Is BLM really talking about black-on-black crime?

Page 4 of 7 [ 107 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

25 Jul 2016, 1:33 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Unfortunately that particular organization contains individuals who are trigger happy around black people. Case in point: when that idiot cop forgot who was the alleged assailant, and shot the therapist instead of the autistic man (why anyone should shoot a harmless autistic man in the first place makes no sense) because said cop saw a black face.

So, to be clear here, you're in favour of profiling cops but not potential criminals?

Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

25 Jul 2016, 1:57 pm

adifferentname wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

So, to be clear here, you're in favour of profiling cops but not potential criminals?

The way I see it: the only difference is that the weight of the government is behind one, but not the other. Perhaps you have better trained and informed police officers where you're at, but not the case where I'm located and that's from a person as lily white as you can get.

Truth is there's more to profiling than just race, most of the time that's actually a secondary concern to profiling based on economics-- ask a poor white guy in the trailer park how he feels about the police and you'll find his opinion is probably much more anti-cop than your average BLM spokesman.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

25 Jul 2016, 2:15 pm

L_Holmes wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

I never said blacks should just accept black crime, but I think you know that. I think you're being purposely obstinate.

YOU are being obstinate. In the face of the facts that I have presented, which prove that crime is an immensely bigger problem for the black community than unjustified police violence, you continue to insist that focusing on police racism makes sense. It doesn't. I'm not saying forget about it or don't talk about it ever, but police brutality is a problem across the board, not just for black people. What is limited to black people, however, is a ridiculous level of crime.

Homicide is the leading cause of death for young black men. I have yet to see BLM even mention this. How can a group that claims to be out to save black lives be blatantly ignoring such a shocking fact about the loss of black lives? It's f*****g despicable.

You're despicable. How could Martin Luther King talk about racism when there was black-on-black crime? How could Gandhi talk about liberation when there was Indian-on-Indian crime? People like you always bring this s**t up like no one thought of it already.

The police are accountable to the people. People often don't follow the rules and there isn't much they can do about it except call the police. When black people kill black people, it isn't the fault of black people in general, it's the fault of that one person that kills. The police can change their rules and training procedures, but there's f**k all you can do about gangs or drug dealers fighting over turf.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

25 Jul 2016, 2:24 pm

adifferentname wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

So, to be clear here, you're in favour of profiling cops but not potential criminals?

Profiling cops - if it means keeping out trigger happy racists.
As for profiling criminals - that goes too far when blacks are randomly stopped and harassed simply because the police think blacks are automatically guilty of something.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Drake
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,577

25 Jul 2016, 2:57 pm

The more I see, the more I think this is about black power not black lives. This police thing is just a way to gain numbers and attention for the real goal. The rank and file is full of racists, street thugs and useful idiots. If they can take on the police and win, then they can take on anyone else and win. And they will because the police is just the first thing of many they intend to change. If right now I could choose between making the issues with the police go away or make BLM go away, BLM would be going away.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

25 Jul 2016, 3:02 pm

Drake wrote:

You are teaching me so much about bigotry. Like God forbid a black person speaks up about their family members getting killed, all of a sudden they are Huey Newton. I guess being autistic doesn't make people at all sympathetic to other minorities.

LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

25 Jul 2016, 3:17 pm

The problem with BLM is that often they are not peaceful.

- they shout in people's faces
- they block traffic
- they interrupt events
- their riots cause damage to the neighborhood

They make people hate blacks.

Drake
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,577

25 Jul 2016, 3:24 pm

AspE wrote:

Drake wrote:

My reasoning for saying that has gone right over your head.

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks. An obstacle that needs to be overcome rather than something helping. BLM are setting back relations between blacks and police and blacks and the other races. Far back. They're part of the problem not part of the solution.

There are ways of speaking up. BLM screams in your face and pushes you around. And I don't know about you, but I don't respond well to being screamed at and pushed around. BLM make it harder to speak up in any reasonable way because they are dominating the conversation now. As far as I'm concerned we're further away from solving the problem now because of BLM.

Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

25 Jul 2016, 3:26 pm

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks.

There's your problem right there-- you feel totally comfortable making claims about things you know nothing about.

Drake
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,577

25 Jul 2016, 3:32 pm

Aristophanes wrote:

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks.

There's your problem right there-- you feel totally comfortable making claims about things you know nothing about.

Am I wrong? I've literally never seen a good word said about it. To the people I've seen talk about it, it is what I said it is.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

25 Jul 2016, 3:38 pm

Drake wrote:

...
My reasoning for saying that has gone right over your head.

No I understood it, I just think it's ignorant.

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks. An obstacle that needs to be overcome rather than something helping.

That's because they promote curing autism. Many of us who are higher functioning don't see it as something to be cured.

Drake wrote:

BLM are setting back relations between blacks and police and blacks and the other races. Far back. They're part of the problem not part of the solution.

You're talking about it, aren't you? That's a damn sight better than being ignored.

Drake wrote:

There are ways of speaking up. BLM screams in your face and pushes you around. And I don't know about you, but I don't respond well to being screamed at and pushed around. BLM make it harder to speak up in any reasonable way because they are dominating the conversation now. As far as I'm concerned we're further away from solving the problem now because of BLM.

That's what people said about the suffragettes, now women can vote. Look, groups exist all over the country to address this issue, well-behaved groups that never broke a law. Have you heard of them? I didn't think so.

Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

25 Jul 2016, 3:38 pm

Drake wrote:

Aristophanes wrote:

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks.

There's your problem right there-- you feel totally comfortable making claims about things you know nothing about.

Am I wrong? I've literally never seen a good word said about it. To the people I've seen talk about it, it is what I said it is.

That's not the issue, the issue is you seem to be willing to make a comparison using it without having any knowledge about what it is, aside from other people's opinions at this one small locale on the 'net. It eliminates the credibility of your opinion, since by your own claim, it's made out of ignorance.

Edit: on a side note, I'm not a fan of Autism Speaks, but I did the research so I know WHY I dislike them. I recommend you do the same before making comparisons with them.

Drake
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,577

25 Jul 2016, 3:58 pm

Aristophanes wrote:

Drake wrote:

Aristophanes wrote:

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks.

There's your problem right there-- you feel totally comfortable making claims about things you know nothing about.

Am I wrong? I've literally never seen a good word said about it. To the people I've seen talk about it, it is what I said it is.

The funny thing is, if I hadn't pointed out my personal unfamiliarity with Autism Speaks, there'd have been no problem. I laid it on the line that I personally am not familiar with them but to others that's what they are. But no one challenged the people in the anti-Autism Speaks posts, and I think no one would have challenged it here.

If you want, forget I mentioned Autism Speaks. You know what point I was trying to make. I don't claim unfamiliarity with BLM, and I say they make the problem they allege to be trying to solve worse.

Drake
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,577

25 Jul 2016, 4:11 pm

AspE wrote:

Drake wrote:

...
My reasoning for saying that has gone right over your head.

No I understood it, I just think it's ignorant.

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks. An obstacle that needs to be overcome rather than something helping.

That's because they promote curing autism. Many of us who are higher functioning don't see it as something to be cured.

Drake wrote:

BLM are setting back relations between blacks and police and blacks and the other races. Far back. They're part of the problem not part of the solution.

You're talking about it, aren't you? That's a damn sight better than being ignored.

Drake wrote:

Prior to BLM, Police cases the likes of which BLM bring up still made it into the mainstream media and still were talked about. BLM didn't change that.

I've brought it up elsewhere that gay marriage is the example to follow. If you'd came to me say 5 years before it was allowed across America and told me that it would be, and it would be largely accepted too, I would never have believed it. They didn't need to do what BLM do to make it happen.

And this police issue should be easier, because you don't have to be black to get gunned down unlawfully by police. This is something that can resonate with all Americans. This is something that won't meet with the kind of resistance that gay marriage did.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

25 Jul 2016, 4:24 pm

I guess you never heard of the Stonewall Riots? Add it to the list of Things You are Ignorant of. That was the beginning of the gay rights movement.

Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

25 Jul 2016, 4:43 pm

Drake wrote:

Aristophanes wrote:

Drake wrote:

Aristophanes wrote:

Drake wrote:

I am unfamiliar with Autism Speaks, but I've noticed the organisation seems to be very unpopular here. BLM is Autism Speaks.

There's your problem right there-- you feel totally comfortable making claims about things you know nothing about.

Am I wrong? I've literally never seen a good word said about it. To the people I've seen talk about it, it is what I said it is.

Sorry doesn't work that way: if you're willing to bolster your arguments with claims of which you have no knowledge it puts your entire viewpoint under suspicion. I mean, really, what other claims have you made here that you can't verify? You see the credibility issue here?

Page 4 of 7 [ 107 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Jump to:

Is BLM really talking about black-on-black crime? Post Reply New Topic

Is BLM really talking about black-on-black crime?