Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[SeattleLionsFan]

This is a little one-sided IMO...because on the other hand we've got young AA "protesters" dressed like Hajis. When you're running around wildly with sunglasses on and a black scarf covering your face it sends a message.

I was talking only about the picture, and not overall. There were no aa with face coverings on. (Although if they were Muslim and wearing headscarves, seems that religious expression should be ok in the us of a.)

[Wild Hoss]

I think we could agree both sides are escalating.... or at worst, posturing.

Well, I think back to your earlier comment about adults. What few adults there are on both sides aren't the ones doing most of the interaction.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Jeff, I didn't say I don't get why they are dressed like they are. I don't agree with your assertion that the streets are a war zone though. And the woman in the picture poses no threat at all.

[Wild Hoss]

I was talking only about the picture, and not overall. There were no aa with face coverings on. (Although if they were Muslim and wearing headscarves, seems that religious expression should be ok in the us of a.)

Understood. I am just making the point that there is "war paint" being worn by both sides is all.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Jeff are you saying that these people just decided to hate cops for no reason?

Fair question ......

Let's look at it. The obvious answer is no. These people (and I assume by this you mean those associated/sympathizing with the BLM movement) believe they have legitimate complaints that blacks are treated differently by the state than other races. Is this a new complaint? No. BLM has just adopted different tactics to make their point than that of the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s. They've also focused on a different target for their rhetoric, namely, law enforcement and to a certain extent the justice system.

Here's founder Alicia Garza's summary of what the BLM is:

"When we say Black Lives Matter, we are talking about the ways in which Black people are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity. It is an acknowledgement Black poverty and genocide is state violence. It is an acknowledgment that 1 million Black people are locked in cages in this country–one half of all people in prisons or jails–is an act of state violence. It is an acknowledgment that Black women continue to bear the burden of a relentless assault on our children and our families and that assault is an act of state violence."

State violence (against blacks)? Really? In a previous post, if I have it right, you made the observation that America is not anywhere close to the state sponsored freedom and human rights violations (or state violence) of, say, China. You mentioned this casually, I believe in a discussion about comparing Alishea Evans' act in Baton Rouge to that of the Chinese protester in Tienanmen square.

So, are you now saying police actions v. blacks constitute state violence at a level comparable to that of the Chinese? That seems to be what you imply in your question to me regarding the legitimacy of the BLM's complaints. I could be wrong.

I reject BLM's underlying philosophy that police forces in America are perpetrators of state violence directed against blacks. I reject that the US justice system treats any particular group differently than others. Moreover, I find their tactics to be dangerous. They are significantly different, much more in-your face-different, than those of the older generation of black leadership who, IMO, more appropriately advocated for tactics that embraced middle-class traditions like church involvement, Democratic Party loyalty, and respectability politics. Instead, BLM's tactics in the rallies they sponsor and organize rely on inflammatory statements and organizers work hard to incite those that attend to violence against authority (the state), and in this case, it's usually the police trying to control an angry, disrespectful, sometimes masked and frequently armed crowd.

Do some groups (let's leave the emotionally charged use of the term blacks) in this country have legitimate complaints about being treated unfairly by the state? Perhaps. But there are vehicles in this country, most of them still quite functional as compared to elsewhere in the world, where those complaints can be heard and, adjudicated.

So, in the larger context and to answer your question, if Garza's articulation of the purpose of the BLM movement is an accurate one, then, yes, blacks who associate themselves with this movement HAVE decided to hate on the police and, it appears the courts as a symbol of state violence. I believe that is an extremely dangerous platform to advocate for.

[Mike]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports...712-story.html

off duty cops walk working women's NBA game walk out..

Glad to see this. I think a good ole fashioned work slow down is order.

From the article:
Asked about a report that seven or eight officers had walked off the job, Kroll said "They only have four officers working the event because the Lynx have such a pathetic draw."

Damn straight. Nobody ever talks about the public being subjected to the WNBA. Enough is enough!

[Ghengis Jon]

I reject BLM's underlying philosophy that police forces in America are perpetrators of state violence directed against blacks. I reject that the US justice system treats any particular group differently than others. - Jeff

I don't disagree. It can be proven to one and all that race is not the fundamental root cause if one colors the police forces to that of the populace. I would expect that not many of the statistics being examined today to shift much at all. It would force people to work on the actual root causes: poverty, lack of economic or eductional opportunity, a disappearance of the family structure, no sense of community or social responsibility, and outright hopelessness. Urban centers have become a sociopathic society, to coin a paradoxical phrase.

[Wild Hoss]

[Dr. Strangelove]

As Jeff launches a"AMERICA HAS BECOME A WAR ZONE" spiel, let's remind everyone for the zillionth time that violent crimes rates are at their lowest since the late 60's. In particular blighted inner city neighborhoods are where most of the crime is happening, so if you live out in a middle-class suburb, you're even less in danger than these charts show.

You are NOT in more danger today than you were 20 years. You're in less danger of being robbed or murdered than at ANY point in the 80's.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The lowest the crime rate EVER got during Reagan's Presidency was in 1984 when it hit 537.7 per 100,000 people. By 2014 it had fallen to 375.7 per 100,000.

In 1984 the murder rate was 7.9 per 100,000. In 2014 it was 4.5

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

[Dr. Strangelove]

Guy who filmed the Alton Sterling killing gets publicly arrested at his employer for 'assault" then gets told down at the station that he was actually only picked up for $1200 in unpaid parking tickets.

Also the owner of the convenience store where this happened (and testified a number of times that Sterling had done nothing wrong) has filed civil rights charges agaisnt the police

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/man-who-first-posted-alton-sterling-video-online-arrested-on-bogus-charges-of-assault-and-battery/

[hack]

So, are you now saying police actions v. blacks constitute state violence at a level comparable to that of the Chinese? That seems to be what you imply in your question to me regarding the legitimacy of the BLM's complaints. I could be wrong.

Not sure why you would think that. My point is that in a just society there should be no opportunities at all for such a photo.


But there are vehicles in this country, most of them still quite functional as compared to elsewhere in the world, where those complaints can be heard and, adjudicated.

The people that need to avail themselves feel differently - to the extent that they'd rather get arrested and make themselves targets for cops in the future than use those formal channels. Are you and I really and truly in a position to say whether they are right or not? What experience do we have that entitles us to dismiss their experiences and paint them all as extremists?

[Jeff Buchanan]

As Jeff launches a"AMERICA HAS BECOME A WAR ZONE" spiel, let's remind everyone for the zillionth time that violent crimes rates are at their lowest since the late 60's. In particular blighted inner city neighborhoods are where most of the crime is happening, so if you live out in a middle-class suburb, you're even less in danger than these charts show.

You are NOT in more danger today than you were 20 years. You're in less danger of being robbed or murdered than at ANY point in the 80's.

Completely agree with you, Strange, AMERICA IS NOT WAR ZONE. Not sure where you got that I thought AMERICA WAS A WAR ZONE other than my statement that one of the likely causes of our police forces appearing to look like combat ready soldiers is because the are trying to apprehend criminals or prevent crimes where the criminals and perpetrators are as heavily armed as some of the worlds most sophisticated and capable fighting forces. Had nothing to do with point of my post where I said that ..... but your charts are nice.

I'd also point out that we are safer today than in the 12th Century and just about every Century since then.

[The Oracle]

The people that need to avail themselves feel differently - to the extent that they'd rather get arrested and make themselves targets for cops in the future than use those formal channels. Are you and I really and truly in a position to say whether they are right or not? What experience do we have that entitles us to dismiss their experiences and paint them all as extremists?

No. And most people, not saying Jeff, don't understand that or don't care to understand that.

[Wild Hoss]

This seems relevant at this point in the discussion.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igQDvYOt_iA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igQDvYOt_iA[/ame]