That first bit I won't take seriously because you know damn well that I understood what he meant and that I disagree with what he said.

Statistically speaking, certain races are commiting more crimes of certain types than other groups in major cities hence why they're being targeted by law enforcement over others. If they were just being targeted without being charged or convicted then it would be plainly a case of being wrongfully discriminated against. Of course, someone's race doesn't make them a criminal but certain types of crimes are commited by certain groups more than others. That's a fact but that information is used to help catch the persons responsible for the crime or at least help narrow down where to look or who pay more attention to. For example, the majority of serial killers are white males between certain ages. It would make sense for police and investigators to focus their efforts around that group over others.  Frankly, I don't believe that all discrimination is bad, some discrimination is needed for certain things.  

It's not a contest to see what group gets wrongfully discriminated against the most. There's no point in diving into that. We're better off dealing with wrongful discrimination in general and not just on one group's bit of wrongful discrimination. 

Using Europe as an example is bad. I hate when white people act oblivious to the reality of white privilege both in the U.S specifically and accross the rest of the world. Have whites been victims?

Yes! By other whites who are more powerful or rich. No white person has been discriminated against for being white (skin). Jews xould pass as German or any other white person as there was no way to distinguish them outside of language or name.

Here are some facts. Other races have been victimized by whites. From Africans, to Asians, to Indians, to Native Americans and Australians.

Both the indigenous population of the Americas and Australia were basically exterminated by Caucasians so don't be surprised that none whites don't sympathize with the so called white struggle.

Even poor whites face better treatment than that of a rich none white person. Poor whites in the U.S. don't get abused by cops like minorities. There is no stereotype to describe whites like other races.

You have a team named Redskins but whiteskins would never be tolerated. The list just goes on and on. So the next time you even think of asking such an obvious question think about the facts I mentioned.

By the way. I am bi-racial and can pass for white but I don't ever mention my white heritage and don't care to know anything about it because slavery is the only reason I am here and why I have white ancestry.

Wh en you are refused a house because of your skin color then you can complain, if you were never allowed to vote, drink from a water fountain or refused service because of your white skin then complain.

If you are hung, beat or raised like livestock on a plantation because your white skin is hated, then and only then can you claim discrimination or victimization.

Your lack of reality and understanding is why people feel the way they do towards white people so remember that.

1.  Then why did you say "Couldn't the same be said the other way around?" when that's clearly logically impossible? 

2.  But what kind of justifiable discrimination could explain why blacks would be subjected to car searches that aren't supported by evidence (as proven by the fact that they don't pay off as often)?  What crimes are you thinking about that blacks would do more often than whites and have evidence of in their cars? 

3.  I disagree with the idea that we can't do any fix of discrimination that doesn't fix all discrimination equally ... although I do appreciate the irony

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-43 

table 43A shows total arrests for 2014 by race. Keep in mind that whites make up 62% of the US population. The percentage of crimes for each race often mirror the percentage of their population in the US except for a few cases. Asians make up 6% of the US population but they only commit 1% of all crime in the US in 2014. Blacks commited 27% of all crime in 2014 but yet they only make up 12% fo the population. They committed more murders and robberies than everyone else. You mentioned disproportionately, right?

Well, it seems blacks disproportionately commit more crimes than every other race in the US hence they're targeted by police. 

Even if your points are true and appropriate in general (i.e. firstly, blacks commit more crimes hence are targeted and arrested more and not are arrested more because targeted unjustly (truth IMO is somewhere in between); and secondly it's right for law enforcement to subject people to invasive searches without suspicion beyond skin color), what crimes do you propose blacks are committing disproportionately that explains being pulled over and having their car searched disproportionately? 

Your link shows a whole lot of crime arrests (not convictions) and surely you don't propose that cops expect to find evidence of prostitution on these traffic stops.  When I look at that list two items jump out as being most relevant to car searches:  Motor vehicle theft and driving under the influence.  Put those two together and the total for blacks is barely out of proportion (higher) to the population, while the total for whites is more out of proportion (higher) to the population than blacks.  (82.7%/62% vs 14.0%/12%)  Based on that, cops shouldn't pull over blacks more than whites, if anything the opposite. 

Alot of what you're asking me can be honestly figured out by reading through that info in that link I gave ya. Especially if you bother to look at the info objectively. You're gettin to the point where I can be very sarcastic with ya if I wanted and frankly, this is getting tedious. I said my piece and made my points, I'm done.