Total Posts:51|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

#blacklivesmatter, keep on being helpful...

Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.
My work here is, finally, done.
Gmork
Posts: 82
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 10:06:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

Is allowing for a public space to hold protests not helping their cause?
Berend
Posts: 188
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2015 4:22:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/17/2015 10:06:19 AM, Gmork wrote:
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.


Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

Is allowing for a public space to hold protests not helping their cause?

Depends. For me, it just annoys me. When they took to the streets here in Portland Oregon and blocked traffic, I got very pissed off.

As for the mall, if they get a warning to stop protesting and leave and fail too, the arrest is warranted, or rather detaining and being thrown out. It's private property. The mall isn't a right, but a privilege to go to, because someone owns that land and uses their land to outlet other companies to capitalize on customers in a single location. I don't think people have the right to use someones business location to protest works for "Freedom to Assemble" unless it is on public property payed by the tax payers.

Everyone will look at their protest and thing differently. Some might think it's stupid to hog an entire area for your own selfish need to shove your ideology down other peoples throats while they are trying to enjoy their time at the mall. So it's all dependent on the person.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2015 12:06:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/17/2015 10:06:19 AM, Gmork wrote:
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

Is allowing for a public space to hold protests not helping their cause?

No.
There are plenty of other actual public spaces, and given they will literally march in the street, this is a clear issue of attacking a policy they don't like and/or an attempt to avoid jail time.

Actually, I find protesters who fear punishment to be gutless and insincere.
My work here is, finally, done.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2015 12:51:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/17/2015 4:22:10 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/17/2015 10:06:19 AM, Gmork wrote:
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.


Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

Is allowing for a public space to hold protests not helping their cause?


Depends. For me, it just annoys me. When they took to the streets here in Portland Oregon and blocked traffic, I got very pissed off.


That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.

As for the mall, if they get a warning to stop protesting and leave and fail too, the arrest is warranted, or rather detaining and being thrown out. It's private property. The mall isn't a right, but a privilege to go to, because someone owns that land and uses their land to outlet other companies to capitalize on customers in a single location. I don't think people have the right to use someones business location to protest works for "Freedom to Assemble" unless it is on public property payed by the tax payers.

Everyone will look at their protest and thing differently. Some might think it's stupid to hog an entire area for your own selfish need to shove your ideology down other peoples throats while they are trying to enjoy their time at the mall. So it's all dependent on the person.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Yeah, people in the civil rights movements also "impeded" other lives in an effort to get people NOT just keep going on their daily lives and ignoring racial injustice, so....
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Berend
Posts: 188
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.

It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.

Black lives don't matter, all lives matter. Police brutality isn't caused by racism, but incompetent cops.

Protesting is fine and trying to get people to notice, even though we almost all already see the crap cops are doing, but in a day and age where you have social media, advertisements as wide as they are, walking into the middle of the street and completely stopping me from doing what I need to is not OK and asininely selfish to think your protesting issue automatically outweighs my personal business.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2015 9:29:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
Yeah, people in the civil rights movements also "impeded" other lives in an effort to get people NOT just keep going on their daily lives and ignoring racial injustice, so....

I think you are missing the point of the criticism.
The issue isn't that they protested, or even that they were arrested. It is that, instead of furthering their cause, they are spending their time and efforts on beating the charges.

So, it is a bit hypocritical that you say "other lives need to be impede" because there is an injustice that needs to be addressed, while seemingly support the notion that addressing the injustice can wait, because it impedes the lives of these protesters. It's almost like this group abandoned its social mission and adopted a political one, because I see no reason how attacking an 18 year old decision helps social injustice.
My work here is, finally, done.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2015 9:55:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.


It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.


This movement is about life and death, so...

Black lives don't matter, all lives matter. Police brutality isn't caused by racism, but incompetent cops.


That you say this shows you don't understand what the movement is about. How is it possible to be so disconnected? Smh

So... would you have thought telling civil rights protesters that their "I am a (wo)man" signs were misguided too, right? "Hey, isn't EVERYBODY a (wo)man???? What's so SPECIAL about YOU saying you are a (wo)man?!" If you don't get the significance of that mantra back then and why it's not saying nor implying that everybody else ISN'T a (wo)man then you won't get the significance of black lives matter. And if you don't get the significance then zi don't know what to tell you. Do you show up to conferences on AIDS and say "HEY, WHAT ABOUT LUPUS?? THAT MATTERS TOO!!"

And yes, this is about racism: did you know cops can both be incompetent AND racist? Or that their racism can MAKE them incompetent? Or that they could not even be personally racist but still perpetuate and fit into the insitutional and systemic racist structure we have here? You do know that many, many pd's are guilty of racist practices right? You do know that "increaded criminality" doesn't fully explain the hugely disproportionate police brutalization blacks, native americans, and hispanics gr..right? The way you frame it is a false dicohotomy.

Protesting is fine and trying to get people to notice, even though we almost all already see the crap cops are doing, but in a day and age where you have social media, advertisements as wide as they are, walking into the middle of the street and completely stopping me from doing what I need to is not OK and asininely selfish to think your protesting issue automatically outweighs my personal business.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2015 1:54:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think when these major protests happen, we should listen to people. The government should try to determine the "true" concerns of the tea party movement, and be a little more transparent. They should listen to the true concerns of occupy Walstreet and take some measures to insure that big corporations aren't overly influential of policy decisions. They should listen to black lives matter and do whatever it takes to make the community more understanding of how police work is conducted, educated them on "broken windows policing", and both the upside and downside of that, actually do some community policing, and not merely pay it lip service, just because the results of community policing take years to see.

When these large groups of people come together like this, they feel a lack of connection to their government, they feel unheard, and we should do something about it. I'm not saying allow the masses to influence policy on emotional whims, but taking the time to understand what is going on in their heads and hearts (not neccesarily, what they say), will go a long way towards a more Democratic and happy society.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2015 1:57:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Sorry I went off on a tangent, but ultimately I see all humans as cows that need to be herded, so I'm more concerned about the social engineering that needs to be done to make the masses happy or make the masses move in a useful direction. Hopefully you can see how the tangent relates to the op
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2015 11:39:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
That you say this shows you don't understand what the movement is about. How is it possible to be so disconnected? Smh

So... would you have thought telling civil rights protesters that their "I am a (wo)man" signs were misguided too, right? "Hey, isn't EVERYBODY a (wo)man???? What's so SPECIAL about YOU saying you are a (wo)man?!" If you don't get the significance of that mantra back then and why it's not saying nor implying that everybody else ISN'T a (wo)man then you won't get the significance of black lives matter. And if you don't get the significance then zi don't know what to tell you. Do you show up to conferences on AIDS and say "HEY, WHAT ABOUT LUPUS?? THAT MATTERS TOO!!"

And yes, this is about racism: did you know cops can both be incompetent AND racist? Or that their racism can MAKE them incompetent? Or that they could not even be personally racist but still perpetuate and fit into the insitutional and systemic racist structure we have here? You do know that many, many pd's are guilty of racist practices right? You do know that "increaded criminality" doesn't fully explain the hugely disproportionate police brutalization blacks, native americans, and hispanics gr..right? The way you frame it is a false dicohotomy.

Could you provide a source of data for the "disproportionate police brutalization"? From what I've seen, it seems to be remarkably even between Caucasians and African Americans.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2015 12:20:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/19/2015 9:55:39 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.


It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.


This movement is about life and death, so...
Clearly not, if you read the OP.
So, either I am wrong, or the movement is not as uniform as you claim it is, and I very much believe the latter. I believe the movement is different things to different people in different locales.

...actually, IIRC, didn't you say the movement was about bettering the lot in black Americans' lives? That is not "life and death", it is quality of life.
My work here is, finally, done.
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 1:37:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

I see your point but I mean, they are protesting racism. That, at the very least, they believe impedes their quality of day to day living. Their protesting just shut down a mall. I don't see how shutting down a mall or a highway to protest compares to what they are actually protesting. And I don't think they care about making people mad. It really isn't the "people" that are going to make these changes, it's the government. Although getting more people on your side would certainly help.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 12:08:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 1:37:17 AM, Df0512 wrote:
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

I see your point but I mean, they are protesting racism.
Were they? Are you sure about that, because by all accounts, they seemed to be protesting Eric Garner's death, which could be viewed as brutality, racism, systemic racism, or a flawed grand jury system? Their rally focused on police deaths and a "die-in", which, in my opinion, does not address racism.....but, then again, racism is defined by many people in different ways, including differing opinions by AFism, popculturepooka, and possibly you.

That, at the very least, they believe impedes their quality of day to day living.
Who are "they" and where are they? Have you noticed that a lot of the police racism seems to occur in the east and south? Does the fact that the black men I have talked to say "racism doesn't affect them" matter? So, why create awareness of a problem that doesn't exist in these parts, especially in a way that literally has a cost?

Their protesting just shut down a mall. I don't see how shutting down a mall or a highway to protest compares to what they are actually protesting.
What if protesting the mall forced a shop to go under, since it was the Saturday before Christmas, which is when many retailers make a profit for the year? What if the closing of the highway cost a kid their life, because the blood delivery for a transfusion was too late? The way I see this issue is less narrow-minded than most, so, no, I don't see why the protest is better, especially if what was being protested is in dispute.

Regardless of what I think, you seem to think that "casualties" are acceptable given the nature of the protest. So, why spend this time, effort, and money on avoiding fines for nine people who knew their involvement was civil disobedience. Why is the movement put on hold because of these nine protesters? You should be outraged for the same reason I am, IMO, as they have turned their back to the cause, and yet, here you are defending them and their alleged actions, which in the current light, are suspect.

And I don't think they care about making people mad. It really isn't the "people" that are going to make these changes, it's the government. Although getting more people on your side would certainly help.
I disagree that government can help in this matter. I think much more further government involvement is going to make matters worse, IMO, outside of fixing government issues, like regulations involving police or getting DA's to indict the cop.

Getting the people to indict an officer is a big deal (keep in mind that that is when the protests flared, IIRC). Voting in DA's that will do this is a good start. Mayors, too. But, why try to change the system from within, right?

What I think needs to happen is having an honest conversation about race, starting with the Civil War, and how the North have gotten a free pass for 150 years to continue their racist ways because "well, we're not the South". Hell, the Civil War was not about slavery, since slavery was still legal in parts of Virginia after the emancipation proclamation, and obviously still racist in the slave states that didn't succeed. The North didn't care about blacks or slavery enough to go to war because of it, they went to war to preserve the union. Let's start by getting facts straight and defining things. I have heard minorities cannot be racist. This is crazy to me, but, it depends on the definition. I have heard people accuse a white person of being racist, even though they have no feelings one way or the other, because they are part of the system, but SJWs need to explain why a white business owner needs to fight the system at the expense of his business (e.g. hiring an uneducated urban youth with few communication skills instead of Whitey McGee who went to a prep school).

Sorry, I'm at work and this is probably quite rambling and incoherent and goes off tangents. I'm just trying to get to my notifications.
My work here is, finally, done.
oOoZoOo
Posts: 9
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 1:29:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Yeah, I am more of an 'all lives matter' kind of person myself...I have seen "racism" on both sides of the fence in several forms. I have also experienced discrimination based on skin color or the fact that I am an American in other countries...not sure what to call that though.

Not all racism is borne out of hate either, cultural differences and our choices based on personal preference can have the potential to make any of us a "racist" in the right context.

But if a group of people do feel or do experience such things (such as racism) to the point to want to protest it, then protest it. You need to protest it where it matters though. A protest's point is to get your voice heard and start to and/or make a difference.

How does riots, protests at these malls, and marching through streets HELP anything?

Answer: It doesn't, it is simply an outlet for a group of people to air their emotions and feel better with themselves.
August_Burns_Red
Posts: 1,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 3:45:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

if they closed down a portion of public mall from protesting than I think if they were warned once to disperse and did not, that they deserved to be arrested. black or white, does not matter. they violated civil obedience laws.
Tomorrow's forecast: God reigns and the Son shines!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 6:45:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/22/2015 12:20:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/19/2015 9:55:39 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.


It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.


This movement is about life and death, so...
Clearly not, if you read the OP.
So, either I am wrong, or the movement is not as uniform as you claim it is, and I very much believe the latter. I believe the movement is different things to different people in different locales.

...actually, IIRC, didn't you say the movement was about bettering the lot in black Americans' lives? That is not "life and death", it is quality of life.

When black Americans' are being killed and people are getting away with murder EVEN WHEN CAUGHT it's about life and death too.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 6:50:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 1:29:57 PM, oOoZoOo wrote:
Yeah, I am more of an 'all lives matter' kind of person myself...

"All Lives matter" as a response to "black lives matter" is remarkably tone deaf at best and utterly malicious at worst.

"GeekAesthete

Imagine that you're sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say "I should get my fair share." And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, "everyone should get their fair share." Now, that's a wonderful sentiment -- indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also. However, dad's smart-a$$comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you still haven't gotten any!

The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share" had an implicit "too" at the end: "I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else." But your dad's response treated your statement as though you meant "only I should get my fair share", which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that "everyone should get their fair share," while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.

That's the situation of the "black lives matter" movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society.

The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn't work the way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn't want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That's not made up out of whole cloth -- there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it's generally not considered "news", while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate -- young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don't treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don't pay as much attention to certain people's deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don't treat all lives as though they matter equally.

Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase "black lives matter" also has an implicit "too" at the end: it's saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying "all lives matter" is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It's a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means "only black lives matter," when that is obviously not the case. And so saying "all lives matter" as a direct response to "black lives matter" is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem.

TL;DR: The phrase "Black lives matter" carries an implicit "too" at the end; it's saying that black lives should also matter. Saying "all lives matter" is dismissing the very problems that the phrase is trying to draw attention to.
"

https://www.reddit.com...

I have seen "racism" on both sides of the fence in several forms. I have also experienced discrimination based on skin color or the fact that I am an American in other countries...not sure what to call that though.


The difference is one sides racism is systemic and institutional and the others' isn't....

Not all racism is borne out of hate either, cultural differences and our choices based on personal preference can have the potential to make any of us a "racist" in the right context.

But if a group of people do feel or do experience such things (such as racism) to the point to want to protest it, then protest it. You need to protest it where it matters though. A protest's point is to get your voice heard and start to and/or make a difference.

How does riots, protests at these malls, and marching through streets HELP anything?

Answer: It doesn't, it is simply an outlet for a group of people to air their emotions and feel better with themselves.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 8:09:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it's generally not considered "news", while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate -- young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don't treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don't pay as much attention to certain people's deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don't treat all lives as though they matter equally.

I've observed the opposite, honestly. What middle-aged white women was in the news? I've seen countless young black men shown, with news reports that generally skew the facts of the case. When they showed pictures of Treyvon Martin, it was an outdated picture (by 5 years) of him in his high school football uniform. When we see pictures of George Zimmerman, we see his mug shot. Do you honestly think that there wasn't a more recent picture of Treyvon available? Then NBC runs an edited Zimmerman's 911 call, to purposely make it sound like his following of Treyvon through his neighborhood was racially motivated. We hear that Michael Brown was a "gentle giant" and that he was "assassinated" with his hands in the air for walking in the street, a situation Barack Obama termed "walking while black". This prompts the slogan "hands up, don't shoot". We hear later that the police officer had identified him, correctly, as the criminal that had robbed a store and man-handled an elderly clerk like he was a rag doll for a cheap box of Swisher Sweets. We later hear that the evidence and witness testimony actually shows that the officer was attacked by Brown, the officer discharged the weapon in the vehicle whereby Brown started to flee the scene. When the officer gave chase, Brown charged him, taunting him. Did the #blacklivesmatter movement care? No. They don't seem to care about justice, they seem to be out for blood. Was there no justice in the Treyvon case or in the Michael Brown case? Instead, after the truth is revealed through physical evidence and witness testimony, the Brown family attorney (the same attorney that represented the Martins) states that "family and supporters will not be persuaded by the autopsy report or eyewitness statements" and then they burn down the town and level local businesses holding signs that state "hands up, don't shoot". It begs the question, what would persuade them? What are they ultimately asking for?

The reality of the situation is that the media portrays these situations religiously, because it sells. The statistics show. however, that a white man is actually more likely to be mistreated to be killed when confronted by police.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 8:50:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 8:09:36 PM, ZenoCitium wrote:
So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it's generally not considered "news", while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate -- young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don't treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don't pay as much attention to certain people's deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don't treat all lives as though they matter equally.

I've observed the opposite, honestly. What middle-aged white women was in the news? I've seen countless young black men shown, with news reports that generally skew the facts of the case. When they showed pictures of Treyvon Martin, it was an outdated picture (by 5 years) of him in his high school football uniform. When we see pictures of George Zimmerman, we see his mug shot. Do you honestly think that there wasn't a more recent picture of Treyvon available? Then NBC runs an edited Zimmerman's 911 call, to purposely make it sound like his following of Treyvon through his neighborhood was racially motivated. We hear that Michael Brown was a "gentle giant" and that he was "assassinated" with his hands in the air for walking in the street, a situation Barack Obama termed "walking while black". This prompts the slogan "hands up, don't shoot". We hear later that the police officer had identified him, correctly, as the criminal that had robbed a store and man-handled an elderly clerk like he was a rag doll for a cheap box of Swisher Sweets. We later hear that the evidence and witness testimony actually shows that the officer was attacked by Brown, the officer discharged the weapon in the vehicle whereby Brown started to flee the scene. When the officer gave chase, Brown charged him, taunting him. Did the #blacklivesmatter movement care? No. They don't seem to care about justice, they seem to be out for blood. Was there no justice in the Treyvon case or in the Michael Brown case? Instead, after the truth is revealed through physical evidence and witness testimony, the Brown family attorney (the same attorney that represented the Martins) states that "family and supporters will not be persuaded by the autopsy report or eyewitness statements" and then they burn down the town and level local businesses holding signs that state "hands up, don't shoot". It begs the question, what would persuade them? What are they ultimately asking for?

The reality of the situation is that the media portrays these situations religiously, because it sells. The statistics show. however, that a white man is actually more likely to be mistreated to be killed when confronted by police.

You just ignored the entire point. How 'bout you actually interact with the main point that "all lives matter" as a response to "black lives matter" is ridiculous?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 9:22:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You just ignored the entire point. How 'bout you actually interact with the main point that "all lives matter" as a response to "black lives matter" is ridiculous?

Fair enough, although my point is related.

On that matter, on the surface, I agree with you. This is especially pertaining to your statement

TL;DR: The phrase "Black lives matter" carries an implicit "too" at the end; it's saying that black lives should also matter. Saying "all lives matter" is dismissing the very problems that the phrase is trying to draw attention to.

The problem is that the movement doesn't reflect this ideology. Consider my earlier criticisms. The "black lives matter" movement demonstrates largely that they don't care about other lives, or justice. I believe the movement means something different to each member. I suspect that there are many out there, like yourself, that interpret the movement to have a more nobler cause then the movement actually demonstrates. I, however, see a movement that is heavy on emotion and willingness to destroy, but light on activism and willingness to address the true culprits of the problems they mean to address.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2015 10:59:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 6:45:00 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/22/2015 12:20:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/19/2015 9:55:39 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.


It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.


This movement is about life and death, so...
Clearly not, if you read the OP.
So, either I am wrong, or the movement is not as uniform as you claim it is, and I very much believe the latter. I believe the movement is different things to different people in different locales.

...actually, IIRC, didn't you say the movement was about bettering the lot in black Americans' lives? That is not "life and death", it is quality of life.

When black Americans' are being killed and people are getting away with murder EVEN WHEN CAUGHT it's about life and death too.

Here's the problem - you only focus on blacks and not the core issue: police being untouchable. You rally behind the mantra that blacks are targets, so you only care about the black deaths.
Did you know that of all media reported deaths caused by police in 2014, only 23.8% of the victims were black? (with 15.9% race not reported in 1100 deaths)
http://www.killedbypolice.net...
That doesn't sound like an alarming disparity, to me.

Whites represent 42.1% (with 15.9% race not reported, which, statistically are more likely white). Can you show me where white victims get justice in higher ratios when it comes to being killed by police?
My work here is, finally, done.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 12:14:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 10:59:33 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/23/2015 6:45:00 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/22/2015 12:20:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/19/2015 9:55:39 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.


It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.


This movement is about life and death, so...
Clearly not, if you read the OP.
So, either I am wrong, or the movement is not as uniform as you claim it is, and I very much believe the latter. I believe the movement is different things to different people in different locales.

...actually, IIRC, didn't you say the movement was about bettering the lot in black Americans' lives? That is not "life and death", it is quality of life.

When black Americans' are being killed and people are getting away with murder EVEN WHEN CAUGHT it's about life and death too.

Here's the problem - you only focus on blacks and not the core issue: police being untouchable.

And the problem specifically manifests itself the worse when it comes to blacks. Problem?

"Save the rainforests"
"So are you saying you don't care about other types of forests or that they aren't effected by deforestaion?!"
"No...I'm saying rainforests are the types of forests most effected by deforestation and thus deserve special attention...."

You rally behind the mantra that blacks are targets, so you only care about the black deaths.

Tell me where I ever said that. If you can, I'll give you a million dollars. I'm willing to bet you can't because that's bs.

Did you know that of all media reported deaths caused by police in 2014, only 23.8% of the victims were black? (with 15.9% race not reported in 1100 deaths)
http://www.killedbypolice.net...
That doesn't sound like an alarming disparity, to me.


Did you know that police brutality is about more than just deaths at the hands of police?
And what's an "alarming disparity"? How much does it take to be "alarming"?

And honestly your reading of the data is highly flawed. You would look for the manner in which they died in contact with the police like "legal intervention". And, hey, would you look at that...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Whites represent 42.1% (with 15.9% race not reported, which, statistically are more likely white). Can you show me where white victims get justice in higher ratios when it comes to being killed by police?

Honestly, I can never figure out if you are so single minded on purpose or not. It's like you miss the forest for the trees on purpose. Police rarely get indicted, period. No matter the race. That is compatible with saying blacks are disproportionately the targets of police brutality and thus are not being held accountable.

"Black lives matter"
"So are you saying ONLY black lives matter?!"

"Blacks can get killed by police and no one is held accountable."
"So are you saying ONLY blacks get killed by the police and no one is held accountable?"

Seriously, the movement is not just about a single issue. I don't know why i have to keep repeating this.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 1:51:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/23/2015 12:08:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/23/2015 1:37:17 AM, Df0512 wrote:
At 7/16/2015 9:54:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
I don't know what your local chapter of #blacklivesmatter is doing, but ours is trying to overturn a state supreme court ruling from the 90s in an effort to avoid nine people from being fined/jailed for trespassing.

The ruling in question is that the Mall of America is not public property, ergo, protesting, if not allowed, is trespassing. I am not sure how this effort is to help anyone but those nine people arrested, but, keep on keeping on and doing those good deeds and fighting those key legal battles.

Background: on Dec 22, hundreds of protesters effectively shut down 1/12 of the mall to protest Eric Garner's death, and after three hours, people started to be arrested. This is after closing down an interstate for nearly an hour and various other impediments on others' lives in the name of progress, which, as I've said before, makes people angry at the movement, and does not help their cause.

I see your point but I mean, they are protesting racism.
Were they? Are you sure about that, because by all accounts, they seemed to be protesting Eric Garner's death, which could be viewed as brutality, racism, systemic racism, or a flawed grand jury system? Their rally focused on police deaths and a "die-in", which, in my opinion, does not address racism.....but, then again, racism is defined by many people in different ways, including differing opinions by AFism, popculturepooka, and possibly you.

That, at the very least, they believe impedes their quality of day to day living.
Who are "they" and where are they? Have you noticed that a lot of the police racism seems to occur in the east and south? Does the fact that the black men I have talked to say "racism doesn't affect them" matter? So, why create awareness of a problem that doesn't exist in these parts, especially in a way that literally has a cost?

Their protesting just shut down a mall. I don't see how shutting down a mall or a highway to protest compares to what they are actually protesting.
What if protesting the mall forced a shop to go under, since it was the Saturday before Christmas, which is when many retailers make a profit for the year? What if the closing of the highway cost a kid their life, because the blood delivery for a transfusion was too late? The way I see this issue is less narrow-minded than most, so, no, I don't see why the protest is better, especially if what was being protested is in dispute.

Regardless of what I think, you seem to think that "casualties" are acceptable given the nature of the protest. So, why spend this time, effort, and money on avoiding fines for nine people who knew their involvement was civil disobedience. Why is the movement put on hold because of these nine protesters? You should be outraged for the same reason I am, IMO, as they have turned their back to the cause, and yet, here you are defending them and their alleged actions, which in the current light, are suspect.

And I don't think they care about making people mad. It really isn't the "people" that are going to make these changes, it's the government. Although getting more people on your side would certainly help.
I disagree that government can help in this matter. I think much more further government involvement is going to make matters worse, IMO, outside of fixing government issues, like regulations involving police or getting DA's to indict the cop.

Getting the people to indict an officer is a big deal (keep in mind that that is when the protests flared, IIRC). Voting in DA's that will do this is a good start. Mayors, too. But, why try to change the system from within, right?

What I think needs to happen is having an honest conversation about race, starting with the Civil War, and how the North have gotten a free pass for 150 years to continue their racist ways because "well, we're not the South". Hell, the Civil War was not about slavery, since slavery was still legal in parts of Virginia after the emancipation proclamation, and obviously still racist in the slave states that didn't succeed. The North didn't care about blacks or slavery enough to go to war because of it, they went to war to preserve the union. Let's start by getting facts straight and defining things. I have heard minorities cannot be racist. This is crazy to me, but, it depends on the definition. I have heard people accuse a white person of being racist, even though they have no feelings one way or the other, because they are part of the system, but SJWs need to explain why a white business owner needs to fight the system at the expense of his business (e.g. hiring an uneducated urban youth with few communication skills instead of Whitey McGee who went to a prep school).

Sorry, I'm at work and this is probably quite rambling and incoherent and goes off tangents. I'm just trying to get to my notifications.

You know what, sure man. I dont know enough about this situation to argue you. And Im not about to do a bunch of reading so I can play devils advocate. I do think the government could help however. Propose a new law or something I don;t know take action. I know the odds of that though. Just saying if our government worked this would be at least less of a problem.

On your paragraph about what needs to happen; I don't think arguing about something that happened over 100 years ago would help. Those were bad times. I'm fine leaving it there. And as for you comments on reverse racism; Some ideals are just so ridiculous to me, I hate having to talk about them. I mean the idea that someone would actually believe it makes my brain ache. Thats really all I have to say about it. Im getting a headache.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 3:56:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/24/2015 12:14:25 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/23/2015 10:59:33 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/23/2015 6:45:00 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/22/2015 12:20:56 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/19/2015 9:55:39 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/18/2015 2:26:32 PM, Berend wrote:
At 7/18/2015 12:53:23 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
That's the whole point.

It's to force people to take notice of the racial disparities.


It's stupid. You walking in the street and blocking me from getting to where I need to could force me to sit there paying attention to silly protesting while my daughter sits outside of the school in the rain, or family emergency, or family member dying, or anything that could by far be more important than seeing a sign.


This movement is about life and death, so...
Clearly not, if you read the OP.
So, either I am wrong, or the movement is not as uniform as you claim it is, and I very much believe the latter. I believe the movement is different things to different people in different locales.

...actually, IIRC, didn't you say the movement was about bettering the lot in black Americans' lives? That is not "life and death", it is quality of life.

When black Americans' are being killed and people are getting away with murder EVEN WHEN CAUGHT it's about life and death too.

Here's the problem - you only focus on blacks and not the core issue: police being untouchable.

And the problem specifically manifests itself the worse when it comes to blacks. Problem?
Yes, it also manifests itself worse when dealing with young black men specifically. So much so, that the numbers are very skewed because of it. So, to say it is just a black thing seems disingenuous, when clearly sex and age is a major factor as well.

"Save the rainforests"
"So are you saying you don't care about other types of forests or that they aren't effected by deforestaion?!"
"No...I'm saying rainforests are the types of forests most effected by deforestation and thus deserve special attention...."

Except men are the group most effected by police, not blacks. The disparity between black and white is about 3:1, while between male and female, it's about 11:1.
The disparity between asains and whites is 3:1 as well.

You are aware that, since blacks are harassed and arrested in higher rates as well, that this disparity is actually less than it appears, since the rate of deaths per police interaction appear to higher for whites over blacks. Statistics are annoying.
https://www.fbi.gov...


You rally behind the mantra that blacks are targets, so you only care about the black deaths.

Tell me where I ever said that. If you can, I'll give you a million dollars. I'm willing to bet you can't because that's bs.

Let me rephrase: you only concern yourself with the black plight, because you believe the disparity is based on race, and not other factors. However, the other factors also have a disparate prevalence in the black community as well, which you call systemic racism.

Did you know that of all media reported deaths caused by police in 2014, only 23.8% of the victims were black? (with 15.9% race not reported in 1100 deaths)
http://www.killedbypolice.net...
That doesn't sound like an alarming disparity, to me.


Did you know that police brutality is about more than just deaths at the hands of police?
Yes, and I also know that it is something that is subjective, hard to prove, and often falsely reported. But, you assume this is not across some other line as opposed to race, such as stupid young males being stupid.
And what's an "alarming disparity"? How much does it take to be "alarming"?
It depends on the number of variables. At what point is a disparity not an issue or "alarming"? When is "equality" in this regard achieved? When there are 4.5 white cases for every black one? Because all factors are equal, right?

And honestly your reading of the data is highly flawed. You would look for the manner in which they died in contact with the police like "legal intervention". And, hey, would you look at that...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
And would you look at that....the disparity in my numbers is about what theirs was, which compares to other sources I've seen. So, what exactly did I miss?
42.1/62 vs 23.8/15 is nearly about 1:2.8.


Whites represent 42.1% (with 15.9% race not reported, which, statistically are more likely white). Can you show me where white victims get justice in higher ratios when it comes to being killed by police?

Honestly, I can never figure out if you are so single minded on purpose or not. It's like you miss the forest for the trees on purpose. Police rarely get indicted, period. No matter the race. That is compatible with saying blacks are disproportionately the targets of police brutality and thus are not being held accountable.

I'm sorry, I thought the movement was about justice, since your comment was clearly about holding cops responsible. So, you agree there is no disparity in non-justice, but, you are aware that by seeking justice for blacks (because it is the more pressing concern), it appears the implication is that there is justice for non-blacks, right? By saying, "fight the disparity" and bringing up things to which there is no disparity, implies there is one.

"Black lives matter"
"So are you saying ONLY black lives matter?!"

"Blacks can get killed by police and no one is held accountable."
"So are you saying ONLY blacks get killed by the police and no one is held accountable?"

Seriously, the movement is not just about a single issue. I don't know why i have to keep repeating this.
You don't need to keep repeating it, at least not to me.
However, as I have said, and my OP proves, what the movement means to you is not necessarily what the movement means to others.
In fact, I'm not sure what the movement is after, exactly, but their demands imply that officers who kill blacks need to be brought to justice, meaning, the victim was automatically innocent. But, sure, I'm the narrow minded one.
http://blacklivesmatter.com...
And in the about page, they kind of speak in platitudes, but the number of a black man dies every 28 hours suggests that that is too often, not a disparity claim, even though a white man dies every 16 hours. If the claim was a disparity claim, that is one thing, but it isn't, so, IMO, this is race-baiting, and you might want to rethink your loyalty to them.
Or do you really think that America de-humanizes blacks?
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 3:59:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/24/2015 1:51:07 AM, Df0512 wrote:
Yeah....that was an unorganized mess of random thoughts that barely had anything to do with anything to do with what you said or my thread. I apologize.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 4:05:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/24/2015 3:56:40 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

http://blacklivesmatter.com...
And in the about page, they kind of speak in platitudes, but the number of a black man dies every 28 hours suggests that that is too often, not a disparity claim, even though a white man dies every 16 hours. If the claim was a disparity claim, that is one thing, but it isn't, so, IMO, this is race-baiting, and you might want to rethink your loyalty to them.

What I mean by this is - the wording implies it is too much and that the police are in the wrong, like they are killing babies for fun. It includes those suspects that are, in fact, violent, and had a reason to be shot, and, frankly, if they weren't shot, then they'd just be at the hands of state violence in prison, so, by blacklivesmatter's own logic, the state is in the wrong for dealing with violent criminals.
My work here is, finally, done.
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2015 4:08:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/24/2015 3:59:41 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 7/24/2015 1:51:07 AM, Df0512 wrote:
Yeah....that was an unorganized mess of random thoughts that barely had anything to do with anything to do with what you said or my thread. I apologize.

Oh for the love of God white people stop apologizing!!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 7:49:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/24/2015 3:56:40 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:


And the problem specifically manifests itself the worse when it comes to blacks. Problem?
Yes, it also manifests itself worse when dealing with young black men specifically. So much so, that the numbers are very skewed because of it. So, to say it is just a black thing seems disingenuous, when clearly sex and age is a major factor as well.


And vis a vis white women, black women are also disproportionately effected.

"Save the rainforests"
"So are you saying you don't care about other types of forests or that they aren't effected by deforestaion?!"
"No...I'm saying rainforests are the types of forests most effected by deforestation and thus deserve special attention...."

Except men are the group most effected by police, not blacks. The disparity between black and white is about 3:1, while between male and female, it's about 11:1.
The disparity between asains and whites is 3:1 as well.


Men aren't systemically effected by sexism. There is a proven track record of blacks being targeted because they are black.


Let me rephrase: you only concern yourself with the black plight, because you believe the disparity is based on race, and not other factors.

I'm amazed that you can read my mind somehow. Native Americans and Hispanics are ALSO effected disproportionately by police brutality. I've said numerous things about that in my personal life. Saying blacklivesmatter doesn't negate that. Native and Hispanic lives matter just as much, but we are talking about blacks here, so...

And actually, the story of Zachary Hammond (the white kid killed by police) has been trending among #blacklivesmatter activists. That's actually where I heard the story.
I care about that too. It shows that police brutatliy can effect anyone and is equally as wrong. But for every 1 Zachary Hammond there are nearly 3 Amadou Diallo's. That's why the focus is on black lives.

However, the other factors also have a disparate prevalence in the black community as well, which you call systemic racism.

That's a generally accepted fact, yes.


Yes, and I also know that it is something that is subjective, hard to prove, and often falsely reported. But, you assume this is not across some other line as opposed to race, such as stupid young males being stupid.

Testimony is by it's very nature "subjective" - that's not an issue. Then why is it that these stupid young males happen to be mostly non-white? Are you suggesting that there a higher proportion of stupid young males in non-white communities?

And what's an "alarming disparity"? How much does it take to be "alarming"?
It depends on the number of variables. At what point is a disparity not an issue or "alarming"? When is "equality" in this regard achieved? When there are 4.5 white cases for every black one? Because all factors are equal, right?

And honestly your reading of the data is highly flawed. You would look for the manner in which they died in contact with the police like "legal intervention". And, hey, would you look at that...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
And would you look at that....the disparity in my numbers is about what theirs was, which compares to other sources I've seen. So, what exactly did I miss?
42.1/62 vs 23.8/15 is nearly about 1:2.8.


Whites represent 42.1% (with 15.9% race not reported, which, statistically are more likely white). Can you show me where white victims get justice in higher ratios when it comes to being killed by police?

Honestly, I can never figure out if you are so single minded on purpose or not. It's like you miss the forest for the trees on purpose. Police rarely get indicted, period. No matter the race. That is compatible with saying blacks are disproportionately the targets of police brutality and thus are not being held accountable.

I'm sorry, I thought the movement was about justice, since your comment was clearly about holding cops responsible. So, you agree there is no disparity in non-justice, but, you are aware that by seeking justice for blacks (because it is the more pressing concern), it appears the implication is that there is justice for non-blacks, right? By saying, "fight the disparity" and bringing up things to which there is no disparity, implies there is one.

"Black lives matter"
"So are you saying ONLY black lives matter?!"

"Blacks can get killed by police and no one is held accountable."
"So are you saying ONLY blacks get killed by the police and no one is held accountable?"

Seriously, the movement is not just about a single issue. I don't know why i have to keep repeating this.
You don't need to keep repeating it, at least not to me.
However, as I have said, and my OP proves, what the movement means to you is not necessarily what the movement means to others.

In fact, I'm not sure what the movement is after, exactly, but their demands imply that officers who kill blacks need to be brought to justice, meaning, the victim was automatically innocent. But, sure, I'm the narrow minded one.

No, it doesn't. That's not good logic. One can be guilty of a crime but ALSO know that that guilt does not merit brutality. Samuel Dubose might've been trying to run from the police but that doesn't merit getting shot in the head. This is a very simple application of the retributive theory of punishment.

http://blacklivesmatter.com...

And in the about page, they kind of speak in platitudes, but the number of a black man dies every 28 hours suggests that that is too often, not a disparity claim, even though a white man dies every 16 hours. If the claim was a disparity claim, that is one thing, but it isn't, so, IMO, this is race-baiting, and you might want to rethink your loyalty to them.

I don't see it as race baiting at all.

Or do you really think that America de-humanizes blacks?

Of course it does.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!