The Instigator
Conservatism
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
KeyserSoze115
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

Black Lives Matter Movement/Protests

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
KeyserSoze115
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/8/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,031 times Debate No: 93506
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (55)
Votes (1)

 

Conservatism

Con

In this debate I will argue against the entire BLM movement. If you are not educated on this subject don't bother debating. I will not accept biased opinions of any kind. Emphasis on biased. It will not work because I myself am black. This is to be a statistically accurate and factual debate. Any form of trolling/lying and I will end the debate. I look forward to his/her reply.
KeyserSoze115

Pro

The Black Lives Matter movement brings needed attention to police brutality in the United States. (https://www.theguardian.com...). The unnecessary violence committed by civil servants on American citizens is shameful and against the very values of this country. Our country's treatment of the black community is a stain on our good name. (https://www.rt.com...). It complicates our standing in the international community while fighting for human rights. (http://www.newsweek.com...). Since it's inception the United States government has been systematically oppressing black people. From slavery to Jim Crow to a broken criminal justice system and a rigged economy the black community has had to face overwhelming adversity in their pursuit of the American Dream. (http://www.latimes.com...). When people are being murdered by the people they pay to protect them it is every Americans duty to exercise their rights as citizens and protest this atrocity. (https://www.law.cornell.edu...). Our criminal justice system needs to be reformed. We need more transparency and more accountability. We can not allow murderers to escape justice. We can not allow the police to obstruct justice when they murder civilians. (https://www.hrw.org...). We can not allow prosecutors to act like defense attorneys for their friends in the police department when they are in front of a grand jury for taking the life of a civilian. (http://www.msnbc.com...). We need higher standards for use of force. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty so we need to err on the side of the civilian. Police can't just go around killing people when they get scared. (http://www.fox9.com...). I understand they want to go home at the end of the day but it's a dangerous job. That's what they signed up for. That's what we pay them for. We can not allow a 12 year old boy to be gunned down within seconds of the police arriving on the scene because he was playing with a toy. (https://www.theguardian.com...). I don't want that in my community and I'm sure they don't want it in their community. We must demand justice for all.
Debate Round No. 1
Conservatism

Con

Thank you for your reply. Let's start with some statistics. I'm sure you've seen this statistic commonly around the internet but nonetheless, it is still viable information.

"1. Cops killed nearly twice as many whites as blacks in 2015. According to data compiled by The Washington Post, 50 percent of the victims of fatal police shootings were white, while 26 percent were black. The majority of these victims had a gun or "were armed or otherwise threatening the officer with potentially lethal force," according to MacDonald in a speech at Hillsdale College.

Some may argue that these statistics are evidence of racist treatment toward blacks, since whites consist of 62 percent of the population and blacks make up 13 percent of the population. But as MacDonald writes in The Wall Street Journal, 2009 statistics from the Bureau of Justice Statistics reveal that blacks were charged with 62 percent of robberies, 57 percent of murders and 45 percent of assaults in the 75 biggest counties in the country, despite only comprising roughly 15 percent of the population in these counties."

http://www.dailywire.com...

The largest killer of blacks are blacks themselves. Roughly 90% of all African homicides are by others of the same race. If. This year around 90 cops have been killed. This year an estimated 126 blacks have been killed by police. The numbers are very close. http://www.dailywire.com...

BLM claims that there is a growing oppression of blacks in this nation, yet they refuse to acknowledge their own races crime against itself. Over fourth of july more than 60 people were shot. Most were black yet we don't hear them protesting guns or gang violence. They protest the small percentage of white on black crimes that seemingly are unjustified, yet we later find out were justified in some cases such as trayvon martin and the ferguson shooting.
http://www.copinthehood.com...

Don't get me wrong. Of course there is oppression against blacks and of course there are violent hate crimes that cops commit. To those cops that commit such actions, I say they can rot in hell for all eternity. The bottom line is that BLM don't care about black lives really at all. If they truly did, why do they not address the more important issue of Gang violence and that 90% of all blacks killed are by other blacks.
http://newobserveronline.com...

This is the most sickening of all of the information I will present to you.
"BLM agitators have also used the refrain "pigs in a blanket, fry "em like bacon!" on numerous occasions to promote violence against police officers."
http://www.infowars.com...
On the source I have given you there are videos of BLM protestors chanting to "Kill cops" This whole organization doesn't care about black lives and here's some more evidence of why: https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

To conclude, BLM claim there is an outstanding oppression against blacks yet refuse to fix the bigger issues first. They claim the "#AllLivesMatter is like saying that all bones matter but you need to fix the broken one first." Is so rediculous I cannot get over how ignorant that statement is. If black lives matter, fix the bigger issues. The more profound ones.
KeyserSoze115

Pro

Let's start with some history. In "1619 the first African American indentured servants arrive in the American colonies. Less than a decade later, the first slaves are brought into New Amsterdam (later, New York City). By 1690, every colony has slaves." (https://www.nps.gov...). Black people were kept as slaves for over 200 years in America until "President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, announcing, "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious areas "are, and henceforward shall be free."" (https://www.ourdocuments.gov...) and "the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865... The 13th Amendment to the Constitution declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Formally abolishing slavery in the United States," (https://www.loc.gov...).
Even after they gained their freedom there were many in America who viewed black people as inferior and felt they didn't deserve equal rights. (https://www.splcenter.org...). "Many Christian ministers and theologians taught that whites were the Chosen people, blacks were cursed to be servants, and God supported racial segregation. Craniologists, eugenicists, phrenologists, and Social Darwinists, at every educational level, buttressed the belief that blacks were innately intellectually and culturally inferior to whites. Pro-segregation politicians gave eloquent speeches on the great danger of integration: the mongrelization of the white race. Newspaper and magazine writers routinely referred to blacks as niggers, coons, and darkies; and worse, their articles reinforced anti-black stereotypes. Even children's games portrayed blacks as inferior beings (see "From Hostility to Reverence: 100 Years of African-American Imagery in Games"). All major societal institutions reflected and supported the oppression of blacks." (http://www.ferris.edu...).
"Jim Crow and the Black Codes made economic, and thus residential, choice nearly impossible for Blacks in the South... The 20th century brought with it social, political, and economic forces that directly led to the highly segregated housing patterns visible today... The rise of industrialization was accompanied by a migration of African Americans from farms to cities to help meet the demand for labor.[27] However, various "legal" measures were taken in response to the rising numbers of African Americans in cities. For example, a number of cities in the South adopted ordinances that established separate neighborhoods for White and African-American residents. After the Supreme Court held one city"s residential segregation law unconstitutional in 1917,[28] "racial segregation in southern cities was accomplished by the same means as in the north: through violence, collective anti-Black action, racially restrictive covenants, and discriminatory real estate practices."[29]... During the 1920s, property values became tied to race "as a means to legitimize racial exclusion and protect racial boundaries."[33]" (http://www.civilrights.org...).
"Panicked by the prospect of black neighbors"and facilitated by highways and subsidized mortgage loans"countless whites left the cities for the suburbs. They were pushed along by "block-busters"; unscrupulous realtors who encouraged blacks to move into white areas (or created the appearance of transition), sparking an exodus and driving down prices. Once completed, more respectable realtors converted the homes and apartments into multi-family dwellings, cramming large groups into row houses meant for a handful of people. "In one Oakland apartment," writes Hirsch, "the space that was rented to one white family at $25 per month was able to house three black families at $100 per month." Journalist Isabelle Wilkinson describes the human side of this in her wonderful book, The Warmth of Other Suns. Block-busting inspired tremendous violence and anti-black sentiment, especially from working-class whites, who were often outbid by blacks, but couldn"t afford suburban housing outside of the city. What"s more, it"along with contract-buying and the destruction of the tax base"helped create the perception that blacks were responsible for the deterioration of a neighborhood. All of these tools and approaches were facilitated by the federal government and its partners at the state and local level. For decades, it was a project of Democrats and Republicans, who worked to appease a white supremacist majority, and often, shared their assumptions. This continued into the 1960s, and arguably, never stopped: Public housing projects, for instance, were placed in these segregated, depressed neighborhoods as a compromise with conservatives who opposed them outright. This, in turn, ensured concentrated poverty and all its attendant problems, as well as bad schools and poor public services. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 was meant to tackle all of this, but as Nikole Hannah-Jones details for ProPublica, it saw sporadic enforcement, if that. After a half century (or more), it"s not hard to see how we get to here from there: When you prevent a whole class of people from building wealth, accessing capital, or leaving impoverished areas, you guarantee cultural dysfunction and deep, generational poverty. When it comes to inner-city poverty"we built that." (http://www.thedailybeast.com...).
So let's keep that history in mind as we talk about statistics and crime in black communities because "poverty is the father of crime" (Aristotle) (http://www.economist.com...). Let us also keep in mind discriminatory policing practices like those uncovered in Ferguson Missouri (https://www.justice.gov...) that lead to situations like "Blacks are far more likely to be arrested for selling or possessing drugs than whites, even though whites use drugs at the same rate." (https://www.washingtonpost.com...). Also when you say "The majority of these victims had a gun or "were armed or otherwise threatening the officer with potentially lethal force," you have to remember that is based on what the officer said in his report and after murdering a civilian an officers report doesn't always reflect what actually happened. (http://www.latimes.com...). This is why we need more transparency. If you truly believe "there is oppression against blacks and of course there are violent hate crimes that cops commit. To those cops that commit such actions, I say they can rot in hell for all eternity" then you would agree that when cops commit such crimes there should be a fair, unbiased, transparent, and thorough investigation. Then you would agree "The Blue Wall of Silence" (http://www.pri.org...) is an obstruction of justice and you would be on the picket line demanding community oversight as well.
Now moving on to your main argument that "they refuse to acknowledge their own races crime against itself" because "we don't hear them protesting guns or gang violence" "and that 90% of all blacks killed are by other blacks". Actually there are protests over guns and gang violence. (https://www.dnainfo.com...) (http://www.slate.com...). But more importantly the perpetrators of gang violence are more consistently pursued to the fullest extent of the law while sadly the perpetrators of police brutality are not. Another important reason that the police killings deserve more attention is because it is a blatant violation of human rights enabled by government practices while "black on black crime" like all crime is a violation of law by one civilian against another civilian. So while they both end in a tragic loss of life one was committed by a civil servant and covered up by his colleagues and poorly prosecuted by his friends resulting in no justice while the other was committed by civilian who was prosecuted under the fullest extent of the law resulting in justice.
Now to address any inflammatory rhetoric at any of the protests associated with Black Lives Matter. You must remember this is a loosely organized movement that acts as a vehicle for people to vent their frustrations with a broken criminal justice system and the inflammatory rhetoric isn't part of the movement's platform but a result of the individual frustrations of the people using the movement to call for change.
So in conclusion let us not forget the history of oppression of the black community to keep in context the origins of many of the problems we face today. Let us keep in mind that racism, discrimination, and hate crimes aren't a thing of the past, they still exist today, and our fellow citizens need protection against such things. The criminal justice system is the mechanism to deliver justice in this country and when it is broken and preventing citizens of this country from obtaining justice it is the right and the duty of every American to rise up and protest these atrocities.
Debate Round No. 2
Conservatism

Con

The history of black oppression has nothing to do with the statistical margin of black crime in the united states. I would like to see a source linking slavery/oppression prior to 1970 that correlates with current crime rates.
http://theinjusticefile.blogspot.com...

Claiming poverty correlates to crime is simply untrue. "According to Census figures in 2013, 18.9 million whites are poor. That"s 8 million more poor white people than poor black people, and more than 5 million more than those who identify as Latino. A majority of those benefiting from programs like food stamps and Medicaid are white, too." Yet again whites make up a significantly higher portion of the population than blacks and yet are considerably lower in chances of committing a crime than blacks. Yet there are more than 8 million more whites in poverty than blacks. http://www.theroot.com...

http://www.breitbart.com...
"DOJ statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, black people committed 52% of homicides."

compared to the current black population and adjusting for migration/population you can see that the rate at which homicides are commiting in the early to late 2000's is around 50%. In 1960 black homicide rate in urban areas was still around 50%
http://theinjusticefile.blogspot.com...

Therefore the previous history of black crime in the U.S. has not changed drastically. I think we can all agree here blacks are treated much more fairly in the U.S. Me being black myself I have actually received special treatment in education. My friend and I attended a college course in European History. We had different teachers and performed the same project to prove that affirmitive action is unfair and needs to be repealed. I got a B+ On my project. He got a B- Both projects were exactly the same because we would talk over voice chat what we were going to put down. Moving onto the main priority of the debate.

---Year 1960

Rapes:: 52% Black
Robbery:: 56% Black
Murder:: 56% Black---

Blacks in 2015 made up almost 50% of the homicides in America in 2015 yet make up 14.5% of the entire population. https://www.fbi.gov...

If you would have read my sources and read my entire post, the pro would have noticed such statistics and still has yet to refute this point. Giving me a history lesson in racism during oppressive moments to africans provides no such evidence that those born today "millenials" are effected severely because of past oppression and poverty. As a black person and Obamas implementation of affirmitive action there are many opportunities for black to aquire a college degree. http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com...

It is illegal in the U.S. to deny that of a different race than white admission. If such case happens, the applicant can sue the college and will win with proper evidence. This is beside the point of the debate. This debate is meant to recognize the actions of BLM and why they don't recognize black on black crime as a more severe threat than the small percentage of hate crimes committed.

------------
I highly suggest you watch this video as it runs over some of the statistics I have made and much more. It's only 9 minutes. https://www.youtube.com...-------------

Pro: "you have to remember that is based on what the officer said in his report and after murdering a civilian an officers report doesn't always reflect what actually happened."

"As of Sunday, 1,502 people have been shot and killed by on-duty police officers since Jan. 1, 2015. Of them, 732 were white, and 381 were black" https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So you are telling me that of all 381 blacks killed. (Most likely a few more than that) Every single cop was either in the error or gave a false story? Even assuming half of those deaths is absolutely ridiculous. Black crime rate is much higher on a population scale than whites. Yet again proved by my sources. Police Officers are likely to meet multiple black criminals a day. Yet again, assuming that most of the cases that police officers make as a testimony are false is completely absurd as you're using not only biased opinion but un-proven statistics. I would like to see a source to back up such claims. Judging from each of your sources from Pri.org not many of them back up their claims with statistics or cross-referencing. I find this to be an unreliable source to use and you should probably cross reference such claims made.

'"The Blue Wall of Silence" (http://www.pri.org......) is an obstruction of justice and you would be on the picket line demanding community oversight as well."

This "Blue Wall of Silence" you speak of is a myth used by BLM protestors, Black Panther activists, and other anti-black oppression groups that claim there is a rising toll of hate crime in America. Not only is it statistically untrue and unproven your source does not back up such claim at all.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org...

"Actually there are protests over guns and gang violence. (https://www.dnainfo.com......) (http://www.slate.com......). But more importantly the perpetrators of gang violence are more consistently pursued to the fullest extent of the law while sadly the perpetrators of police brutality are not."

Protests over gun and gang violence is not the main reasoning for BLM. Their main goal is to stop oppression of blacks which is not statistically proven to be a rising conflict in America. Black lives matter claims that they want to stop the killing of blacks. (And i'll say it yet again, there is a significantly higher black on black crime rate than white cops on blacks. To top it off even smaller than that is a hate crime. Can you imagine being a white cop in the past few years? Do you not realize how in fear some of these cops are when confronting blacks? Not because of their race. But because if a Police officer has to make a last second decision to save his own life and end a young black mans life, the event will be spewed all over the media and just like the ferguson shooting, this cop will be harrassed and his life will be nothing but a constant threat of death. Do you honestly believe that cops are so racist. So many cops. Want the death of blacks unjustified and want to live a life of fear for not only themselves but their families? Putting your own family in danger over a hate crime is not something someone with morality would do. Like I said, of course there are hate crimes that cops commit. But there is no evidence that even 1/5 of all white cops commit hate crimes. Even now that the facts are out we find out that the alton stirling case was justified. That hasn't stopped BLM from protesting. Was it a sloppy handling of an arrest? Sure. How do you avoid potentially getting shot? You don't resist arrest and have an illegal weapon on you.

Pro: "sadly the perpetrators of police brutality are not."
This is yet again a false claim and is not supported by any source and/or statistic.
http://www.nytimes.com...
"The former New York police officer Michael Pena received 75 years from a Manhattan judge in 2012 for raping an elementary school teacher on her way to work."

The maximum punishment for rape is 30 years, in some circumstances life in prison. Notice "In some circumstances" meaning more than one misdemeanor or violent crime along with rape. This officer got 75 with a rape charge, public indecency (intoxication) and second degree attempted manslaughter which is punishable anywhere from 5-15 years. . I think we can agree that this officer has been punished much more than a civilian. Corruption among police officers are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and then some. Now before you make a claim such as "not all corrupt cops are brought to justice" far more murderers are not brought to justice than police officers.
"The clearance rate for murders is about 65% in the United States today" Meaning 35% of all murders are not solved as of right now. Whether a government official takes a life or a civillian, the punishment is still the same. It is murder.
https://www.quora.com...
http://www.nydailynews.com...
http://www.attorneys.com...

There is significantly more black on black crime than white cops who commit hate crime. To say that the small amount of hate crimes committed by cops is more important than 60 blacks being shot on fourth of july just this year is absolutely absurd. A black life taken is a black life taken. For you to make such a statement would be the same as me saying:

In 2015, 500 houses burned down. 15 of those houses were burned down by their neighbors. This is a far more important matter that must be stopped than the other 485 houses that are completely destroyed. BLM claims the biggest threat to black lives is white oppression. Yet white oppression is statistically much smaller than we can imagine. Even if all 380+ black deaths were hate crimes, that still doesn't denote the fact that 90% of blacks are victims of crime from their own race
KeyserSoze115

Pro

My opponent asks for a link between crime and black oppression. In round two I showed how the oppression of the black community created areas of concentrated poverty in our inner cities. First let us recognize that children born into poverty are far more likely to live in poverty as an adult. "One"s economic position is strongly influenced by that of one"s parents: 42 percent of children born to parents in the bottom fifth of the economic distribution remain in the bottom as adults and another 23 percent rise only to the second fifth, while 39 percent of children born to parents at the top of the income distribution remain at the top, with another 23 percent moving to the second fifth." (http://www.nccp.org...). We should also be aware of the effects of poverty on child development. "Child poverty and economic hardship can have significant consequences for children"s development and life chances. Growing up in poverty can be harmful to children"s cognitive development and ability to succeed in school, to their social and emotional well-being, and to their health." (https://www.princeton.edu...). Concentrated poverty has many negative effects on the community and the people living in it. When you have a lot of really poor people in concentrated area the community loses its tax base causing a decline in public services. Lack of funding for schools leads to a decline in educational opportunity. (http://usuncut.com...). Impoverished communities are less attractive to investors and employers limiting job opportunities. "lack of business competition, gaps in market information, and higher costs for doing business in poor neighborhoods can raise the prices charged for basic goods and services, such as food, car insurance, utilities, and financial services, in low-income neighborhoods." (http://www.frbsf.org...). "Residents of high-poverty areas experience negative health outcomes at much higher rates, owing partly to the stress of being poor and marginalized and partly to living in an environment with dilapidated housing and high crime. There may also be higher risk of exposure
to other environmental hazards, such as lead-based paint(http://www.cdc.gov...), and pollution from heavily trafficked roads nearby. Even when the residents of high-poverty areas seek medical attention, they may find that the quality of care available at local providers is inferior to the quality of care available to most residents of wealthier areas." "In general, high-poverty inner-city neighborhoods exhibit higher crime rates, especially for violent crime.96 One team of researchers found that neighborhood poverty is a significant predictor of local crime.97 In another study, Anne Case and Lawrence Katz show that neighborhood peer groups influence adolescents" propensity to engage in criminal behavior or drug use.98 In these neighborhoods, the social penalties for criminal activity may be lower, and reduced access to jobs and quality schools may further reduce the opportunity costs of crime." (http://www.bjs.gov...). If we look at any major city in America the poor side of town is the bad side of town. The cities with the highest crime rates have more poverty compared to the national average. (http://ww2.kqed.org...). Poverty is a major contributing factor to crime and the oppression of the black community created an endless cycle of poverty and crime in our inner cities.

Now my opponent says crime and poverty have no correlation. He says that there are actually more poor white people. But his own source says "that blacks and Latinos are disproportionately poor, 27 percent of African Americans and 25 percent of Latinos are poor, compared to just 9 percent of whites". (http://www.theroot.com...). Do to the relationship between poverty and crime when you see a higher rate of poverty within a demographic you can also expect to see a higher rate of crime.

My opponent repeatedly points to the high rate of crime in black communities like somehow it justifies police acting as judge jury and executioner on the street. But my opponent never addresses the issue of uneven policing. (http://www.nyclu.org...). In New York City 55% of the people stopped for stop and frisk were black even though the city is only 25% black. White only made up 10% of stops despite making up 45% of the population. (https://www.census.gov...). 90% of all people stopped were innocent. So if police are disproportionately looking for crime within one group of people chances are a higher rate of the crime they uncover will be within that group of people. Just like if I only fish in the Atlantic Ocean chances are the fish I catch will be from the Atlantic Ocean. That doesn't mean that I can't catch fish in the Pacific Ocean or that there are less fish to catch in the Pacific Ocean it only means that that I just don't fish in the Pacific Ocean.

High crime rates within a community does not justify police misconduct. Just because there are more criminals in a certain community doesn't mean cops are aloud to treat innocent members of that community as criminals. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Even if only a small percentage of police killings are unjustified it doesn't make the unjustified killings any less egregious. It doesn't make family members miss their brother, son, or husband any less. We can not allow our public servants to be so careless with civilian lives. We need higher standards for the use of force on the national level.

Just because more black people die from black on black crime then by the police doesn't mean you shouldn't work to solve both. Just like more people die from heart disease then cancer but we aren't going to stop trying to find a cure for cancer until we can prevent heart disease. So by repeating that more blacks die from black on black crime is not an argument against protesting police killings.

Your irrelevant anecdotes about affirmative action have nothing to do with this debate I would just like to point out that affirmative action has nothing to do with what grade you got on your school project. And no we can not all agree that black people are treated more fairly. Just for example studies show that if you have a black sounding name you are less likely to get a callback for a job even if you are just as qualified. (http://www.nber.org...).

My opponent says "But there is no evidence that even 1/5 of all white cops commit hate crimes". That is a really low bar. I sure hope 20% of cops aren't committing hate crimes. Even 1% is too much. We need to investigate every murder with an independent outside investigator and prosecute any wrong doing to the full extent of the law no matter what percentage of police are committing these crimes.

My opponent denies that police officers falsify reports and suppress evidence after a police shooting. The case of Laquan McDonald is the most recent high profile example of this but a simple Internet search will reveal this happens all over the country. (http://www.cnn.com...) (http://atlantablackstar.com...). I would also like to hear the reasoning behind your claim that the Alton sterling shooting was justified. The penalty for possession of an illegal weapon is not shoot on site. The gun was shown to be still in his pocket after he was shot. He was on the ground being restrained by multiple officers using a taser. I fail to see the justification in this shooting.

All of this is beside the point. The point of this debate is that as my opponent admits "Of course there is oppression against blacks and of course there are violent hate crimes that cops commit. To those cops that commit such actions, I say they can rot in hell for all eternity." and of course these crimes should be investigated by an impartial independent investigator and any wrong doing should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. That is all BLM is asking for. All of this other stuff is just a distraction. No one should escape justice even if their victim was a criminal. Every American has the right to protest and injustice is cause worthy of protest. Every American has the duty to demand liberty and justice for all.
Debate Round No. 3
Conservatism

Con

I would like to thank the pro for his quick reply. The pro opens his statement with a detailed and statistical analysis of poverty and the linking of crime. While I agree that poverty is linked with crime on some level but this is not the topic of the debate. The topic is the BLM movement and their claims to be fighting against oppression of blacks today by police officers. Mainly white. If you look on their website http://blacklivesmatter.com... their claims are much more different than what is seen in the media and what the protests have been about. The reason I am against the BLM movement is because they are not abiding by their said beliefs. The current movement of today from BLM has edged itself forward to the claims of white cop oppression against blacks.

Pro: "Now my opponent says crime and poverty have no correlation. He says that there are actually more poor white people. But his own source says "that blacks and Latinos are disproportionately poor, 27 percent of African-Americans and 25 percent of Latinos are poor, compared to just 9 percent of whites". (http://www.theroot.com......)."

Whites make up roughly 77.5% of the entire population of the United States. While 9% is a smaller number in percentage it is much larger on an actually scaled analysis. "18.9 million whites are poor. That"s 8 million more poor white people than poor black people, and more than 5 million more than those who identify as Latino. A majority of those benefiting from programs like food stamps and Medicaid are white, too." http://www.theroot.com...
If in fact poverty was the biggest determining factor of inner city concentrations of crime, then we would see much more crime among poor whites than we do with poor blacks. Seeing as how blacks make up 14% of the united states population and equate nearly 50% of all homicides the statistics of poverty and an underlying minority population making up such a large number of crime do not correlate correctly. As stated before, if this were the case white crime would be much higher seeing as how the extra 8 million would make up 1/5 of the entire black population itself.

The pro then proceeds to claim that oppression keeping blacks from success hold blacks down and chained into the inner cities where it becomes a concentrated collection of crime. This is a perfect statement that agrees with black on black crime. As stated before blacks are killed by other blacks at 90%. This is an overwhelmingly large number. The claim that the most important subject of black oppression is the murdering of blacks by whites is simply untrue and immoral to the families who have lost lives due to black homicide. For example:

(Not a real life scenario) If 90% of children in Africa are being killed by militia warlords and the other 10% are being killed by criminals it makes absolutely no sense to disregard the main factor of African children deaths which are militia warlords. This is the same for current day events. I am not saying to disregard white cop oppression. I am saying that there is NO push for black on black reform from the BLM movement at all when in their own name states "Black Lives Matter". If they truly do matter then why is their main priority on the small percentage of hate crimes induced upon blacks. When you repair a house, you do not start detailing right away. You fix the broken roof. You fix the missing door, and everything that is vital to the protection of it's inhabitants. This same rule applies to the economy, our U.S. debt is running at 19.3 trillion. http://www.usdebtclock.org... It is of the utmost importance to any politician who understands basic economic principles to balance the budget and reduce that debt or this nation's currency will fail. Continueing on to the topic." we find that during the 2012/2013 period, blacks committed an average of 560,600 violent crimes against whites, whereas whites committed only 99,403 such crimes against blacks. This means blacks were the attackers in 84.9 percent of the violent crimes involving blacks and whites" http://www.amren.com... "Some observers argue that what causes the overwhelming preponderance of black-on-white over white-on-black violence is "chance of encounter," due to the fact that there are five times as many whites as blacks in the American population. However, there are only about 30 percent more Hispanics than blacks, yet black-on-Hispanic violence is almost as lopsided as black-on-white violence. This suggests blacks may be deliberately targeting both whites and Hispanics." (Source from above) If we are going to the make a statement like that, one must also make a counter one. Clearly, there is an overwhelmingly high percentage of Black on white crime in America yet this goes unnoticed by the media and BLM. White's biggest threat for crime in the U.S. are blacks, yet we do not hear about the racism coming from blacks or that there is a bias in crime related events involving Black-on-White.

The pro continues to make statements regarding racism against blacks and it's correlation to poverty. Seeing as how this is not a part of the debate topic I will be brief. While the Pro does claim that the reason for the high percentage of crime among blacks is due to the relationship of poverty and concentration in inner cities, it still does not denote the fact that the highest contender of homicides against its own race is by African-American's themselves.

Pro: "My opponent repeatedly points to the high rate of crime in black communities like somehow it justifies police acting as judge jury and executioner on the street. But my opponent never addresses the issue of uneven policing. (http://www.nyclu.org......)."

I have not once stated that police involved in a hate crime are justified to be "Judge, Jury, and Executioner". Using such a phrase is not logical as there are split second decisions that go through a police officer's head in a life threatening situation. When a suspect refuses to show his/her hands there is potential that they have a weapon. When a suspect resists arrest, there is potential for the arrestee to have a weapon. There are many possibilities that officers face every day and claiming that each time a cop kills someone it is because they are taking matters into their own hands is not only false but highly disrespectful to those who put their lives on the line for the safety of American citizens. If there is a case of a police officer breaking the law, I believe no matter what race you are, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if then some.

Pro: "In New York City 55% of the people stopped for stop and frisk were black even though the city is only 25% black. White only made up 10% of stops despite making up 45% of the population."
I'm afraid that this statistic does not provide a convincing enough argument to prove the case of racial profiling. While I do agree that racial profiling is indeed a problem but there are a number of factors that may be involved. For one, the classification of race for NY's PD is virtually close to 50-50. (Whites vs. Non whites.) http://nypost.com... So this must mean that on the matters of racial profiling, blacks, hispanics, and othe races involved in policing must then also be taken into account of racial provisions. Yet BLM does not ever state this. To claim that the majority of black stops by 54% of whites were involved in a racial profiling case is not proven by any source or the one that the Pro has listed. I'm sure you must have seen this already but there is in fact a Harvard study proving that there is "No racial bias in police shootings" http://www.washingtontimes.com... consisting of 63 pages of statistical analysis on the use of force from police officers. Finding that Whites are more likely to be shot than blacks even though they encounter blacks much more often and are found to have had force used upon them more frequently than blacks in the cases of resisting arrest, use of baton, pepperspray, taser, etc. https://www.washingtonpost.com... This source while also in agreement to my statement, also shows that the use of force is more prevalent among blacks. It does NOT however, claim that the majority of cops who do use force are white, and it also does not show a racist bias.

Pro: "We can not allow our public servants to be so careless with civilian lives."
These men and women who serve ARE civilians. They simply put on a uniform. They have families and children whome they love dearly. That being said, they understand more than anyone that a life taken is also a life taken from someone elses family.

Pro: "Your irrelevant anecdotes about affirmative action have nothing to do with this debate"
I would like to remind the pro that while it does not deal with the debate, it was to refute a point that was stated. I would also like to remind the Pro that he himself has not stayed entirely on topic and that I have still accepted his argument and refuted it.

Pro: "My opponent denies that police officers falsify reports and suppress evidence after a police shooting."
I did not deny the corruption of cops completely, but only the misconception of this "Blue wall of silence" my opponent claimed was so prevalent.

Pro: "The point of this debate is that as my opponent admits "Of course there is oppression against blacks and of course there are violent hate crimes that cops commit."
My point being is that there are far bigger issues threatening black lives. Wish I could say more. But sadly I am out of typing room. An excellent debate nonetheless. I would like to thank the pro for his time.
KeyserSoze115

Pro

My opponent argues that there are actually more poor white people in America and that black people still commit a disproportionately higher percentage of crime in America. He dismisses the fact that a much smaller percentage of white people are poor. In most white communities there is a larger diversity of incomes and the poor make up a small percentage of the community causing less competition for low skill sources of income. However there are a few areas that are majority white and have a high percentage of people living below the poverty line. To help identify the reason for the disparity between murder rates in poor white communities verses poor black communities I would point to the environment in which these communities are located. You can not compare poor people living in the Appalachian Mountains to poor people living in the slums of Detroit. The areas where there are high percentages of poor white people are less densely populated reducing conflict for resources. The high crime areas of the inner city are much more densely populated causing more competition for the same sparse sources of income. Throughout this debate I have argued that it is the concentrated poverty in America's inner cities that creates the conditions for increased crime rates and that due to segregation and discriminatory housing policies the inner cities are mostly made up of black people. (http://nhi.org...). Black people are not inherently more violent or prone to criminal activity then white people. It's that there is not a lot of white people in high crime areas not that black people cause high crime areas. This is not a black problem. This is an American problem. "Black on black" crime is really just crime in a hyper segregated society. My opponent repeatedly cites the statistic that 90% of the murders in which the victim was black the person committing the murder was also black. But what he doesn't say is that 84% of murders in which the victim was white the person committing the murder was also white. All these statistics say is that white people tend to live in communities that are majority white and black people tend to live in communities that are majority black and if someone was to commit a murder the chances are the victim would be of the majority race of the community where the murder occurred. (https://ucr.fbi.gov...). My opponent says "White's biggest threat for crime in the U.S. are blacks". This is not what the data from his source or my source shows. Whites are far more likely to be victimized by other whites in both murder and violent crimes excluding murder. This is dangerously toxic misinformation that is only making the situation worse. If we want to improve race relations we have to be honest and objective and work together. These misleading statistics and false facts are only muddying the water and slowing down progress.
This is a complex issue. There is a lot of history and a lot of contributing factors behind the tragic amount of crime in too many black communities in America today. We can't talk about "black on black" crime honestly without talking about some of the the contributing factors that cause this crime. And poverty certainly plays an outsized role in being the primary motivation for the types of crimes that we are talking about. There wouldn't be a lot of people stealing cars or robbing convenience stores if they weren't desperate for money. There wouldn't be a lot of people standing on the corner selling drugs if they had a good job to go to. The violence that we speak of rises up out of these types of crimes. People in these impoverished inner city communities need to make a living and when they can't find jobs or the only jobs they can find are minimum wage that can't support their families then they need to supplement their income by other means. That creates a situation where you have a higher percentage of people in these communities of concentrated poverty looking to supplement their income in ways that aren't always legal like for example selling bootleg CDs and DVDs (Alton Sterling) or loose cigarettes (Eric Garner). When you have more people operating outside the law it creates more competition for the illegal market and when you are surrounded by people who are desperate for money, who might try to rob you, you have to protect your business and when you can't rely on the police for protection you have either rely on a gang for protection or you have to make sure you can protect yourself and that often requires carrying a weapon. In a situation with all these guns and the need to rely on yourself for protection it maximizes the possibility that a dispute can quickly escalate into a tragic loss of life. This is a human behavior that you can witness anywhere on the planet and if you want to solve this problem you have to look to the source. You can't just throw out statistics and expect to draw an intelligent conclusion without knowing the background behind those statistics and too often statistics are perverted in an attempt to justify racist ideologies and it is a disservice to this country.
My opponent tries to justify police shootings by saying "there are split second decisions that go through a police officer's head in a life threatening situation. When a suspect refuses to show his/her hands there is potential that they have a weapon. When a suspect resists arrest, there is potential for the arrestee to have a weapon" "These men and women who serve ARE civilians. They simply put on a uniform. They have families and children whome they love dearly." According to Merriam-Webster a civilian is "one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force" (http://www.merriam-webster.com...). Not showing your hands and resisting arrest is not a reason to get shot. Reaching for your wallet is not a reason to get shot. Playing with a toy gun is not a reason to get shot. A police officer getting scared and making the wrong split second decision is not an excuse to shoot someone. I understand they want to go home to their families but this is the job they signed up for. It is a dangerous and highly stressful job. If they can not handle the pressure then maybe they should think about getting a different job. But we absolutely can not have police officers with itchy trigger fingers going around killing civilians.
My opponent says that racial profiling is a problem but it is not a big deal because only half of the NYPD is white so this must mean that blacks and Hispanics must be guilty of racial profiling as well. Just because black people can be racist against there own kind does not mean that we don't need to solve this problem. We need to discourage racism committed by all races and
against all races. He then goes on to cite a recent working paper published by a Harvard professor that uncovered no racial bias in police shootings. However the data used for this part of the study came from only one city and relied on police reports. (http://scholar.harvard.edu...). I find any study on criminal activity that relies on criminals to confess there crimes inherently flawed. If we relied only on confessions to convict murderers I would expect a lot of murderers to escape justice. The study did find however that blacks are far more likely to experience non-lethal force at the hands of law enforcement. Black suspects were far more likely to experience being pushed to the ground or into a wall, an officer drawing and pointing his weapon at them, or an officer using a baton or pepper spray on them. (http://scholar.harvard.edu...). This disparity in use of force compounds the mistrust that many black communities have toward law enforcement. There have also been numerous studies to contradict the findings that blacks are not more likely to experience lethal force at the hands of law enforcement. (http://www.vanityfair.com...). Again this is just a distraction from the problem that police are too quick to use force regardless of what race the victim is and we need stricter national guidelines for when you are allowed to use different levels of force. We need more accountability and transparency when investigating use of force by an outside independent investigator. We need community oversight because the cops are there to serve the community. It is the community that pays their salaries and it is the community they should be accountable to. We need outside independent prosecutors that will maintain the integrity of the prosecution and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law.
My opponent is not denying the problem. He says "Of course there is oppression against blacks and of course there are violent hate crimes that cops commit." "I do agree that racial profiling is indeed a problem" "I did not deny the corruption of cops completely" "If there is a case of a police officer breaking the law, I believe no matter what race you are, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law" but for some reason he is against protesting these problems. He is against trying to solve these problems. He tries to distract us with other problems we could solve instead. That's like saying he is against the NRA because they only focus on gun rights and say nothing about abortion rights. Black Lives Matter was formed to bring much needed attention to police misconduct and the need for criminal justice reform. Just because there are other problems that need attention doesn't mean their purpose is any less worthy. If we do not come together and honestly try to solve this problem it will only continue to get worse
Debate Round No. 4
55 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Conservatism 6 months ago
Conservatism
And I don't dismiss the blue wall of silence. I have already sourced and given my arguments for that. I'm tired of doing this 3, 4, 5 times. It's not even the topic of the debate.

"Your ignoring everything I and your opponent said regarding police impunity"
Are you being serious? I've stated countless times my opinions on the justice system and it's effects on a community whether they're criminal or not. So don't even try and say I am.
Posted by Conservatism 6 months ago
Conservatism
The whole purpose of affirmative action is to grant opportunities to blacks and other cultures..I was merely using my project as an example of why affirmative action is unfair. My teacher is obviously a liberal and affirmative action is enforced in schools. I was trying to help the Pro understand what affirmative action does. I wasn't using it as proof that blacks have a much better life than whites? For all I know maybe my teacher made a mistake I could care less. I was just using it as an example. Stop gripping onto that like it's the biggest mistake that cost me the entire debate. You're making a mountain out of an anthill with that one. You're mind boggling. Me claiming that you support BLM just because of their race is a racist statement? I am proving your ignorance comment after comment. You fail to recognize the real problem. I don't see you or BLM supporting any whites that have been victims of police brutality? You still have ignored my main premise of the argument. Or do you not believe whites EVER fall victim to brutality? It's just african americans? If you say yes, then that is complete and utter proof of your brainwashed narrative. You say that BLM is for the reformation of the justice system. Ok great! If they are, don't just side with one race. THAT is racist. You clearly are becoming volatile in your emotions by expressing that you want to report me for something that isn't even racist. As a matter of fact, it's quite the contrary. Let me explain it for you. When I say you're just siding with BLM because they are black, that means without information and proper facts you are blindly accepting what an organization deems as truth regardless of anything else that may prove on the contrary. THAT is racist. Stop demonizing my statements they make you look childish.
Posted by DavidMancke 6 months ago
DavidMancke
On top of the false dilemma, and on top of your subjective narrative, you offered some real hogwash.

You dismiss the blue wall of silence as a myth; have you ever heard of Frank Serpico..? Police and the court system close ranks to protect there own. This has been robustly established.

You presume that black people have some privilege over white people in America when noting supports it. You just offer, "affirmative action" and some report you did in school. That is horribly weak.

You fail to understand the significance of police operating with impunity.

You accuse me of biased voting in support of BLM just because they are black. That is racist! Your ignoring everything I and your opponent said regarding police impunity in favor of just screaming bias, when it's demonstrably clear who is speaking out of bias here. (that's you, btw)

In fact, I resent what you said, "Because they are black" so much I am compelled to report it a racist behavior/hatespeech.
Posted by DavidMancke 6 months ago
DavidMancke
"Do you believe that we should forget about the insanely high number of black on black homicides and focus on fixing this small number of justice criminalities performed by police?"

The way you have cast this is a false dilemma, an imagined "either, or" scenario.

No we should not ignore homicide trends. Yes we need to address racism in our justice system. These are not mutually exclusive, and I have been clear about that, and what make extrajudicial police violence such a significant issue even if one cop escapes justice.

Your problem is there is an evaluative element to your case that is bias, by virtue of putting a premium on one problem versus another. You then cherry pick statistics to try and support it. (Your statistics about black criminality and the rate at which cops kill black people at are not without counter.)

Also, I am from Spokane Washington, and we have bad history of police corruption out in teh street and in the station house.

We have had several extrajudicial police related homicides here in the past 15 years. Most of the victims were white. Before you go there, there was plenty of public outrage, but as in many cities, the fox guards the hen house. It took the needless slaughter of a mentally handicapped man trying to buy candy to get any attention to the issue. (cops are married to the local news here)

Finally, we did get a conviction of just one of the cops that killed poor Otto Zehm. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted or reduced to less than a year.

All of this goes to show the harms of cops operating with impunity; which is what BLM protests.

BLM's own website claims to include people of any race, especailly those impacted by unfair police practices. They even use the term, "all lives matter."

Part of the problem with your case and your perspective is conflating bad behavior of select examples expressing similar sentiments as BLM with the movement itself.
Posted by Conservatism 6 months ago
Conservatism
You cannot facilitate a normal thinking pattern, can you? Your incoherent statements are so mind numbingly disproportionate to what I'm actually saying that it hurts. Not only do you jump to conclusions, but you mentally cannot think past your own bias and misunderstanding. It's like in school when you don't get something, The teacher will explain it to you and the student still doesn't get it. That is exactly what i'm dealing with. Your irrelevant arguments pass around mine. You still don't recognize the facts. And still haven't responded to my questions. Do you believe that we should forget about the insanely high number of black on black homicides and focus on fixing this small number of justice criminalities performed by police? You have to have a sense of morality and logic. Yet for you, morality is biased and your support of BLM is proof. Only because they are black. Yet you turn a blind eye to white people who are victims of police brutality. Oh but there's no such thing as white oppression is what you're saying. White people are never victims of police brutality. See, you cannot tell who's racist and who's not because emotions will never be on paper. This is another prime example of what you fail to understand. #AllLivesMatter
Posted by DavidMancke 6 months ago
DavidMancke
**

#blacklivesmatter
Posted by DavidMancke 6 months ago
DavidMancke
I am done with this comment showdown. You lost. My vote was upheld twice, warts and all. If you are still that wound up over black criminality I will challenge you to another debate addressing BLM and you can even oppose; in order to lighten your burden of proof.

#Blacklivematter
Posted by DavidMancke 6 months ago
DavidMancke
You are a highly recalcitrant student, and I don't know what you hope to prove at this point anyways.

Simply put you clearly think that Black on black crime is more significant than police corruption. I disagree by virtue of the corrupt police are authority figures abusing their charge.

You point to some 90% statistic to make your case, calling it a "bigger issue" than police violence on a basis of frequency. This whole line of thinking forgets there is a difference between one civilian acting criminally against another and an authority figure abusing power, then operating with impunity. The same report that excuses Wilson exposes this pattern.

This is not painting a house bro. This is criminal justice and what you call a small level of partiality can ruin peoples lives. The report showed us that as well. You ignore it.

One of you issues is that you blast us with your sentiments and then respond with shock and flame when directed to the glaring gaps in your reasoning. Rather than reexamine your work, you just double down.

What the hell do you mean, "If we were racist there wouldn't be blacks..? You need to answer that because it sound like your saying, if "we" were racist there would be no blacks in public office, and if that is the threshold for racism its a foolish threshold. There were a few black people in office during reconstruction after the civil war. Did that mean racism was gone. Clarify that please, because as stated it's absurd.

Obama has not advanced any affirmative action policies whatsoever. More to the point, I told you how your use of Affirmative action looks in the debate. You don't have your facts straight regarding the practice and the POTUS, and you use it to claim that blacks are treated better than whites in the US and it's not at all topical. So again, it looks like your interrupting yourself to repeat diatribe older than me. Like your pulling over real quick just to get this like jibe about AA out there.
Posted by Conservatism 6 months ago
Conservatism
It's clear you are thinking on a socially acceptable level and not a logical, statistical aspect. So anything I source you just Ignore. You asked me to make my case and I did a second time. Even more clearly. I'm sorry you cannot grasp what I'm trying to say, and instead, claim I'm a racist to my own kind for wanting black crime to be lowered. This is a pointless argument.
Posted by Conservatism 6 months ago
Conservatism
For one, the attorney general is a she...My reasoning for pointing that out is that you claim the justice system is so flawed, yet we have a democratic, black, woman as the attorney general in charge of MULTIPLE public cases and safety. If we were racist, there wouldn't be blacks. I'm so confused as to why I have to explain these things over and over. I only have a couple thousand characters to write this all. Why are you bringing back the affirmative action concept? I have already explained this. Affirmative action was signed by john f. kennedy as an executive order. It was originally intended to make sure that ALL races had equal opportunity. LBJ made it so that those under previous historical oppression receive benefits. Clinton made those guidelines even more strict and now Under the Obama administration it is even more reformed. Yet black unemployment is double that of whites. http://www.npr.org... So my argument against affirmative action is not racist and it further emphasises your ignorance by calling me a racist with no logical backing other than that of which you feel.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by DavidMancke 7 months ago
DavidMancke
ConservatismKeyserSoze115Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD: An overwhelming and easy Pro decision. If I could fail Con, he would be repeating this class. I will provide a lengthier RFD in the comments, but simply put Con misses the boat by echoing exhausted and familiar anecdotes about black on black crime while missing the issue of the debate and BLM movement in general; police brutality and the impunity those police.