BLM and a review of incidents

[Loren Pechtel]

https://austin.craigslist.org/pol/d/liberty-hill-the-truth-about-blm/7166251413.html

Yeah, they aren't a news outfit, it's just the primary source is paywalled.

2019 data: 6 questionable cases of the shooting of an unarmed black man--and in two of those the cops are facing charges. Most of the other 8 involve the dead guy clearly attacking the cops.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Your link starts out:

I have already made the case that systemic racism in law enforcement is a myth. The claim that racist police are prowling the street searching for black men to murder is absurd on its face, and even absurder when you look at the facts.

That isn't the claim, nor is that systemic racism. The rest is not going to be worth reading.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Your link starts out:

I have already made the case that systemic racism in law enforcement is a myth. The claim that racist police are prowling the street searching for black men to murder is absurd on its face, and even absurder when you look at the facts.

That isn't the claim, nor is that systemic racism. The rest is not going to be worth reading.

In other words, you're not interested in a presentation of facts that don't agree with your religion.

 

[Toni]

Your link starts out:

I have already made the case that systemic racism in law enforcement is a myth. The claim that racist police are prowling the street searching for black men to murder is absurd on its face, and even absurder when you look at the facts.

That isn't the claim, nor is that systemic racism. The rest is not going to be worth reading.

In other words, you're not interested in a presentation of facts that don't agree with your religion.

Or maybe he's just not interested in being fed someone else's religion. I'm not either.

Here is a link to WaPo's database. I have a paid subscription but if you don't, you can almost certainly access it by using an anonymous browser or going into anonymous mode on whatever browser you usually use. That's what I do for news sources I don't subscribe to. Before I decided I'd pay for an online subscription, I used it for WaPo, as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/

 

[Patooka]

If a post starts off with opinionated screed, I'm going with the safe bet that any "facts" aren't being provided in good faith.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Your link starts out:

I have already made the case that systemic racism in law enforcement is a myth. The claim that racist police are prowling the street searching for black men to murder is absurd on its face, and even absurder when you look at the facts.

That isn't the claim, nor is that systemic racism. The rest is not going to be worth reading.

In other words, you're not interested in a presentation of facts that don't agree with your religion.

No, in other words, I am not going to let someone lie to me about what systemic racism means, nor will I find it productive to read further the debunking of a strawman creation of said term.

 

[laughing dog]

Your link starts out:

I have already made the case that systemic racism in law enforcement is a myth. The claim that racist police are prowling the street searching for black men to murder is absurd on its face, and even absurder when you look at the facts.

That isn't the claim, nor is that systemic racism. The rest is not going to be worth reading.

In other words, you're not interested in a presentation of facts that don't agree with your religion.

What facts? That screed is an opinion piece. There was no way to see the source(s) of his facts when it was available (it is now flagged for removal). There was no reason to take such a screed at face value - it may no pretense of being disinterested.

While I can understand that screed conforms with your religious beliefs, but since you are not God, no one is required to take your beliefs as automatically valid or even worth the time to heed.

 

[Trausti]

 

[Derec]

Now this is a sign I could get behind.

 

[Derec]

No, in other words, I am not going to let someone lie to me about what systemic racism means,

"Systemic racism" is one of those meaningless pseudoconcepts - a type of "racism" that doesn't require any actual racism to exist, just discrepancy of outcomes.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

No, in other words, I am not going to let someone lie to me about what systemic racism means,

"Systemic racism" is one of those meaningless pseudoconcepts - a type of "racism" that doesn't require any actual racism to exist, just discrepancy of outcomes.

Whether or not it exists, it's a system of resulting racism from discrimination and other non-overt factors. It isn't cops deliberately looking for black men to murder. Therefore, my point stands. Nice try, though.

 

[Derec]

Whether or not it exists, it's a system of resulting racism from discrimination and other non-overt factors. It isn't cops deliberately looking for black men to murder. Therefore, my point stands. Nice try, though.

I was agreeing with you that "systemic racism" doesn't require any actual racists. That's because it's a vacuous term, invented to push the false narrative that racism is everywhere.
It does not require any discrimination either, just unequal outcomes. So if say UC Berkeley admits less black people than the share of population that's classified as "systemic racism" even if they just evaluated applications based on individual merit without regard to race.

Note also that "systemic racism" is not only a vacuous concept, it is also a very one-sided one, filled with double standards.
So for example, >70% of NBA players are black, but that is not considered "systemic racism" , because over-representation of black people in something good is not considered problematic, only over-representation of white people.

 

[Trausti]

No, in other words, I am not going to let someone lie to me about what systemic racism means,

"Systemic racism" is one of those meaningless pseudoconcepts - a type of "racism" that doesn't require any actual racism to exist, just discrepancy of outcomes.

Whether or not it exists, it's a system of resulting racism from discrimination and other non-overt factors. It isn't cops deliberately looking for black men to murder. Therefore, my point stands. Nice try, though.

Wait, what? Has anyone told BLM this!?! Kinda important.

 

[Derec]

Whether or not it exists, it's a system of resulting racism from discrimination and other non-overt factors. It isn't cops deliberately looking for black men to murder. Therefore, my point stands. Nice try, though.

Wait, what? Has anyone told BLM this!?! Kinda important.

Whenever a cop kills a black criminal, they not only immediately call it murder, they also accuse the cop of being "a racist". Even if a shooting is not justified, that does not mean that the cop is racist. But try explaining that to somebody whose worldview is as restricted as that of an average #BLMer ...

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The cop who killed George Floyd certainly seemed like a racist douchebag. I suppose it's possible he was just a violent douchebag and not a racist. But then when you have a bunch of violent douchebags and apologists on the force and they operate in areas of minorities who are concentrated into high crime areas due to historical racism, it's functionally the same thing as systemic racism. So I completely disagree with Loren's quote and Derec. The point still stands.

 

[Trausti]

The cop who killed George Floyd certainly seemed like a racist douchebag. I suppose it's possible he was just a violent douchebag and not a racist. But then when you have a bunch of violent douchebags and apologists on the force and they operate in areas of minorities who are concentrated into high crime areas due to historical racism, it's functionally the same thing as systemic racism. So I completely disagree with Loren's quote and Derec. The point still stands.

LOL. What makes these areas high crime? Is the dirt cursed? And with George Floyd you're talking about Minneapolis. Historical racism? Shut up. This used to be Minneapolis.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

https://austin.craigslist.org/pol/d/liberty-hill-the-truth-about-blm/7166251413.html

Yeah, they aren't a news outfit, it's just the primary source is paywalled.

2019 data: 6 questionable cases of the shooting of an unarmed black man--and in two of those the cops are facing charges. Most of the other 8 involve the dead guy clearly attacking the cops.

The post has been flagged for removal. Do you have a copy?

 

[laughing dog]

The cop who killed George Floyd certainly seemed like a racist douchebag. I suppose it's possible he was just a violent douchebag and not a racist. But then when you have a bunch of violent douchebags and apologists on the force and they operate in areas of minorities who are concentrated into high crime areas due to historical racism, it's functionally the same thing as systemic racism. So I completely disagree with Loren's quote and Derec. The point still stands.

LOL. What makes these areas high crime? Is the dirt cursed? And with George Floyd you're talking about Minneapolis. Historical racism? Shut up. This used to be Minneapolis.

Using the Mary Tyler Moore show (a show about white people except for the reporter who did the sports) as evidence that there was no racism in Minneapolis back is incredibly ignorant. The problems with the racism with the Minneapolis (and St. Paul) police goes back more than 50 years.

 

[Elixir]

The cop who killed George Floyd certainly seemed like a racist douchebag. I suppose it's possible he was just a violent douchebag and not a racist. But then when you have a bunch of violent douchebags and apologists on the force and they operate in areas of minorities who are concentrated into high crime areas due to historical racism, it's functionally the same thing as systemic racism. So I completely disagree with Loren's quote and Derec. The point still stands.

LOL. What makes these areas high crime? Is the dirt cursed? And with George Floyd you're talking about Minneapolis. Historical racism? Shut up. This used to be Minneapolis.

Using the Mary Tyler Moore show (a show about white people except for the reporter who did the sports) as evidence that there was no racism in Minneapolis back is incredibly ignorant. The problems with the racism with the Minneapolis (and St. Paul) police goes back more than 50 years.

But da TeeVee is Reee- Allitee for white supremacists - dincha no?

 

[Jarhyn]

https://austin.craigslist.org/pol/d/liberty-hill-the-truth-about-blm/7166251413.html

Yeah, they aren't a news outfit, it's just the primary source is paywalled.

2019 data: 6 questionable cases of the shooting of an unarmed black man--and in two of those the cops are facing charges. Most of the other 8 involve the dead guy clearly attacking the cops.

More victim smearing.

For reference, if I was shot by a cop in cold blood on the street tomorrow, it would be trivially easy to smear me. My hair has a laundry list of controlled substances buried in it: TESTED POSITIVE FOR SUBSTANCE USE!!!!!

I have connections to a number of drug dealers: GANG CONNECTIONS!!!

I have sold drugs.

I'm a "combat trained veteran" who "presented a threat even unarmed": DANGEROUS THUG!

Of course, it wouldn't matter that I'm a 37 year old software engineer, that I'm chronically unarmed, that I refuse the unilateral initiation of hostile activities *even at risk to my own life*. None of those things would matter. I would be a "druggie drug dealer gang banger fighter", especially if my skin happened to be black.

As to whether there are racists out there in the police department that are out there with the goal of murdering black people, there absolutely are. They have stated a concerted effort within the KKK and other racist organizations to specifically infiltrate the police, and police have their thin blue line. To think that people with the desire to unethically hold power over others would not gravitate towards the career that places them in a universal position of power over others is ridiculous.

I meet racists all the goddamn time in Minneapolis. the leader of the Minneapolis police union has historically been Bob "choke a black girl while yelling slurs" Kroll.

Your argument is wholely laughable.