The Goat Pen

bluetick wrote:

eCat wrote:New York Post columnist weighs in on BLM (she's white and wrote a book called The War on Cops)

http://nypost.com/2016/09/06/the-lies-t ... -movement/

Bravo. The author makes a straw man (BLM movement built on lie that there is an epidemic of cops shooting blacks) and then knocks it down (stats show there is no epidemic).

If I'm not mistaken the BLM is a result of a handful of well-publicized cases where unarmed blacks wound up dead at the hand of LEOs and justice was viewed as inadequately served. Sorta like a half dozen O.J. Simpson verdicts all within a short span of time. Except there were videos and audios and better forensics and all different signs pointing to the fact that the victims didn't deserve their ultimate fate.

No, I suspect there's no more shootings of these kind than there were 10-20-50 years ago. But there's a shit-ton of cell-phone and store-front video out there now. Maybe soon enough there'll be a clip of a white child getting gunned down by a cop while holding a toy.

maybe, but will the media play it non-stop? will the community react with violent protests? will Police be shot in retaliation?

you said it yourself - a handful - meaning statistically insignificant number to the overall justified and lawful engagement by police

eCat wrote: maybe, but will the media play it non-stop? will the community react with violent protests? will Police be shot in retaliation?

you said it yourself - a handful - meaning statistically insignificant number to the overall justified and lawful engagement by police

Here's a difference maybe you'll concede. Institutional racism (whites-only) was alive and well in this country as late as the 60s and 70s. Every black BLM protester probably has a relative who was denied a basic privilege solely due to the color of their skin..as allowed by law.

They're prone to view alleged injustices in the legal system as a continuation of that former two-layered system of legal inequality, I'm thinkin'. So you ask why the white community doesn't react the same way against the legal system? C'mon..

bluetick wrote:

eCat wrote: maybe, but will the media play it non-stop? will the community react with violent protests? will Police be shot in retaliation?

you said it yourself - a handful - meaning statistically insignificant number to the overall justified and lawful engagement by police

Here's a difference maybe you'll concede. Institutional racism (whites-only) was alive and well in this country as late as the 60s and 70s. Every black BLM protester probably has a relative who was denied a basic privilege solely due to the color of their skin..as allowed by law.

They're prone to view alleged injustices in the legal system as a continuation of that former two-layered system of legal inequality, I'm thinkin'. So you ask why the white community doesn't react the same way against the legal system? C'mon..

yea I don't give a shit about any of that. That 60's racial inequality check has been written and cashed. What I'm seeing is an approach that threatens the security and safety of all Americans, with African Americans impacted negatively moreso by its inception than any positive that comes from it.

bluetick wrote: Here's a difference maybe you'll concede. Institutional racism (whites-only) was alive and well in this country as late as the 60s and 70s.

Government sponsored, direct racism can be traced up through 1980. Private sponsored racism in the form of housing and economics can be traced through the 90s, before equal protection was granted via the courts (i.e. lawsuits). That does play a part in where we are now with things...but a disproportionate amount of excessive force levied among unarmed Black citizens is an adequate thing to protest and it isn't new. The video is new (as tick mentioned). The deaths of officers over the decades are never good, but I still disagree with laying that at the feet of BLM.

eCat wrote: What I'm seeing is an approach that threatens the security and safety of all Americans

It's a protest organization. America loves protest organizations. Everybody gets a chance to rally for their cause, be it anybody on any side of any issue you can think up (even that curious Baptist gang from Westboro, Kansas gets consideration). But if you really feel threatened..maybe get a dog.

with African Americans impacted negatively moreso by its inception than any positive that comes from it.

Still, from what polls I read African Americans support BLM at around 91%. I think the other 9% may join you and vote for Trump. (Hey - what have they got to lose, right?)

There's no rational basis for what bothers people. What bothers you bothers you, even though it might seem stupid or over-reactive to somebody else. Like that slaphappy jolly rancher out in Wyoming or wherever who gathered his buddies with a bunch of rifles because the government said he could've graze his livestock on federal land (or whatever the fuck he was pissed about), some people thought that was perfectly "reasonable" for them to do that, whereas others thought the feds should've blown them to bits. Same with BLM. It all depends on if you're personally sympathetic to their "cause". If you are, they're doing great work. If you're not, they're dangerous idiots....

hedge wrote:There's no rational basis for what bothers people. What bothers you bothers you, even though it might seem stupid or over-reactive to somebody else. Like that slaphappy jolly rancher out in Wyoming or wherever who gathered his buddies with a bunch of rifles because the government said he could've graze his livestock on federal land (or whatever the fuck he was pissed about), some people thought that was perfectly "reasonable" for them to do that, whereas others thought the feds should've blown them to bits. Same with BLM. It all depends on if you're personally sympathetic to their "cause". If you are, they're doing great work. If you're not, they're dangerous idiots....

I'm' not sure where I stood on whether Bundy was right or not in his gripe, but I was amazed that 300 or so men armed stood their ground against the federal government, when it was obvious a swat team type situation was deployed out there with the intent to put a bullet in his head and end his nonsense rant. They recognized they had a potential Waco on their hands and stood down, not to mention a large sympathetic public to a rancher just trying to make a living -whether that narrative was honest or not, it was the public perception.

The situation was that his family had been grazing cattle on federal land for decades and systematically the BLM ( in this case, Bureau of Land Management) had been driving ranchers out in an effort to transition the land from cattle grazing to animal preserve. Bundy felt slighted by their contract change and refused to pay his grazing rights fees, yet continued to graze his cattle on the land.

The bigger issue here was about the federal government owning 50 to 75% of the land in the Western states when it serves no purpose for them to do so. This isn't national parks were talking about but wide swaths of land that is just there.

And you're right - some people - the strong anti-government backers wanted him to prevail, while others felt like his refusal to pay the fees he needed to justified the governments confiscation of his cattle. My interest in it the situation was more focused on the value of the second amendment for people to defend themselves in what they believed to be right.

The story not told is the government didn't back off - he was arrested some months later when the story died down and people were focused on other things - specifically his dumbass sons trying to raise awareness for another rancher injustice I think in Oregon.

Very true, hedge.

Somehow BLM gets blamed for police deaths, while those Wyoming types are still mad at the ATF for Waco and Ruby Ridge...and those people REALLY shot at authorities. I guess it is a matter of what you think are valid things to protest about.

Bklyn wrote:Very true, hedge.

Somehow BLM gets blamed for police deaths, while those Wyoming types are still mad at the ATF for Waco and Ruby Ridge...and those people REALLY shot at authorities. I guess it is a matter of what you think are valid things to protest about.

in my eyes, there is no difference in inciting a riot where police die because you've ginned up someone who identifies with you - not from afar but on the street in protest. Hell, the government sends drones to kill terrorists for that single act alone. That woman who had the video of her boyfriend/husband being shot and released it with her narrative of what happened *after* he was shot, while none of us see the video of what happened the 2 minutes before and into the shooting that resulted in people going crazy and cops dying needs to be in jail and not see the moon for many years.

BLM should be blamed for police deaths. Its not a debatable point in my book. BLM, in whatever form it takes, was fully aware of the potential risk in organizing a protest in the midst of civil unrest in regards to a police shooting. The videos of the families screaming to burn and riot playing 24/7 on news and social media set a tone for how some protests would play out. It was irresponsible at best, and in my mind criminal.

eCat wrote: BLM should be blamed for police deaths. Its not a debatable point in my book.

Well, there's that.

"BLM should be blamed for police deaths."

Why does eCat hate free speech? You can't blame BLM for police deaths just like you can't blame Operation Rescue for the Atlanta Olympic bombing.

I don't hate free speech

but when free speech becomes an organized activity that results in violence, then I think its bullshit when someone claims they have no part in the adverse results of it

and more importantly, when it continues knowing it could potentially result in the lives being lost, then its criminal.

What does it take to be a part of BLM? Paying dues? A membership card? The founding members may not want anything to do with the results of some of these protestors, but when you organize a protest, or a entity that other people organize under, you have a responsibility , an ownership in it.

When you have a BLM protest on the street doing this

[youtube]PelVrRyNCU0[/youtube] or this [youtube]YIr-B686kog[/youtube]

now you can say they are outliers , or people that would be prone to violence without BLM, but I have a hard time accepting that given the signs, the megaphones and the organized group.

I'm not going to support it, nor do I feel compelled to be quiet about it.

Yeah and if that had been a white person saying kill black people, it would be trending worldwide, Obama would condemn it, BLM would be on CNN yelling and screaming about how they have been held down for the past 20 years (bullshit), or how they are just being slaughtered in the street (yeah by their own people but no need to bring that up).

Fuck that shit. I feel sorry for NO ONE that breaks the law. I feel sorry for NO ONE that advocates violence. I feel sorry for NO ONE that won't lift a finger in their neighborhood to help fix the crime issue.

So yeah, fuck'em and feed'em fish heads.

sardis wrote:"BLM should be blamed for police deaths."

Why does eCat hate free speech? You can't blame BLM for police deaths just like you can't blame Operation Rescue for the Atlanta Olympic bombing.

Or the 3 people murdered at that Colorado abortion clinic last winter.

If those ranchers had shot a couple of the federal agents who had been sent there, some people would've thought it was justified...

hedge wrote:If those ranchers had shot a couple of the federal agents who had been sent there, some people would've thought it was justified...

absolutely.

and those ranchers wouldn't be alive to tell their story.

The overriding majority of chants at BLM marches are "Stop killing us" and "No Justice No Peace." Many are poorly organized, but for the most part are fairly benign. It's nearly all grassroots efforts all over the map. Even so, the movement is being credited with influencing some legitimate policy changes:

Since 2014, over 120 communities nationwide have formed civilian review boards for local policing, according to the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement.

There has been a five-fold increase of indictments for LEOs charged with crimes

Cities and states have increasingly reformed or reduced the militarization of their law agencies, cutting back on weapons of war such as weaponized drones, grenades and launchers, armored vehicles etc. Last year Obama signed a bill banning tracked military vehicles being sold to law agencies

And probably the most notable change BLM has helped foster is the increased use of body cameras by police, a relatively inexpensive technology that guarantees greater accountability by law enforcement agencies. When the Obama administration made federal funding available to expand body programs last year, more than 70 policie departments applied.

More cameras, more oversight...nothing wrong with any of that that I can see. Maybe others see it differently.

so what is BLM doing about chicago?

what is anybody doing about Chicago?

my daughter was part of a amazon movie chiraq -brught some visibility to the issue but seemingly a problem that is mushrooming instead of getting better

cop issue I believe steps in right direction are being mad

in the hood I haven't heard any positive moves being made at least well publicized ones

bluetick wrote:The overriding majority of chants at BLM marches are "Stop killing us" and "No Justice No Peace." Many are poorly organized, but for the most part are fairly benign. It's nearly all grassroots efforts all over the map. Even so, the movement is being credited with influencing some legitimate policy changes:

Since 2014, over 120 communities nationwide have formed civilian review boards for local policing, according to the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement.

There has been a five-fold increase of indictments for LEOs charged with crimes

Cities and states have increasingly reformed or reduced the militarization of their law agencies, cutting back on weapons of war such as weaponized drones, grenades and launchers, armored vehicles etc. Last year Obama signed a bill banning tracked military vehicles being sold to law agencies

And probably the most notable change BLM has helped foster is the increased use of body cameras by police, a relatively inexpensive technology that guarantees greater accountability by law enforcement agencies. When the Obama administration made federal funding available to expand body programs last year, more than 70 policie departments applied.

More cameras, more oversight...nothing wrong with any of that that I can see. Maybe others see it differently.

you left out

Shooting deaths of law enforcement officers spiked 78 percent in the first half of 2016 compared to last year, including an alarming increase in ambush-style assaults like the ones that killed eight officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, according to a report released Wednesday.

The bottom line is

Standard anti-cop ideology, whether emanating from the ACLU or the academy, holds that law enforcement actions are racist if they don’t mirror population data. New York City illustrates why that expectation is so misguided. Blacks make up 23 percent of New York City’s population, but they commit 75 percent of all shootings, 70 percent of all robberies, and 66 percent of all violent crime, according to victims and witnesses. Add Hispanic shootings and you account for 98 percent of all illegal gunfire in the city. Whites are 33 percent of the city’s population, but they commit fewer than two percent of all shootings, four percent of all robberies, and five percent of all violent crime. These disparities mean that virtually every time the police in New York are called out on a gun run—meaning that someone has just been shot—they are being summoned to minority neighborhoods looking for minority suspects.

Body cameras are great, but if cops feel handcuffed (not a pun) in their ability to serve the public while protecting their lives, they aren't going to choose serving the public. Now throw in a movement where as a complete coincidence ambush attacks on police spike (rolling eyes) and you have more African Americans being the victim of black on black crime because police departments live in fear of litigation, persecution or public backlash to the point their lives arein danger for just wearing the uniform.

Profiling is going to continue to happen if people want effective policing

Interesting of note........

It was a split-second decision.

A distressed man with a baby in tow was pacing back and forth in a manic state and shouting incoherently. The responding police officer calmly addressed the man in an attempt to calm him down and defuse the situation, but the man suddenly pulled an object from his side and lunged toward the officer. Instinctively, the officer raised his Taser and squeezed the trigger. It turned out the man was armed with a knife, but the "officer," who was actually the firebrand African-American activist known as Quanell X, acknowledged he would have fired whether the assailant had a knife, a spoon or an empty hand.

“I didn’t even see it,” said the leader of the Houston area Black Panther Party, who was taking part in a training scenario in an attempt to understand what police officers go through during high-pressure situations. “It could have been anything in his hand, and I still would have used force to stop him.

“It all happened so fast," he added. "You don’t know what they could have in their hand.”

Quanell, a former Nation of Islam member, is one of at least two black activists to take the police training tests. Both he and Arizona activist the Rev. Jarrett Maupin came away from the experience with a newfound understanding of the pressure on police officers, not to mention a new message for black youth who come in contact with law enforcement officers.

“I walked away with a few things,” Quanell said “Many of these officers do not have adequate training and they should not be patrolling by themselves. Having backup would stop them from being skittish and firing their weapon.

“Also, we have to teach our community that, even if you disagree with the officer, do not try to litigate with them on the spot," he added. "Live to see another day. Don’t let our pride get in the way. Otherwise, you are setting yourself up.”

A) not sure why you cherrypicked NYC stats, and

B)

"Body cameras are great, but if cops feel handcuffed in their ability to serve the public while protecting their lives, they aren't going to choose serving the public."

You're not saying body cams and dashcams hinder cops from serving the public, right? Seems like the best way to counter a fake police-brutality charge would be a video. Good/honest cops surely wouldn't mind. Plus you can use the vids for training and grading purposes and the like. Win win win