).I spoke about the endangerment charges before, if you acquit on the murder you had to acquit on the endangerment. The endangerment chargers were specific to the 2 individuals he shot at but missed. So if you’re going to say shooting and killing was justified, how are you going to find him guilty of shooting and missing?Good to know.I fail to see the relevance in barrel length in relation to 16 & 17 year olds being able to possess, but wtf do I know.Edited to include ages as opposed to ‘minors’.0 -
I’m not 100% sure on this, but I do believe in many states it’s not illegal to conceal rifles and shotguns because in theory they are too big to conceal effectively. Which is one reason there are barrel requirements on things like shotguns, so you can’t saw it off and conceal it (other reasons too). That’s why length matters….barrel length.
So there is nothing illegal about having a .16 gauge buried under your clothes.0 -
Even while you pay?mace1229 said:I’m not 100% sure on this, but I do believe in many states it’s not illegal to conceal rifles and shotguns because in theory they are too big to conceal effectively. Which is one reason there are barrel requirements on things like shotguns, so you can’t saw it off and conceal it (other reasons too). That’s why length matters….barrel length.
So there is nothing illegal about having a .16 gauge buried under your clothes.0 -
mace1229 said:
I assume it has to do with concealability. Just like hand guns aren’t legal for them to possess.Merkin Baller said:
Yeah, I edited.mace1229 said:
Not any gun. Just long rifles with a barrel over 12” (or maybe it was 16”, I don’t have it memorized).Merkin Baller said:
So, it’s legal for minors in WI to possess other people’s guns.mace1229 said:
According to WI law he can posses long rifles, but not own it. So that charge was dropped.Merkin Baller said:
17 year olds are allowed to possess certain guns in WI? Or was it just a loophole in the wording of the law?Ledbetterman10 said:
It is noteworthy, but Rittenhouse’s gun wasn’t illegal. Maybe it should’ve been. That’s a gun law discussion though. As far as the law goes, Rittenhouse was able to have his and Coffee wasn’t because he had four felony convictions.Merkin Baller said:
He wasn’t completely acquitted though:Ledbetterman10 said:
A black guy that opened fire on sheriff deputies that were serving a warrant was acquitted due to claiming self-defense yesterday at almost the same time Rittenhouse was.Hobbes said:
She is stating that historically white people have benefited from a criminal justice system that was designed to protect them. Rittenhouse is yet another example. POC do not profit from the criminal justice system in the same way white people do.mrussel1 said:
How does a shooting involving white people have anything to do with that? If he was black, yeah maybe he would have been guilty. But that means nothing because it's hypothetical. I mean is she saying that every white person acquitted from here on out is a beneficiary of white privilege even when the 'victims' are white? Is she saying that POC should not ever go to trial? IMO she is turning a crime that has zero to do with race, into a racial crime.Hobbes said:
The "justice" system was designed by white males to ensure that other white males would profit and be protected. Kyle profited from being white. From that night in Kenosha all the way to the verdict. Had Kyle been black, this would have had a different outcome. There is nothing "reasonable" about this regarding race.mrussel1 said:
Didn’t a white guy shoot three white guys?Hobbes said:
what does her post even mean? Is she upset that beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard?“In a separate proceeding Friday, the same jury convicted Coffee IV of one count of possession of a firearm by a felon.
At his sentencing Jan. 13, he faces a maximum prison term of 30 years.
“The state will be seeking that maximum 30 years upon him,” Assistant State Attorney Chris Taylor said after court.“
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy to see gun laws being enforced, but if you’re going to use that story as a comparison to Rittenhouse, I think that’s a noteworthy distinction.
I don’t know. I’m not complaining about the felon or his punishment, I’m in favor of it. But I genuinely don’t understand how Rittenhouse walked on the possession charge (or reckless endangerment for that matter).I spoke about the endangerment charges before, if you acquit on the murder you had to acquit on the endangerment. The endangerment chargers were specific to the 2 individuals he shot at but missed. So if you’re going to say shooting and killing was justified, how are you going to find him guilty of shooting and missing?Good to know.I fail to see the relevance in barrel length in relation to 16 & 17 year olds being able to possess, but wtf do I know.Edited to include ages as opposed to ‘minors’.
If that’s the case, then why restrict ownership of long barreled rifles for 16 & 17 year olds?I know you didn’t make the law, I’m just pointing out the absurdity I see with it.Regarding the decision to toss the charge:According to this article in the Milwaukee Sentinel, this doesn’t set a precedent as that would require an appellate court to affirm the judge’s decision.Had the judge made this decision months ago, as the defense requested, the prosecution could have turned to an appellate court for a decision as to whether or not it was the right call. Tossing it when he did left the prosecution with no recourse in that regard. Does the judge owe the prosecution anything? No, not at all, but I think it’s noteworthy nonetheless.0 -
Just guessing here, but restricting ownership means it’s under the control of an adult. I don’t think a minor can even buy ammo. The minor would need permission of said owner and need them to buy the ammo so they can target practice or hunt or whatever.Merkin Baller said:mace1229 said:
I assume it has to do with concealability. Just like hand guns aren’t legal for them to possess.Merkin Baller said:
Yeah, I edited.mace1229 said:
Not any gun. Just long rifles with a barrel over 12” (or maybe it was 16”, I don’t have it memorized).Merkin Baller said:
So, it’s legal for minors in WI to possess other people’s guns.mace1229 said:
According to WI law he can posses long rifles, but not own it. So that charge was dropped.Merkin Baller said:
17 year olds are allowed to possess certain guns in WI? Or was it just a loophole in the wording of the law?Ledbetterman10 said:
It is noteworthy, but Rittenhouse’s gun wasn’t illegal. Maybe it should’ve been. That’s a gun law discussion though. As far as the law goes, Rittenhouse was able to have his and Coffee wasn’t because he had four felony convictions.Merkin Baller said:
He wasn’t completely acquitted though:Ledbetterman10 said:
A black guy that opened fire on sheriff deputies that were serving a warrant was acquitted due to claiming self-defense yesterday at almost the same time Rittenhouse was.Hobbes said:
She is stating that historically white people have benefited from a criminal justice system that was designed to protect them. Rittenhouse is yet another example. POC do not profit from the criminal justice system in the same way white people do.mrussel1 said:
How does a shooting involving white people have anything to do with that? If he was black, yeah maybe he would have been guilty. But that means nothing because it's hypothetical. I mean is she saying that every white person acquitted from here on out is a beneficiary of white privilege even when the 'victims' are white? Is she saying that POC should not ever go to trial? IMO she is turning a crime that has zero to do with race, into a racial crime.Hobbes said:
The "justice" system was designed by white males to ensure that other white males would profit and be protected. Kyle profited from being white. From that night in Kenosha all the way to the verdict. Had Kyle been black, this would have had a different outcome. There is nothing "reasonable" about this regarding race.mrussel1 said:
Didn’t a white guy shoot three white guys?Hobbes said:
what does her post even mean? Is she upset that beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard?“In a separate proceeding Friday, the same jury convicted Coffee IV of one count of possession of a firearm by a felon.
At his sentencing Jan. 13, he faces a maximum prison term of 30 years.
“The state will be seeking that maximum 30 years upon him,” Assistant State Attorney Chris Taylor said after court.“
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy to see gun laws being enforced, but if you’re going to use that story as a comparison to Rittenhouse, I think that’s a noteworthy distinction.
I don’t know. I’m not complaining about the felon or his punishment, I’m in favor of it. But I genuinely don’t understand how Rittenhouse walked on the possession charge (or reckless endangerment for that matter).I spoke about the endangerment charges before, if you acquit on the murder you had to acquit on the endangerment. The endangerment chargers were specific to the 2 individuals he shot at but missed. So if you’re going to say shooting and killing was justified, how are you going to find him guilty of shooting and missing?Good to know.I fail to see the relevance in barrel length in relation to 16 & 17 year olds being able to possess, but wtf do I know.Edited to include ages as opposed to ‘minors’.
If that’s the case, then why restrict ownership of long barreled rifles for 16 & 17 year olds?I know you didn’t make the law, I’m just pointing out the absurdity I see with it.Regarding the decision to toss the charge:According to this article in the Milwaukee Sentinel, this doesn’t set a precedent as that would require an appellate court to affirm the judge’s decision.Had the judge made this decision months ago, as the defense requested, the prosecution could have turned to an appellate court for a decision as to whether or not it was the right call. Tossing it when he did left the prosecution with no recourse in that regard. Does the judge owe the prosecution anything? No, not at all, but I think it’s noteworthy nonetheless.
I agree it’s dumb. Should require an adult present. I don’t think you can even buy a BB gun or BBs until you’re 18. So allowing a 16 year old with a rifle unsupervised seems like a bad decision.0 -
Yup, doesn't exist. All a hoax.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/09/business/black-homeowners-appraisal-discrimination-lawsuit/index.html
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Sure, it doesn't exist. Nothing to see here.
A co-worker invited him to a rural cabin. He was killed hours later.
The last time Carmela King saw her fiance, she dropped him off to hang out with a co-worker in rural Pennsylvania. Her last “Love You” text message went unanswered. A few hours later, she said, his dead body was lying across the cabin’s front lawn — his back peppered with multiple bullet wounds.
Peter Bernardo Spencer was killed Dec. 12 — more than six weeks ago. Since then, no charges have been filed in the killing of the 29-year-old father-to-be.
“He was a good man and his life mattered,” King said. “He deserved to be here to raise his child and to be the family man, the husband, and the hard-working man he desired to be.”
For 45 days, the people accused of killing Spencer have walked free — leaving his family, activists and religious groups flummoxed. The incident, they said, underscores a grim double standard in which the wheels of justice operate differently based on the victim’s skin color.
Spencer, who emigrated from Jamaica in 2013, was found dead shortly before 2:30 a.m. in Rockland, Pa. — some 85 miles north of Pittsburgh — according to a Pennsylvania State Police news release. Officers also found multiple firearms, “ballistic evidence” and drugs at the cabin. The suspect — described as a 25-year-old White man — and three other individuals, who are also White, were detained and questioned. All four were released after consultation with the Venango County District Attorney’s Office. The State Police’s Heritage Affairs team, which responds to hate- or bias-related crimes, was notified — but Spencer’s death is not being investigated as a hate crime.
“I would love to see a district attorney who finds a crime scene with a house full of Black people, a White guy in the yard with nine bullet holes, and then detains them and lets them all go,” said civil rights attorney Paul Jubas, who is advising Spencer’s family. “I would love to see what the response is to that. That district attorney would be instantly out of office the next day. White America would not stand for that.”
The Southern Poverty Law Center tracked 36 active hate groups in Pennsylvania — most of them with skinhead, neo-Nazi and white supremacist ideologies, according to its data. A history of sundown towns — or all-White communities where minorities were barred after dark by the threat of violence — is still entrenched in the state’s most rural areas, said the Rev. Dale Snyder, a pastor at Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church.
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
It sounds like a drug deal gone wrong..
Give Peas A Chance…0 -
Really? It sounds like a swinger party gone wrong to me. I guess both are possible since we have no evidence for either.Meltdown99 said:It sounds like a drug deal gone wrong..0 -
well they did find guns, ammo.mrussel1 said:
Really? It sounds like a swinger party gone wrong to me. I guess both are possible since we have no evidence for either.Meltdown99 said:It sounds like a drug deal gone wrong..evidence that matched the shooting in the back. ..and drugs but all were released? drugs found and you are released?_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Drugs could be pot which is nothing. The guns and shot in the back though? No foul play?mickeyrat said:
well they did find guns, ammo.mrussel1 said:
Really? It sounds like a swinger party gone wrong to me. I guess both are possible since we have no evidence for either.Meltdown99 said:It sounds like a drug deal gone wrong..evidence that matched the shooting in the back. ..and drugs but all were released? drugs found and you are released?
I initially thought it was a key party gone wrong...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help