The great 2020 election thread....

[GreyICE]

"All Lives Matter" would be perfectly fine, if it was anything other than a way of distracting from police mistreatment of black people. If you think other wise, show one instance of any sort of "all lives matter" movement actually opposing the mistreatment of black people. Here's one incident you could use:

[url=https://tuckbot.tv/#/watch/gee66j]This happened this week[/url]

The officer injured his hand during the arrest by the way. Following the release of the video, the LAPD suddenly discovered they had to put the officer on administrative leave and let the suspect go. Otherwise he'd probably be charged with assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest. That'd be "things that happened this week in obvious racism from cops".

Here's another: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/video-appears-show-georgia-man-shot-while-jogging-lawyers-call-n1201301

Apparently either the shooter or driver of the pickup truck is an ex-cop (the other is his son) and the prosecutor initially wasn't going to prosecute before that video of cold-blooded murder showed up.

Like, this is systemic. This country is broken. Buy a gun. When you realize you need to own one, it's gonna be too late.

[Darth Wedgius]

"All Lives Matter" would be perfectly fine, if it was anything other than a way of distracting from police mistreatment of black people. If you think other wise, show one instance of any sort of "all lives matter" movement actually opposing the mistreatment of black people.

[url]https://www.facebook.com/BringPeaceALM/[/url] seems to oppose people being mistreated regardless of race, and opposes the mistreatment of several black individuals.

OTOH, if you mean an example of "all lives matter" uniquely opposing the mistreatment of black people, I think I'm unlikely to find one.

TBH, I think "all lives matter" came from misunderstanding of the phrase "black lives matter," not in an intentional effort to distract from anything.

[GreyICE]

Okay, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say that there are some people who wanted to emphasis that all life is special and all life matters. Some of them were trolls looking to distract from the racism of the police force and the consistent mistreatment and outright murder of black people that is sanctioned in America, but maybe not all (unlike "Blue Lives Matter" which is universally white nationalist turdburglers)

Like the cops who carried toy guns to plant on people who were shot: https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-ci-gttf-gladstone-to-plead-guilty-20190523-story.html

Yeahhhhh, I wouldn't trust those people to protect you. That's why I strongly recommend that everyone get guns, and be prepared. Or, in the immortal words of our President "Hey, some of those second amendment people might have a solution, who knows?"

[Darth Wedgius]

Okay, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say that there are some people who wanted to emphasis that all life is special and all life matters. Some of them were trolls looking to distract from the racism of the police force and the consistent mistreatment and outright murder of black people that is sanctioned in America, but maybe not all (unlike "Blue Lives Matter" which is universally white nationalist turdburglers)

Blue Lives Matter rally:


youtu.be/MZ2tuy1rqOo

I try not to paint everyone with the same slogan with the same brush, except for what the slogan actually says, and sometimes not even then.

When you say murder is sanctioned, I take it that you mean that things you consider murder are not punished? How often in that judgement do you assume things not in evidence, e.g. the motives of the "murderer"?

[Captain Crimson]

I don't see an inherent contradiction because I say them, I don't dispute the way the deck has been stacked against minorities since the civil war ended.

What that mean? Like "all lives matter", that's just something that you say?

That seemed to have been a typo. I meant as I say them, I don't dispute the way blacks have had the decks stacked against them.

No doubt.

As far as All Lives Matter though, what do you take that to mean? How do you find it non contradictory to Black Lives Matter?

Because I do think all lives matter, white lives matter, black lives matter. Seriously, I'd even defend a criminal if they're civil rights are being violated, no matter what a sadistic creep they might be. Just throw them in jail if that's the case.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't see an inherent contradiction because I say them, I don't dispute the way the deck has been stacked against minorities since the civil war ended.

What that mean? Like "all lives matter", that's just something that you say?

That seemed to have been a typo. I meant as I say them, I don't dispute the way blacks have had the decks stacked against them.

No doubt.

As far as All Lives Matter though, what do you take that to mean? How do you find it non contradictory to Black Lives Matter?

Because I do think all lives matter, white lives matter, black lives matter. Seriously, I'd even defend a criminal if they're civil rights are being violated, no matter what a sadistic creep they might be. Just throw them in jail if that's the case.

Right. Just that the context for which you compared them, do you have an opinion on what the term was used for?

I mean take 9/10 random people and set one aside for like killers and stuff. Every person in that pool matters, I'm sure you'd agree, but more importantly I'm sure most anybody would agree. It's a very obvious statement without any hidden layers. When has it as a fact ever been pertinent as a message? In particular, how was it pertinent in response to the citations of police shooting unarmed people?

[Captain Crimson]

I don't see an inherent contradiction because I say them, I don't dispute the way the deck has been stacked against minorities since the civil war ended.

What that mean? Like "all lives matter", that's just something that you say?

That seemed to have been a typo. I meant as I say them, I don't dispute the way blacks have had the decks stacked against them.

No doubt.

As far as All Lives Matter though, what do you take that to mean? How do you find it non contradictory to Black Lives Matter?

Because I do think all lives matter, white lives matter, black lives matter. Seriously, I'd even defend a criminal if they're civil rights are being violated, no matter what a sadistic creep they might be. Just throw them in jail if that's the case.

Right. Just that the context for which you compared them, do you have an opinion on what the term was used for?

I mean take 9/10 random people and set one aside for like killers and stuff. Every person in that pool matters, I'm sure you'd agree, but more importantly I'm sure most anybody would agree. It's a very obvious statement without any hidden layers. When has it as a fact ever been pertinent as a message? In particular, how was it pertinent in response to the citations of police shooting unarmed people?

I think focusing on the unarmed people shot by police is important. Let us not forget it affects white people though. Does it affect black people disproportionately? You could definitely make that case. But it's both BS and it's something that has to stop.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I think focusing on the unarmed people shot by police is important. Let us not forget it affects white people though. Does it affect black people disproportionately? You could definitely make that case. But it's both BS and it's something that has to stop.

Well I was probably coming off a bit strong for it being a toxic movement or something. As was stated by someone earlier it was largely misunderstanding backlash. Albeit while the overall message especially in the confines of how you convey it is reasonable, the use of it was specifically an argument against the BLM protests, and not directed at any chains of civil authority, figuratively speaking or otherwise.

All and all though it really was just more of a misunderstanding, even as far as I experienced it with people I know, but the take was so misguided.

[Darth Wedgius]

Well, not every shooting of an unarmed man is wrong, IMO. If the someone is trying to grab your gun or is charging at you while you're holding a gun on them, I think you have every moral right to shoot them dead. YMMV; that's just my opinion.

Likewise, if a kid paints a toy gun so it looks real and is pointing it at people and then points it at the cops, sorry, but I'd pull the trigger. One of us is being too dumb to live, and I'd hate my last thought to be the realization that it was me. I know that's just a kid, and being a kid implies being stupid sometimes, but I've actually been a kid once, and I know that's extraordinary stupidity even for a kid.

If an unarmed kid is running away from down an alley you and you shoot them in the back, that's just murder. IMHO.

I don't really trust cops and I'm all in favor of body cams (unlike BLM's leadership, who doesn't want them around). Do I think blacks get considered criminals more often in America by pretty much anyone? Yes, and it isn't nearly fair. Yes, blacks in the US commit crimes out of proportion compared to the general population, but men do even more.

Do cops murder people and get away with it? Yes, absolutely. It's part of their job to shoot people, making it a lot less suspicious. If a cop shoots someone there's often little way to show beyond reasonable doubt that it wasn't legit. That's why I really like body cams, and cops saying that the camera wasn't working that day really raise a stink for me.

It sucks when any murderer gets away with it. In the US, about 40% of murders in general go unsolved. And even "solved" doesn't mean a conviction, and sometimes it doesn't even mean an arrest. It just means the cops decided who dunnit.

[Captain Crimson]

I think focusing on the unarmed people shot by police is important. Let us not forget it affects white people though. Does it affect black people disproportionately? You could definitely make that case. But it's both BS and it's something that has to stop.

Well I was probably coming off a bit strong for it being a toxic movement or something. As was stated by someone earlier it was largely misunderstanding backlash. Albeit while the overall message especially in the confines of how you convey it is reasonable, the use of it was specifically an argument against the BLM protests, and not directed at any chains of civil authority, figuratively speaking or otherwise.

All and all though it really was just more of a misunderstanding, even as far as I experienced it with people I know, but the take was so misguided.

Kinda like how I suppose MeToo, just not the excesses that can lead to abuse. All systems of power and a movement for change can have that. They just need to rein the excesses in. Because I support giving victims a voice. Having a big giant company fire a worker over that, less so. Let it go to trial if it has to be done, then decide what to do. But then the big corps have always at times fired workers if it suits PR purposes, and show no signs of stopping anytime soon. So it has to be done. Necessary evil, I'd say.