#BLMers, classy as always

[Jimmy Higgins]

I won't speak for Derec but I'm objecting to this specific case as the money does not seem to be allocated for any productive purpose, but rather for racist reasons.

What racist reasons are you referring to?

Maybe he means like how crack cocaine is charged harder than powder cocaine.

 

[Derec]

Here is the genesis of the movement Derec disparages regularly:

Regardless of what you call "genesis" of #BLM the movement really burst onto stage when Michael Brown was shot and often violent protests ensued.
One can argue about the Trayvon Martin verdict but there is no real argument about Michael Brown's shooting being justified. Unfortunately #BLM took a wrong turn at Ferguson and has been embracing thugs ever since: Mario Woods, Jamar Clark, etc. That is also why they do things like vandalize displays with messages they do not like.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe he means like how crack cocaine is charged harder than powder cocaine.

Does melanin prevent one from enjoying powdered cocaine?

Speaking of which, does anyone know why crack has been so popular in the poor inner city neighborhoods? In matters of how they are used, crack seems closer to meth (as different as they are chemically) than powered cocaine. Weird.

 

[RavenSky]

I'm sure there is a link to a factual source in that sentence, but I'm just not seeing it... right?

Loren, cite a claim?

Here is a link though. It is true, 25% jump, but in the real world, there are always some buts.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/california-ballot-measure-blamed-shoplifting-jump-39115364

Sounds more like the police aren't doing their job.

 

[Derec]

So you point to a line item budget which includes 0.06% funding for something called Black Lives Matter and you argue, in spite of the article saying the district plans to work with groups that support objectives of BLM, then you ask what pictured aspects you presented from your vantage point do I support.

They should work with a more positive group is what I am saying. #BLM has some serious problems with their tactics as well as their support for violent thugs.

[*]Ending "broken windows" policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones

Why should police not enforce laws that are deemed "minor". If a law makes sense it should be enforced, if it doesn't it should be repealed. Laws for example against shoplifting make sense and should be enforced.

[*]using community oversight for misconduct rather than having police decide what consequences officers face

With community oversight boards stuffed with anti-police #BLM sympathizers that see all cops as guilty?

[*]making standards for reporting police use of deadly force

Don't we have those already?

[*]independently investigating and prosecuting police misconduct

And when the independent agency does not return the outcome #BLM wants?

[*]having the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve

That is basically a quota system and unworkable. It would mean statistically significantly different qualifications of police by race.

[*]requiring officers to wear body cameras

Nothing wrong with that in principle.

[*]providing more training for police officers

Assuming current training is deficient.

[*]ending for-profit policing practices

You seem to be very proud of "for profit policing practices" in your hometown "Speedersfundus". For-profit policing is wrong everwhere, not only in majority black cities.

[*]ending the police use of military equipment

What equipment in particular is that offensive? And is it because it makes rioting more difficult and/or dangerous?

[*]implementing police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct

As long as we are talking about real misconduct and not 'every time a black thug is killed by police it's murder' #BLM mantra.

- - - Updated - - -

To people like Derec and Loren Pechtel, helping minorities is always "appeasement" because otherwise the Black Panthers will re-emerge and take over the USA this time.

Why should helping in an educational context be race-based? Why not team up with a race-neutral group and help everybody regardless of race? I know, not very popular in the age of "identity politics".

 

[Derec]

How can we reword, "black lives matter" so that the unintended suggestive idea is absent?

That assumes that the "suggestive idea" is unintended by the #BLMers.

To illustrate, a black person once asked me, "you don't like black people do you?," to which I for humorous purposes responded, "no." An elderly colored lady immediately said to the guy, "don't listen to him honey; he don't like white people either."

See, the statement, "I don't like black people," is not necessarily racist, and my example illustrates that the IMPLICATION is absent, but despite that, it's highly SUGGESTIVE that it is.

The statement, "black lives matter" doesn't IMPLY that the only lives that matter are black lives, but (and especially when spouted by blacks towards whites in an angry tone) the phrase highly SUGGESTS which lives they think matters.

The idea of retorting that all lives matter is understandable, but it minimizes the reasoning behind why the phrase ever come to be. If blacks are disproportionately taken at the hands of police, the phrasing by blacks is a reminder that not only do the lives of non-blacks matter, but their lives matter too.

So, the phrasing is unfortunate because of the negative suggestion that either only their lives matter or their lives are more important, and the phrasing all lives matter minimizes the point of saying it to begin with, but more appropriately, "black lives matter too" reinforces some rather acceptable ideas like the lives of blacks should matter to those in power who are too quick to act like their lives don't.

I don't really have a problem with what you wrote there, but that is only one problem with #BLM. Some others are

- assuming that if there is a difference in proportion of black people shot by police it must be due to racism and not to black people committing a disproportionate share of violent crimes
- selecting violent thugs as causes celebres.
- engaging in destructive tactics like harassing white students in a library, vandalizing College Republicans' displays, disrupting political speeches etc.

 

[fast]

-assuming that if there is a difference in proportion of black people shot by police it must be due to racism and not to black people committing a disproportionate share of violent crimes

I'm a little bit confused. According to the link provided to me by another poster earlier, there is a difference in not only count but proportion as well; thing is, it's the other way around; more whites are shot by police. So, even if racism is somehow occasionally involved, it's not reflected in the numbers. Couple that with the assumption blacks commit a disproportionate share of violent crimes, the numbers are highly skewed in the wrong direction to justify the anger by those supporting the basis for BLM. Are blacks and their supporters just that misinformed?

 

[Arctish]

-assuming that if there is a difference in proportion of black people shot by police it must be due to racism and not to black people committing a disproportionate share of violent crimes

I'm a little bit confused. According to the link provided to me by another poster earlier, there is a difference in not only count but proportion as well; thing is, it's the other way around; more whites are shot by police. So, even if racism is somehow occasionally involved, it's not reflected in the numbers.

Could you provide a link to those figures so we all can see them and how that data was measured?

Couple that with the assumption blacks commit a disproportionate share of violent crimes, the numbers are highly skewed in the wrong direction to justify the anger by those supporting the basis for BLM. Are blacks and their supporters just that misinformed?

Why would we assume that? Arrest and conviction rates don't tell the whole story, especially when institutional racism is known to be a factor in both.

I think it should be apparent to everyone by now that focusing on the personalities of people shot by cops is just a way to brush aside the concerns of citizens who object to cops killing people needlessly.

We've seen the video of the contractor who witnessed Michael Brown's death shouting to the cop "His hands were up!". We've seen the video of Mario Woods shambling along the sidewalk when the cops, who had him surrounded and isolated, decided to shoot him instead of continuing to keep him under control until they could arrest him without harm. We've seen the video of Tamir Rice standing on the side of the road when the cops drive right up to him and one of then shoots the boy in less than 2 seconds. We've seen the video of Michael Crawford shopping and talking on his cell phione in a Wal-Mart when the police ran up to him and shot him without taking the time to see if he was doing anything that might possible be illegal in Ohio, an open carry state.

How many more videos will it take before we all can see the pattern here; that cops are killing black people needlessly, and nothing is being done about it?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Loren, cite a claim?

Here is a link though. It is true, 25% jump, but in the real world, there are always some buts.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/california-ballot-measure-blamed-shoplifting-jump-39115364

Sounds more like the police aren't doing their job.

Or in part that the idea had some favorable aspects, but they didn't foresee criminals organizations taking advantage of the change.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Speaking of which, does anyone know why crack has been so popular in the poor inner city neighborhoods?

It was cheap and powerful.
You can watch this excellent 1986 documentary on the spread of crack.
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/48-hours-on-crack-street/

In matters of how they are used, crack seems closer to meth (as different as they are chemically) than powered cocaine. Weird.

You can mainline both, opiods are now the rage today.

 

[laughing dog]

Why should helping in an educational context be race-based? Why not team up with a race-neutral group and help everybody regardless of race? I know, not very popular in the age of "identity politics".

If you had bothered to actually read your cited article as well as the material posted by Ravensky you'd know the answer: children of color in the Milwaukee public schools have disproportionate attendance and achievement gaps.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm sure there is a link to a factual source in that sentence, but I'm just not seeing it... right?

Loren, cite a claim?

Here is a link though. It is true, 25% jump, but in the real world, there are always some buts.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/california-ballot-measure-blamed-shoplifting-jump-39115364

That group of "researchers" missed the point--raising the threshold only results in the big explosion of shoplifting because there's basically no chance of jail time for a misdemeanor in California.

- - - Updated - - -

I won't speak for Derec but I'm objecting to this specific case as the money does not seem to be allocated for any productive purpose, but rather for racist reasons.

What racist reasons are you referring to?

How about you actually read the thread rather than simply try to derail?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What racist reasons are you referring to?

Maybe he means like how crack cocaine is charged harder than powder cocaine.

Maybe you could quit it with the disparate impact crap.

Crack cocaine was charged harder than powder cocaine because crack cocaine was associated with a lot more problems than powder cocaine.

What this actually shows is that powder cocaine is generally used by those with a fair amount of money. They're generally either paying out of their own pocket or doing white collar crime to get the money for it.

Crack cocaine, however, is much more used by the poor who are committing more serious offenses to get the money for it.

This isn't about white vs black, this is about the secondary crimes associated with it's use. (Of course the real problem is the drug war in the first place. Neither would be associated with all that much crime if it was legal for addicts.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren, cite a claim?

Here is a link though. It is true, 25% jump, but in the real world, there are always some buts.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/california-ballot-measure-blamed-shoplifting-jump-39115364

Sounds more like the police aren't doing their job.

Sounds like you didn't read the article.

It would be a total waste of police resources to go after them as they're not going to be punished anyway. While illegal it's a crime with a de-facto zero punishment. No deterrence, of course the crime rate goes up!

 

[RavenSky]

Sounds more like the police aren't doing their job.

Sounds like you didn't read the article.

It would be a total waste of police resources to go after them as they're not going to be punished anyway. While illegal it's a crime with a de-facto zero punishment. No deterrence, of course the crime rate goes up!

I read the entire article, which is why I formed the opinion that I did. For instance:

"They go, 'Perry, our hands are tied because it's a misdemeanor,'" Lutz said. "It's not worth pursuing, it's just a waste of manpower."

When police make a conscious and public choice not to pursue the offenders, does it occur to you that perhaps THAT is what the shoplifters are counting on, rather than blaming the law itself?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maybe he means like how crack cocaine is charged harder than powder cocaine.

Maybe you could quit it with the disparate impact crap.

Sorry to bring that up. I know it bothers you, but it is an issue of concern, as people that don't have any political clout typically can be treated however the fuck the people in charge give a fuck about.

Crack cocaine was charged harder than powder cocaine because crack cocaine was associated with a lot more problems than powder cocaine.

Yup, them white people snort cocaine and there are no troubles because they do it in their large mansions. No harm, no foul. Never heard of W mugging people for cocaine money. Also, did charging crack harder change shit at all?

Crack cocaine, however, is much more used by the poor who are committing more serious offenses to get the money for it.

This isn't about white vs black, this is about the secondary crimes associated with it's use. (Of course the real problem is the drug war in the first place. Neither would be associated with all that much crime if it was legal for addicts.)

When you say secondary crime, you mean crime that burdened white people, right? You aren't talking about the killing squads in Central America?

 

[fromderinside]

Maybe he means like how crack cocaine is charged harder than powder cocaine.

Maybe you could quit it with the disparate impact crap.

Crack cocaine was charged harder than powder cocaine because crack cocaine was associated with a lot more problems than powder cocaine.

What this actually shows is that powder cocaine is generally used by those with a fair amount of money. They're generally either paying out of their own pocket or doing white collar crime to get the money for it.

Crack cocaine, however, is much more used by the poor who are committing more serious offenses to get the money for it.

This isn't about white vs black, this is about the secondary crimes associated with it's use. (Of course the real problem is the drug war in the first place. Neither would be associated with all that much crime if it was legal for addicts.)

Well since most communities are segregated by income and race together I come to a sense of your values. Serous crimes are committed by blacks in poor neighborhoods because blacks tend to carry whatever they have on their person. Stealing aunt Martha's pain and jolly meds aren't really crime because those things are sold to poor black persons so they have the courage to use knives and guns on their neighbors to get that money back. Yeah. I get it.

 

[laughing dog]

How about you actually read the thread rather than simply try to derail?

Asking someone to actually provide evidence for their claims is not derailing anything. Your typical content-free response reinforces the conclusion that you have no examples of the racist reasons driving the Milwaukee School systems efforts to bridge the attendance and achievement gaps of students of color (one of the 2 examples in the OP).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Loren, cite a claim?

Here is a link though. It is true, 25% jump, but in the real world, there are always some buts.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/california-ballot-measure-blamed-shoplifting-jump-39115364

That group of "researchers" missed the point--raising the threshold only results in the big explosion of shoplifting because there's basically no chance of jail time for a misdemeanor in California.

You didn't read the article did you. No points were missed. A bunch of points were raised and one major player are crime syndicates that know exactly what the law is and were playing the law. They noted that the average poor guy typically doesn't have a lawyer and has no clue what the law is. They concluded that the law needed modifications.

I'm sorry my research to address stuff you just claimed without actually backing up isn't enough. Maybe you should back up the shit you talk about every once in a while in order to a make case that isn't based solely on... "Because I said so."

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why would we assume that? Arrest and conviction rates don't tell the whole story, especially when institutional racism is known to be a factor in both.

And have you stopped beating your husband?

We've seen the video of the contractor who witnessed Michael Brown's death shouting to the cop "His hands were up!".

There were plenty of scumbags who perjured themselves to make Michael Brown look innocent. Unfortunately they didn't go to jail.

We've seen the video of Mario Woods shambling along the sidewalk when the cops, who had him surrounded and isolated, decided to shoot him instead of continuing to keep him under control until they could arrest him without harm.

And if it had been your kid he was trying to kill would you still prefer the cops jerk off until the crew from the Enterprise beams in with phasers set to stun?

You continue to ignore the fact that the only "control" the officers had came from the barrel of a gun--and that "control" is meaningless if the person prefers death to arrest.

We've seen the video of Tamir Rice standing on the side of the road when the cops drive right up to him and one of then shoots the boy in less than 2 seconds.

The real issue here is that realistic replica firearms should not be considered toys. The cops will treat such things as real--you go for a gun, expect to get shot. Combine that with a driving mistake and you get a dead kid.

We've seen the video of Michael Crawford shopping and talking on his cell phione in a Wal-Mart when the police ran up to him and shot him without taking the time to see if he was doing anything that might possible be illegal in Ohio, an open carry state.

Unfortunately, the lying caller didn't get charged with murder.

How many more videos will it take before we all can see the pattern here; that cops are killing black people needlessly, and nothing is being done about it?

How many more videos will it take to convince you that you're part of the problem, not part of the solution? When you decry every shooting you rightly get dismissed as a crank and ignored, you have no hope of changing anything. Focus on the real problems, drop the racism. (BLM is at least as bad as the KKK.)

- - - Updated - - -

Sounds more like the police aren't doing their job.

Or in part that the idea had some favorable aspects, but they didn't foresee criminals organizations taking advantage of the change.

The real problem is that they won't fund the prison system at the level needed to work with the criminal code.

 

[RavenSky]

We've seen the video of the contractor who witnessed Michael Brown's death shouting to the cop "His hands were up!".

There were plenty of scumbags who perjured themselves to make Michael Brown look innocent. Unfortunately they didn't go to jail.

There is only one "scumbag" we know for a fact lied, claiming she was a witness and saw Michael Brown "charging" at the officer, when it turns out she was not even at the scene. You are correct, however, that she was not prosecuted for her perjury.