White Lives Matter banner flew over football game

Originally posted by dadudemon
I know you're just trolling, Whirly, but you do actually make a good point and I agree with it earlier.

But my question still remains. We've solved the 10 black lives lost by picketing and protesting police departments and flooding our representatives with angry letters, picketing, and protests. We finally got comprehensive legislation passed that better regulates police and they use better de-escalation tactics and engagement tactics. 10 black unarmed don't die each year because of these efforts (even 1 life is worth it).

But what's next? Still hundreds of thousands of more black lives being lost. Disproportionately compared to other race demographics.

I think Silent Master is right. But you're also right: we can tackle both.

Do the stuff I suggested to snowdragon to fix the police.

Implement affordable UHC to address much of the other things affecting the black community.

End up saving more lives from other race demographics (but it would disproportionately help black lives which is a win).

Chicago gets mentioned a lot on these boards in regards to inner city violence, so I'll leave this link here (don't yet have linking privileges so you'll have to copy+paste)

blockclubchicago.org/2020/06/24/chicagoans-do-protest-gun-violence-and-organize-for-safer-neighborhoods-all-the-time-heres-how/

I would like to see more state funding for these sorts of projects.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No.

The science says you can predict fatal police encounters in each city by the prevalence of race in the city and the amount of violent crime those races commit. It holds true across the board in every city they looked at. That includes white dominated cities, black dominated cities, and Hispanic dominated cities.

So you are stating their movement is not legit based on the science and these one off events, of which there are much more for white people, are exceptions? I highly doubt that this is what you're saying. It seems to contradict you entire point which I still do not understand.

Yes, almost no racism is involved with fatal police encounters. When you look at statistics, it generalizes to the population or the sample. When you look at one specific case, you have details about that case. It's the same problem everyone has with statistics: they cannot wrap their brain around the population statistics because they are laser focused on what is called the exception fallacy. The statistics still remain true even if you find even dozens of exceptions.

Okay I think I get it now.

It's a science (not your random way of interpreting the data), and it seems to hold true for amount of violence leading to police homicides.

No I doubt BLM carefully analysed the science before starting the protests.

Well we don't know if they were one off events. We do know there were a few events which happened to be caught on camera and publicised. Black people however seem to feel it happens a lot more often than publicised. And logically a lot more happens off camera than on camera.

And pretty sure the stop and searches are focused on African Americans, which is always a risk for black people. Data also doesn't show how many the proportion of non-violent black and white people who get assaulted or generally treated badly but not killed.

I mean here in the U.K that black nurse put out the video of how she was stopped and arrested for having tinted windows. They searched her car and found nothing. She later films herself with the PM lmao.

But I do agree about police brutality being a thing in general which I have brought up before. We saw how that old white man got smacked on the ground, and literally 50 police just walked past and ignored him, and then they put out some bogus statement before realising it was on camera. That in itself is pretty damning evidence for that case.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I specifically addressed your post, not the slogan, and you've dodged what I addressed. Not surprised.

It is not a dodge. Your issue is that Black Lives Matter is not, in your estimation, true to its slogan, because it does not encompass other issues that also impact black lives. As I already pointed out, that is not what they are organized to do, irrespective of whether you think they should based on their slogan. If they changed their slogan, your entire argument goes away. So if you have a problem with their slogan, take it up with them, or kick rocks. Those are your choices.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I already am and I already know the actual issues impacting black lives. Hint: it's not the 10 unarmed black men killed by police. 👆

That will come as a great surprise to those men and their families. You should tell the survivors that the extrajudicious killing of their loved ones by police is not an actual problem impacting black lives. I am sure that will go over great.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is not a dodge. Your issue is that Black Lives Matter is not, in your estimation, true to its slogan, because it does not encompass other issues that also impact black lives.

That's incorrect and I posted straight from their website into this thread which clearly shows that their goals also include electing Democrats to office:

BLM’s #WhatMatters2020 is a campaign aimed to maximize the impact of the BLM movement by galvanizing BLM supporters and allies to the polls in the 2020 U.S Presidential Election to build collective power and ensure candidates are held accountable for the issues that systematically and disproportionately impact Black and under-served communities across the nation.

BLM’s #WhatMatters2020 will focus on issues concerning racial injustice, police brutality, criminal justice reform, Black immigration, economic injustice, LGBTQIA+ and human rights, environmental injustice, access to healthcare, access to quality education, and voting rights and suppression.

This initiative will inspire and motivate people to ask themselves and their candidates are you really addressing What Matters in 2020?

Additionally, this is what they have to say of their organization.

Black Lives Matter Foundation, Inc is a global organization in the US, UK, and Canada, whose mission is to eradicate white supremacy and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes. By combating and countering acts of violence, creating space for Black imagination and innovation, and centering Black joy, we are winning immediate improvements in our lives.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
As I already pointed out, that is not what they are organized to do, irrespective of whether you think they should based on their slogan. If they changed their slogan, your entire argument goes away. So if you have a problem with their slogan, take it up with them, or kick rocks. Those are your choices.

I think you should know a lot more about what you're talking about before you type this much stuff that is plainly wrong. It's little weird that you'd get all of this wrong when I already posted content from their site on what they are about. What gives?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
That will come as a great surprise to those men and their families.

You clearly didn't read the article that had quite a bit of information about 100 Black Men and the issues they are combating to directly improve the black community.

Perhaps you should read that a bit before you try to suppose, as a white man, how ignorant black people are. Perhaps tone down your racism a bit and let black voices be heard?

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
Not Whirly but call me what you like.

According to the forensic tool I have access to, it shows a 72% match in writing style with Whirly.

Oddly enough, the match shows old school Whirly, the pre-2010s Whirly, is slightly less than a 60% match. You changed over the years. You were a significantly different person. Yes, I spent about 30 minutes, in a meeting, yesterday, inputting your posts from various accounts into that forensics tool. It's pretty cool. It was harder to find some of your older posts, however.

This tool is smart enough to pick up on subtleties when someone tries to change their writing styles to mask who they are.

Regardless, I prefer this version of Whirly, better. You're smarter, more engaged, and verbose with your ideas. Smart Whirly is best Whirly.

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
The act of engaging in serious police reform and making attempts to heal the rift between blacks and police is already a step forward in tackling black-on-black crime. The next step is to keep reforming, treat gun violence like a public health issue, and support community based projects that blacks are forming in their own neighbourhoods.

Chicago gets mentioned a lot on these boards in regards to inner city violence, so I'll leave this link here (don't yet have linking privileges so you'll have to copy+paste)

blockclubchicago.org/2020/06/24/chicagoans-do-protest-gun-violence-and-organize-for-safer-neighborhoods-all-the-time-heres-how/

I would like to see more state funding for these sorts of projects.

Implementing a UHC would also go a long way in helping black victims of violence. It seems counter-intuitive but having affordable healthcare that is not tied to an employer is almost liberating to a people. And it would disparately benefit black Americans to have an affordable healthcare solution.

Healthcare should always include drug-related healthcare and mental healthcare. Some people see an angry, young, violent black man who is a criminal. A psychiatrist may see a human that has been through some shit and needs years of psychotherapy to become a well adjusted and successful member of society. It's the difference between how a police officer thinks and a mental health professional think.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Okay I think I get it now.

It's a science (not your random way of interpreting the data), and it seems to hold true for amount of violence leading to police homicides.

No I doubt BLM carefully analysed the science before starting the protests.

Well we don't know if they were one off events. We do know there were a few events which happened to be caught on camera and publicised. Black people however seem to feel it happens a lot more often than publicised. And logically a lot more happens off camera than on camera.

And pretty sure the stop and searches are focused on African Americans, which is always a risk for black people. Data also doesn't show how many the proportion of non-violent black and white people who get assaulted or generally treated badly but not killed.

I mean here in the U.K that black nurse put out the video of how she was stopped and arrested for having tinted windows. They searched her car and found nothing. She later films herself with the PM lmao.

But I do agree about police brutality being a thing in general which I have brought up before. We saw how that old white man got smacked on the ground, and literally 50 police just walked past and ignored him, and then they put out some bogus statement before realising it was on camera. That in itself is pretty damning evidence for that case.

Getting a bit exhausted (not specific to you0 on this topic but since pretty much everything you said is right, I think we are good. Your write-up, here, pretty much hits all the points any reasonable person would consider. I think people who would disagree with the points you bring up, especially the examples, might be a little bit racist (to a lit a bit racist).

👆

Originally posted by dadudemon
According to the forensic tool I have access to, it shows a 72% match in writing style with Whirly.

Oddly enough, the match shows old school Whirly, the pre-2010s Whirly, is slightly less than a 60% match. You changed over the years. You were a significantly different person. Yes, I spent about 30 minutes, in a meeting, yesterday, inputting your posts from various accounts into that forensics tool. It's pretty cool. It was harder to find some of your older posts, however.

This tool is smart enough to pick up on subtleties when someone tries to change their writing styles to mask who they are.

Regardless, I prefer this version of Whirly, better. You're smarter, more engaged, and verbose with your ideas. Smart Whirly is best Whirly.

Implementing a UHC would also go a long way in helping black victims of violence. It seems counter-intuitive but having affordable healthcare that is not tied to an employer is almost liberating to a people. And it would disparately benefit black Americans to have an affordable healthcare solution.

Healthcare should always include drug-related healthcare and mental healthcare. Some people see an angry, young, violent black man who is a criminal. A psychiatrist may see a human that has been through some shit and needs years of psychotherapy to become a well adjusted and successful member of society. It's the difference between how a police officer thinks and a mental health professional think.

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
Fine, I am Whirly 2.0.

👆

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
😂 But, you, DDM, the mods and I know you are not. I do like your style though and you are a nice improvement to the forum.

He cannot help but gaslight and troll, and he is going to end up banned for it.

Considering the usual suspects here gaslight all the time...that would be curious indeed.

Now comes the part where they lie and say they've stopped 🙂

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He cannot help but gaslight and troll, and he is going to end up banned for it.

Will true, Baba, Imp and BF will not ban DDM. He'd have to do something VERY extreme. Perman-Banning people on waning forum like this is a bad idea all around though.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
😂 But, you, DDM, the mods and I know you are not. I do like your style though and you are a nice improvement to the forum.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He cannot help but gaslight and troll, and he is going to end up banned for it.

Are you both trying to get banned with this stuff?

Whirly, just post as that Darth dude. Pretend to be him.

If Darth isn't Whirly, has he said who he is then? He admitted to being a sock.

So whose sock is he? I'm sure he'll answer.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He cannot help but gaslight and troll, and he is going to end up banned for it.

Originally posted by Robtard
Will true, Baba, Imp and BF will not ban DDM. He'd have to do something VERY extreme. Perman-Banning people on waning forum like this is a bad idea all around though.

DDM give this Darth guy a chance.

There is no way a mod could be consistent and ban DDM without banning you whirly, and adam, and rob, and bash.

DDM providing evidence and you guys pretending it doesn't exist is common. Don't die on this hill.

Originally posted by Surtur
There is no way a mod could be consistent and ban DDM without banning you whirly, and adam, and rob, and bash.

DDM providing evidence and you guys pretending it doesn't exist is common. Don't die on this hill.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Right but the war on drugs has caused alot of pain in the black communities which is a serious problem, probably more so then blm overall. Alot of prison cells filled with wasted drug incarcerations.

Well I would say don’t do something that you know the police are looking for. Crying foul when you are doing something you know is wrong is kind of dumb no? The states are pushing more and more for at least the legalization of marijuana so if it’s that should alleviate some of the disparity. I’m now for legalizing it. I have been swayed by some posters on here as well as some info on the prison complex. If it helps stop some of the useless jailings, then I’m for it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Because the movement is against inherent racism especially in the establishment. Presumably blacks do not kill blacks because they are racist towards blacks.

But I'm pretty sure the victims families are not okay with it. Not are the black families scared for their kids in those neighbourhoods.

Then the movement shouldn’t be called black lives matter. It should be “stop racism on black people” since they don’t seem to care bout anyone else. Block people aren’t the only minorities.

If their children are scared in their own neighborhoods over a small percentage of police brutality, they should be terrified of the people that may kill them in their own community. It’s ridiculously more likely to happen.

Originally posted by socool8520
Then the movement shouldn’t be called black lives matter. It should be “stop racism on black people” since they don’t seem to care bout anyone else. Block people aren’t the only minorities.

If their children are scared in their own neighborhoods over a small percentage of police brutality, they should be terrified of the people that may kill them in their own community. It’s ridiculously more likely to happen.

You dont think fighting police brutality and inherent racism will help other minorities as well?

Given the police reforms and such, clearly BLM have made a difference.

Im sure they are terrified in their neighbourhoods. Exactly what do you think they should do about it? Protest gangs and drug dealers?

Originally posted by Surtur
DDM providing evidence and you guys pretending it doesn't exist is common. Don't die on this hill.

Agreed. I consistently cite evidence, cite sources, and complete original work and analysis. Calling any of that "gaslighting" is not even a good attempt at coping with uncomfortable facts that do not fit commonly held false beliefs. It's just pathetic and trolling.

When the points/facts I point out do not support something you say, you cope with a joke or a related counter-point.

But when the points facts I point out do not support their TDS narratives, they just call it gas-lighting.

Luckily, my employer doesn't do that and they check my work (peer review) and use it to inform decisions and policy. Can you imagine an employer dismissing research that informed policy that could save them tons of money?

Originally posted by socool8520
Then the movement shouldn’t be called black lives matter. It should be “stop racism on black people” since they don’t seem to care bout anyone else. Block people aren’t the only minorities.

If their children are scared in their own neighborhoods over a small percentage of police brutality, they should be terrified of the people that may kill them in their own community. It’s ridiculously more likely to happen.

Ding ding. If they are scared of being killed by police then they should be so frightened of each other that they are parallelized with fear and unable to function. You don't hear that from young black men, though. It's more of a "f*ck the police" attitude. They aren't scared of the police. Some are scared of other young black men, understandably so. But not parallelized with fear.

The most dangerous person for a black kid is the mother who is encouraged to abort her black child or encouraged to raise her kids in poverty as a single mother - it says so right on the BLM website that BLM aims to destroy the nuclear family.