All lives matter BOOED! Only black lives matter.

[Doc Savage Fan]

I wish knew why you rightwingers had such a hatred of Sharpton and Jackson, besides them being "uppity."

Or why its so difficult to understand that people don't like their movement being co-opted.

Race baiters...look it up.

 

[Rustler]

I wish knew why you rightwingers had such a hatred of Sharpton and Jackson, besides them being "uppity."

Or why its so difficult to understand that people don't like their movement being co-opted.

they are not hated but, will use their skin color and own people to garner more support or get more money.............they really could care less IMHO

 

[JockoJohnson]

Race baiters...look it up.

He won't. And you are racist for saying race baiters.

 

[CitizenKain]

He won't. And you are racist for saying race baiters.

Oh you mean made up shit that you racists get mad about.

 

[JockoJohnson]

I wish knew why you rightwingers had such a hatred of Sharpton and Jackson, besides them being "uppity."

Because I must be racist.

Or why its so difficult to understand that people don't like their movement being co-opted.

Then they should have better sloganeering. Right now, it sounds like they don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves. So a natural response is for some/most to not give a shit about them unless they make it all inclusive. I know being inclusive has been discussed plenty of times in this forum so why shouldn't it apply now?

ANY UNJUSTIFIED SHOOTING OF ANY PERSON, REGARDLESS OF SKIN COLOR, BY A COP IS WRONG -- not just if it was a black person.

If they want to make it about racism in this country then get a different slogan and make it about that and not just cops.

 

[fskimospy]

Because I must be racist.

Then they should have better sloganeering. Right now, it sounds like they don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves. So a natural response is for some/most to not give a shit about them unless they make it all inclusive. I know being inclusive has been discussed plenty of times in this forum so why shouldn't it apply now?

ANY UNJUSTIFIED SHOOTING OF ANY PERSON, REGARDLESS OF SKIN COLOR, BY A COP IS WRONG -- not just if it was a black person.

If they want to make it about racism in this country then get a different slogan and make it about that and not just cops.

This has been gone over multiple times. There are two issues being discussed:

1. Cops shoot too many people.
2. Cops shoot black people at disproportionately high rates.

They are specifically protesting #2. Protesting #2 does not mean you don't care about #1. Similarly when you say something like "getting good grades in school matters" you aren't saying that ONLY getting good grades in school matters.

This entire thread is ridiculous. He was booed for saying a phrase that has been specifically used to attack the slogans that the people he was speaking to believe in. It had nothing to do with the words in the phrase and what they would mean in a different context. This is hardly unique to 'all lives matter', by the way.

 

[JockoJohnson]

I will just chalk it up to me being racist that I don't understand. I get it that black people do get disproportionately shot as opposed to white people. But white people still get shot too. So what is the end goal of #BlackLivesMatter....to shoot black people less so that cops unjustly shoot white and black people equally?

Edit: If it is to have all black people stop being shot unjustly but then white people are still unjustly being shot, how well would it go over when the #WhiteLivesMatter slogan comes out?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

This entire thread is ridiculous. He was booed for saying a phrase that has been specifically used to attack the slogans that the people he was speaking to believe in. It had nothing to do with the words in the phrase and what they would mean in a different context. This is hardly unique to 'all lives matter', by the way.

Was Hillary's usage of the phrase "All lives matter" specifically used to attack the slogans that the people she was speaking to believed in as well? Or was that somehow different?

 

[CitizenKain]

Because I must be racist.

Then they should have better sloganeering. Right now, it sounds like they don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves. So a natural response is for some/most to not give a shit about them unless they make it all inclusive. I know being inclusive has been discussed plenty of times in this forum so why shouldn't it apply now?

ANY UNJUSTIFIED SHOOTING OF ANY PERSON, REGARDLESS OF SKIN COLOR, BY A COP IS WRONG -- not just if it was a black person.

If they want to make it about racism in this country then get a different slogan and make it about that and not just cops.

So you believe they don't care about anyone other then themselves why?

The reason it isn't inclusive is the people who are running it are making a point. Because some people in this society don't regard black lives as mattering. If a cop was to pull up to a white kid playing in a park and puts 2 rounds into them without warning, there would be an uproar. If a group of cops ran into a walmart and shot a white women holding a BB gun without warning then it wouldn't be handwaved away. Thats what they are calling attention to.

I'm not sure how people can have such a problem understanding this, it isn't that difficult. I mean, you somehow manage to use a computer.

 

[Annisman*]

This has been gone over multiple times. There are two issues being discussed:

1. Cops shoot too many people.
2. Cops shoot black people at disproportionately high rates.

They are specifically protesting #2. Protesting #2 does not mean you don't care about #1. Similarly when you say something like "getting good grades in school matters" you aren't saying that ONLY getting good grades in school matters.

This entire thread is ridiculous. He was booed for saying a phrase that has been specifically used to attack the slogans that the people he was speaking to believe in. It had nothing to do with the words in the phrase and what they would mean in a different context. This is hardly unique to 'all lives matter', by the way.

Is that disproportionate to the amount of violence and crime blacks commit ?

 

[fskimospy]

Was Hillary's usage of the phrase "All lives matter" specifically used to attack the slogans that the people she was speaking to believed in as well? Or was that somehow different?

Of course not. What would make you think that it was? Neither O'Malley nor Hillary meant to use the phrase to attack the black lives matter slogan.

If someone used the phrase 'peace in our time', they would still be criticized by some people for using it even if they weren't surrendering to Hitler.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Of course not. What would make you think that it was? Neither O'Malley nor Hillary meant to use the phrase to attack the black lives matter slogan.

Then I misunderstood your post...my apologies.

 

[werepossum]

Straw man. The only way that isn't approved is the one that was created specifically as an insult.

Dude, it was NOT "created specifically as an insult." Get over yourself.

That is so fucking moronic.

He actually shoehorned "the soldiers" into his bullshitstorm.

Montel is black. Therefore attacking his message is necessarily racist.

This has been gone over multiple times. There are two issues being discussed:

1. Cops shoot too many people.
2. Cops shoot black people at disproportionately high rates.

They are specifically protesting #2. Protesting #2 does not mean you don't care about #1. Similarly when you say something like "getting good grades in school matters" you aren't saying that ONLY getting good grades in school matters.

This entire thread is ridiculous. He was booed for saying a phrase that has been specifically used to attack the slogans that the people he was speaking to believe in. It had nothing to do with the words in the phrase and what they would mean in a different context. This is hardly unique to 'all lives matter', by the way.

I agree that protesting #2 does not mean you don't care about #1. However, booing someone who dares mention #1 is a pretty good indication that one doesn't care about #1.

 

[Rakehellion]

Is that disproportionate to the amount of violence and crime blacks commit ?

Yes. And that's the problem.

 

[JockoJohnson]

So you believe they don't care about anyone other then themselves why?

The reason it isn't inclusive is the people who are running it are making a point. Because some people in this society don't regard black lives as mattering. If a cop was to pull up to a white kid playing in a park and puts 2 rounds into them without warning, there would be an uproar. If a group of cops ran into a walmart and shot a white women holding a BB gun without warning then it wouldn't be handwaved away. Thats what they are calling attention to.

I'm not sure how people can have such a problem understanding this, it isn't that difficult. I mean, you somehow manage to use a computer.

Meh. I get it. I don't like the people running it because it seems that more do it for their own publicity than actually correcting the problem. Don't ask me to explain it, it is just how I see it. Blame Al Sharpton, media attention whore extraordinaire for my opinions. He swoops in, wreaks all kinds of havoc, and then leaves other people to pick up the pieces. So when I see people get their panties in a bunch when #AllLivesMatter is brought up, I get a kick out of it. Call me sick or whatever, I am just tired of the same old media narratives. It is too predictable and nothing, NOTHING, ever comes of it.

Look at Ferguson -- People got their 15 minutes of fame and there is a dead black man and not much in the way of consequences. Once the full story came out, people just walked away from it.

One of the real travesties was Eric Garner in NY. That still pisses me off how that went down. He was "more" innocent than Brown, based off of information reported after the fact. And those cops got nothing done to them. Then the child in Ohio. I get it but fuck those retarded media whores like Al Sharpton. Once I see them, all sympathy is gone because they do it for their own self-aggrandizement. They are now the center of attention.

 

[fskimospy]

I agree that protesting #2 does not mean you don't care about #1. However, booing someone who dares mention #1 is a pretty good indication that one doesn't care about #1.

Good thing that's not what was being done here then, huh?

The only way someone could think that is if they were trying to conflate booing of the 'all lives matter' slogan with disapproving of someone saying police should shoot fewer people, and that would be downright nutty, wouldn't you say?

It's funny that you're implicitly trying to argue that the black activists there were against efforts to rein in police violence. Think about that for a minute and then get back to me on if you think that makes sense.

 

[xBiffx]

Good thing that's not what was being done here then, huh?

The only way someone could think that is if they were trying to conflate booing of the 'all lives matter' slogan with disapproving of someone saying police should shoot fewer people, and that would be downright nutty, wouldn't you say?

It's funny that you're implicitly trying to argue that the black activists there were against efforts to rein in police violence. Think about that for a minute and then get back to me on if you think that makes sense.

How can you be OK with efforts to reign in police violence and then boo the very thing that has the highest impact on doing so? Either you don't care about that or you think the black part of the movement is more important independent of what the movement is about.

Does segregating this effort really stand to help it? Think about that for a minute and get back to me on if you think that makes sense.

 

[fskimospy]

How can you be OK with efforts to reign in police violence and then boo the very thing that has the highest impact on doing so? Either you don't care about that or you think the black part of the movement is more important independent of what the movement is about.

They aren't booing that. They were booing the use of a phrase that has come to be used to attack efforts to address racially discriminatory policing. Had O'Malley said "we need to reduce police violence" I'm sure he would have gotten big cheers.

Does segregating this effort really stand to help it? Think about that for a minute and get back to me on if you think that makes sense.

It's not segregating the effort. They are two different problems. It's baffling that anyone could even describe it as 'racially segregating it'. If the problem is people discriminating against black people saying "we should stop discriminating against black people" isn't segregation, it's simply a statement of reality.

 

[xBiffx]

They aren't booing that. They were booing the use of a phrase that has come to be used to attack efforts to address racially discriminatory policing. Had O'Malley said "we need to reduce police violence" I'm sure he would have gotten big cheers.

So says you. They began booing at the time "white lives matter" was said anyways. He didn't say that so we can't know that.

It's not segregating the effort. They are two different problems. It's baffling that anyone could even describe it as 'racially segregating it'. If the problem is people discriminating against black people saying "we should stop discriminating against black people" isn't segregation, it's simply a statement of reality.

You are absolutely segregating the effort to reduce police violence. You are definitely not addressing the other problem. But again, if you are all about reducing police violence, "black lives matter" is an epic fail. How on earth can you expect to change the behavior of police when you are only talking about a smaller portion of the problem of police violence.

Again, police with racial issues shooting people/being excessive is the problem here. You aren't going to fix violence without addressing that, and that alone. Even if you try and fix the racial issue, that doesn't mean they aren't still shooting people/being excessive. Which means you fixed exactly what? Now you have cops without racial issues still shooting people. And guess what, they are still going to be shooting black people too.

 

[Rakehellion]

You are absolutely segregating the effort to reduce police violence.

The issue isn't about police violence. It's about unfair treatment of blacks.

 

[xBiffx]

The issue isn't about police violence. It's about unfair treatment of blacks.

So as long as they don't target blacks unfairly, let them be violent? I mean, what behavior is trying to be reigned in here, thoughts or actions?

Yes. And that's the problem.

By the way, I'd like to see some links on that.

 

[fskimospy]

So says you. They began booing at the time "white lives matter" was said anyways. He didn't say that so we can't know that.

Yes. So says me.

You are absolutely segregating the effort to reduce police violence. You are definitely not addressing the other problem.

Both obviously false. Saying the police should stop being racist is not segregating anything, it is a simple statement of fact. Considering the entire problem of police racism is based in...yes...race, it is by definition impossible not to mention race when talking about how it should stop.

Additionally, acting against police racism in no way precludes acting against other forms of police misbehavior. The idea that black people should have to shut up about police racism to fix other problems is not only absurd, but is insanely offensive.

But again, if you are all about reducing police violence, "black lives matter" is an epic fail. How on earth can you expect to change the behavior of police when you are only talking about a smaller portion of the problem of police violence.

Because police violence has more than one facet and going after one doesn't preclude or damage the prospects for going after others. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Again, police with racial issues shooting people/being excessive is the problem here. You aren't going to fix violence without addressing that, and that alone. Even if you try and fix the racial issue, that doesn't mean they aren't still shooting people/being excessive. Which means you fixed exactly what?

Absolutely not.

Police shooting too many people is a problem. Racism in policing is another problem. Deny that all you want, but don't expect other people to follow along.

If police are still shooting too many people but they stopped shooting black people disproportionately you would have both less racism and fewer shootings. (unless you think they would start shooting other people more to make up for it? haha)

That's fixing a lot!

 

[fskimospy]

So as long as they don't target blacks unfairly, let them be violent? I mean, what behavior is trying to be reigned in here, thoughts or actions?

Once you realize that they are in fact two different problems this will all make sense to you.

 

[xBiffx]

If police are still shooting too many people but they stopped shooting black people disproportionately you would have both less racism and fewer shootings.

Again its the let them be violent, as long as the violence is evenly distributed argument.

Very compelling.

 

[Rakehellion]

By the way, I'd like to see some links on that.

http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices