Sikh man shot dead ‘execution-style’ in a New York neighbourhood

[californiasardar1 982]

3 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

What's that?

Are there MORE Sikhs in Richmond Hill than other places where they aren't attacked?

When I talk of a "stronghold" does your mind conjure up an image of a fort with the tops of turbans sticking out over the ramparts? A stronghold in the contemporary urban sense isn't what you're thinking it is.

 

Are you so <banned word filter activated> dense that you don't understand that, for example, 1% = 100*0.01%, meaning that there are 100 times as many Sikhs susceptible to getting attacked, but 1% and 0.01% are both very small percentages?

[MisterrSingh 8,529]

22 minutes ago, californiasardar1 said:

Are you so <banned word filter activated> dense that you don't understand that , for example, 1% = 100*0.01%, meaning that there are 100 times as many Sikhs susceptible to getting attacked, but 1% and 0.01% are both very small percentages?

I know that you American cuck! How am I not speaking in RELATIVE TERMS?

50 SIKHS in a CITY is still greater than 5 SIKHS in another CITY. You'd expect those 50 SIKHS to have some greater sway than the 5 SIKHS in the next city.

Frig me, you're a frustrating so-and-so.

[ChardikalaUK 885]

On 6/29/2022 at 8:35 PM, MisterrSingh said:

I know that you American cuck! How am I not speaking in RELATIVE TERMS?

50 SIKHS in a CITY is still greater than 5 SIKHS in another CITY. You'd expect those 50 SIKHS to have some greater sway than the 5 SIKHS in the next city.

Frig me, you're a frustrating so-and-so.

Whether it's 5 or 50, it won't make a difference if the others are 100,000.

Things are very different in terms of Sikh numbers in America compared to the UK and Canada. 

[Ranjeet01 3,909]

On 6/28/2022 at 6:11 PM, Premi5 said:

I think we need someone like @Ranjeet01 who knows NY well to give us an opinion. 
 

I have no idea , but probably it’s not the only affordable place

The article doesn’t say the demographic of the killer

New York is not a cheap place. 

I am no expert either.

Sikhs seem to congregate in certain places, Queens in New York seems to be an area which is preferred. 

Our people tend to like living on the outskirts or peripheries of areas. Queens borders Long Island which is where Sikhs in Queens move to once they are established. 

Also for some weird reason our people tend to like living near airports. La Guardia and JFK are not too far from Queens.

It is in the same way we Sikhs in West London or East London move to the home counties for a more suburban lifestyle.

[Ranjeet01 3,909]

44 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

New York is not a cheap place. 

I am no expert either.

Sikhs seem to congregate in certain places, Queens in New York seems to be an area which is preferred. 

Our people tend to like living on the outskirts or peripheries of areas. Queens borders Long Island which is where Sikhs in Queens move to once they are established. 

Also for some weird reason our people tend to like living near airports. La Guardia and JFK are not too far from Queens.

It is in the same way we Sikhs in West London or East London move to the home counties for a more suburban lifestyle.

Though if I explore this further. 

I think that when Sikhs were moving to New York in the 70's,  it was a much rougher place than it is now.

Manhattan is like Central London and people mainly lived in apartments and in those days it was a much sleazier place.

Our people don't like living in apartments. We prefer houses. There is no way our people like to live in places like the Bronx  (too many blacks),  Brooklyn has too many blacks as well.

So the only borough that may be suitable is Queens as it was probably more affordable, less crime ridden where there is more space and you could buy a house. Not a terraced house but a detached one with a basement.

What you probably also note is that the demographics has probably changed. 

These boroughs of New York are quite big and Richmond Hill probably more Jews and Italians living there and probably less blacks Hispanics etc

But over the years there has been a demographic shift. This might explain in part why we are seeing things happening. But there are likely also other factors.

 

[californiasardar1 982]

On 7/2/2022 at 9:22 AM, ChardikalaUK said:

Whether it's 5 or 50, it won't make a difference if the others are 100,000.

Things are very different in terms of Sikh numbers in America compared to the UK and Canada. 

And this is the extremely simple fact he fails to understand.

 

[MisterrSingh 8,529]

28 minutes ago, californiasardar1 said:

And this is the extremely simple fact he fails to understand.

 

Oh shut up.

Is there some kind of magical invisible veil that envelops Sikhs and weakens them whenever they cross over into the mystical land of America? Maybe you fellas need to stop acting big in the pind, and stop getting your tatti kicked in when you go to the West?

[harkirat23 69]

*kindly stick to the topic*

[californiasardar1 982]

On 7/12/2022 at 12:48 PM, MisterrSingh said:

Oh shut up.

Is there some kind of magical invisible veil that envelops Sikhs and weakens them whenever they cross over into the mystical land of America? Maybe you fellas need to stop acting big in the pind, and stop getting your tatti kicked in when you go to the West?

 

I don't understand what point you think you are making. Resorting to insults doesn't help your case. It is also really lame for you to make this some sort of US Sikhs vs UK Sikhs thing. Does it make you feel better about yourself to engage in this kind of petty one-upmanship?

You don't appear to grasp very basic realities related to population density. From your posts, you sound very provincial. It might be illuminating for you to occasionally leave Wolverhampton or Southall or wherever you live. More troubling than your provincialism is your inability to understand basic quantitative reasoning. I don't say these things to try to insult you, and it gives me no happiness to note these things. You seem like a really nice guy (although you try to hide it). People like you are the future of the Sikh quam. So in making these observations, I feel disappointed and depressed.

[californiasardar1 982]

On 6/29/2022 at 9:35 PM, MisterrSingh said:

I know that you American cuck! How am I not speaking in RELATIVE TERMS?

50 SIKHS in a CITY is still greater than 5 SIKHS in another CITY. You'd expect those 50 SIKHS to have some greater sway than the 5 SIKHS in the next city.

Frig me, you're a frustrating so-and-so.

 

I am going to try one more time to help you understand: a man with $50 in his bank account is ten times richer than a man with $5 in his bank account. But the difference is essentially meaningless, because both of them are extremely poor.

[MisterrSingh 8,529]

1 hour ago, californiasardar1 said:

 

I am going to try one more time to help you understand: a man with $50 in his bank account is ten times richer than a man with $5 in his bank account. But the difference is essentially meaningless, because both of them are extremely poor.

I meant it the other way round.