White Lives Matter banner flew over football game

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
It's not really fair or honest to treat state-sanctioned violence against blacks and black-on-black crime is seperate issues, or to suggest that the BLM movement is only interested in one of them. Especially when a huge number of black activists are involved in tackling these problems.

But political activists lecturing criminals on the value of black lives is not going to cause black-on-black crime to decrease, encouraging better policing and a more accountable criminal justice system on the other hand might actually work to heal the current rift between police and the black community. Which in turn could serve as a basis for a community based policing model that is actually effective in reducing violent crime in these neighbourhoods.

What does the 'White Lives Matter' movement do to further any of this? Other than providing a smoke-screen for racists trolls to downplay the issue? There are a lot people in this thread who seem very concerned about issue black-on-black crime, and yet only seem to be proferring excuses for why the BLM movement is flawed and should be disregarded. Why?

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
back on topic, excellent post. Wish I had written it, it destroys the right narrative.

I know right, bingo/crack on.......there is no significant right narrative on this forum. Generally speaking it's just ppl looking to dispell the garbage of narrative policing without facts....also bingo/crack on. 😉

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay champ, you're not new. You're a sock, probably Whirly's, but you are someones sock. No need to hide behind another user name kiddo

I know enough about you on the other hand to be aware that you are not worthing paying attention to. 👆

Teg maybe? He hasn't poster as much.

That's why it's not enough to just "clean up law enforcement", you need a new model of policing. There a proven strategies for dealing with gang violence, and none of them involve more heavy-handed policing, but rather providing community support and exit strategies for those involved. Starve them of membership and street gangs will dissappear. But that can't happen without state funding, and a reappriasal of how the state views and treats black people.

I have spoken about cleaning up law enforcement in the past, so I'm not going into that mssging in particular. That said the BLM mssging is clearly political and has very little to do with said lives. If you believe in the USA there is a problem with racism I would respond with a simple "racism is an individual belief that cannot be routed out by laws." Look at the culture of the USA, dominated by black influence well beyond its population and to fix thebad parts requires community influence not legislation.

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
You are right, I am not new, just making an observation.

I know enough about you on the other hand to be aware that you are not worthing paying attention to. 👆

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Whoever you are you want to engage in logical polite debate, with carefully thought through and nuances arguments. I respect that, I'd respect it if your politics were different. 👆

I laughed. You used so many words incorrectly it's not even funny.

I'm gonna allow this farce 🙂

Originally posted by snowdragon
I have spoken about cleaning up law enforcement in the past, so I'm not going into that mssging in particular. That said the BLM mssging is clearly political and has very little to do with said lives. If you believe in the USA there is a problem with racism I would respond with a simple "racism is an individual belief that cannot be routed out by laws." Look at the culture of the USA, dominated by black influence well beyond its population and to fix thebad parts requires community influence not legislation.

When people say Black Lives Matter they mean that it is not acceptable to treat black people as expendable, and that the state-sanctioned taking of those lives should be met with consequences. Is that a political statement? Yeah, it relates to the public sphere, I also don't see a problem with it.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
When black people are being disproportionately killed by police

Wrong.

Unless you mean to say they are killed less often than white people proportionally to their violent crime prevalence?

Highly unlikely that you do not mean that at all.

If you can't even discuss police brutality with honesty, you shouldn't discuss the topic at all.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Whoever you are you want to engage in logical polite debate, with carefully thought through and nuances arguments. I respect that, I'd respect it if your politics were different. 👆

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
The USA does have a problem with racism, and the way to deal with it is by curbing the ability of racists to act. So long as police feel empowered to kill innocent blacks with little more than a slap wrist and a few months leave, they will continue to do so. They need to be held accountable, and their ability to execute civilians needs to be restricted.

When people say Black Lives Matter they mean that it is not acceptable to treat black people as expendable, and that the state-sanctioned taking of those lives should be met with consequences. Is that a political statement? Yeah, it relates to the public sphere, I also don't see a problem with it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
You are claiming (correct me if I'm wrong), that we can basically judge racism by comparing the number of violent offenders of each race, to the numbers of homicides to that particular race.

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.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
1) That would assume homicides are a direct result of offenders being violent. But the few cases that lead to the BLM protests had nothing to do with violence.

2) Stats Can Not measure racism. In fact your stats by their nature are presuming there is no inherent racism in making these arrests.

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.

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
The USA does have a problem with racism, and the way to deal with it is by curbing the ability of racists to act. So long as police feel empowered to kill innocent blacks with little more than a slap wrist and a few months leave, they will continue to do so. They need to be held accountable, and their ability to execute civilians needs to be restricted.

When people say Black Lives Matter they mean that it is not acceptable to treat black people as expendable, and that the state-sanctioned taking of those lives should be met with consequences. Is that a political statement? Yeah, it relates to the public sphere, I also don't see a problem with it.

Post this under your non-sock account if you want to be taken seriously

Originally posted by Silent Master
Post this under your non-sock account if you want to be taken seriously

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
So long as police feel empowered to kill innocent blacks with little more than a slap wrist and a few months leave, they will continue to do so.

Most of your point is simply disengenous words when you say "empowered" because that is the opposite of what happens to police and your use of "innocent" is questionable as well.

When people say Black Lives Matter they mean that it is not acceptable to treat black people as expendable, and that the state-sanctioned taking of those lives should be met with consequences. Is that a political statement? Yeah, it relates to the public sphere, I also don't see a problem with it.

The more appropitate answer to this is simply a question, if there is so much racism why do most the minority cities with problems boast a significant black leadership? Come back to me with an honest response and we can have a discussion in good faith.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
soppy sod, I'd never write a post that long under any account.

I never said it was your sock.

Originally posted by DarthAloysius
It's not really fair or honest to treat state-sanctioned violence against blacks and black-on-black crime is seperate issues, or to suggest that the BLM movement is only interested in one of them. Especially when a huge number of black activists are involved in tackling these problems.

Too true.

BLM is also interested in getting Democrats elected. They use ActBlue as their charity funds manager. Here's the top recipients of ActBlue money:

Opensecrets said that none of the BLM donations are going to the DNC so you can mark off that $30 million at the #9 slot from that list.

https://twitter.com/OpenSecretsDC/status/1272939242927218688

And it should be obvious why BLM is interested in electing Democrats.

It says it right on their website in their "What Matters" section:

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.

They use an "ActBlue" charity company to funnel funds to Democrats to get them elected or reelected.

If they actually cared about those issues, they'd vote for Trump, the Libertarians, or the Greens.

And they make it VERY clear they want to destroy the nuclear family (when we have mountains of science that shows the standard nuclear family to be the best possible starting point for children):

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement..."

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

WTF? Burn this organization to the ground. Destroy it. Post-haste.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Too true.

BLM is also interested in getting Democrats elected. They use ActBlue as their charity funds manager. Here's the top recipients of ActBlue money:

Opensecrets said that none of the BLM donations are going to the DNC so you can mark off that $30 million at the #9 slot from that list.

https://twitter.com/OpenSecretsDC/status/1272939242927218688

And it should be obvious why BLM is interested in electing Democrats.

It says it right on their website in their "What Matters" section:

They use an "ActBlue" charity company to funnel funds to Democrats to get them elected or reelected.

If they actually cared about those issues, they'd vote for Trump, the Libertarians, or the Greens.

And they make it VERY clear they want to destroy the nuclear family (when we have mountains of science that shows the standard nuclear family to be the best possible starting point for children):

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement..."

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

WTF? Burn this organization to the ground. Destroy it. Post-haste.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Too true.

BLM is also interested in getting Democrats elected. They use ActBlue as their charity funds manager. Here's the top recipients of ActBlue money:

Opensecrets said that none of the BLM donations are going to the DNC so you can mark off that $30 million at the #9 slot from that list.

https://twitter.com/OpenSecretsDC/status/1272939242927218688

And it should be obvious why BLM is interested in electing Democrats.

It says it right on their website in their "What Matters" section:

They use an "ActBlue" charity company to funnel funds to Democrats to get them elected or reelected.

If they actually cared about those issues, they'd vote for Trump, the Libertarians, or the Greens.

And they make it VERY clear they want to destroy the nuclear family (when we have mountains of science that shows the standard nuclear family to be the best possible starting point for children):

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement..."

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

WTF? Burn this organization to the ground. Destroy it. Post-haste.

Where are your figures from?

The Blaze?

Originally posted by dadudemon
T

Opensecrets said that none of the BLM donations are going to the DNC so you can mark off that $30 million at the #9 slot from that list.

https://twitter.com/OpenSecretsDC/status/1272939242927218688