It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“Across these 300 interviews, I have multiple officers telling me that they didn’t shoot only because the suspect was black or the suspect was a woman, or something that would not be consistent with this narrative of cops out there running and gunning,” said Mr. Klinger, a former cop and author of “Into the Kill Zone: A Cop’s Eye View of Deadly Force” (2006). “When it comes to the issue of race, I’ve never had a single officer tell me, ‘I didn’t shoot a guy because he was white.’ I’ve had multiple officers tell me, ‘I didn’t shoot a guy because he was black,’ ” Mr. Klinger said. “And this is 10, even 20 years ago. Officers are alert to the fact that if they shoot a black individual, the odds of social outcry are far greater than if they shoot a white individual.” ]
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1
It's not a terrible analogy at all. People are always finding specific causes to focus on. Women's rights - aren't men's rights important too? Sure, but what's wrong with a group focusing on women's rights? Save the whales - what about the other sea creatures? They matter too, but what's wrong with focusing on whales? There are and have been specific movements throughout history - nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with focusing on a specific issue, like children, or Native Americans, or handicapped people, or gays. None of those specific movements mean that all people on the planet don't have value or don't matter, it just means there is a specific issue that a group wants to focus on. THIS specific issue is regarding blacks being killed unnecessarily and unfairly by law enforcement, hence the slogan "black lives matter".
The elephant in the room here is that there are people who don't like blacks very much - they think they are a bunch of lazy thugs who are quick to blame everyone else for their situation. So when someone starts a movement called "black lives matter", it gets on the nerves of these people, so they try to sabotage the movement -- water it down, make it not about blacks anymore. Hence, "all lives matter".
What does this movement want? I believe they want law enforcement to be held accountable when they show prejudice against blacks. I believe they want things like stricter background checks on police applicants, better training for police recruits, and harsher consequences when officers have shown prejudice towards blacks.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1
Please show me where anyone "forced" the college president to do anything. Can you show me a picture or video of someone putting a gun to her head? Can you show me anything in writing where they threatened to burn her house down and kill her loved ones?
All they did was to explain to her why the slogan is what it is, and why the other slogan aims to undermine the specific focus of this movement, which the college president has stated she overwhelmingly supports. As soon as she realized her error, she was happy to correct it. Doesn't sound like anything was forced to me.
Google is your friend:
blacklivesmatter.com...
originally posted by: Jamie1
The irony is that taking the position that the it's a pissing contest between the hashtags, #alllivesmatter and #blacklivesmatter hurts their cause more than if they wouldn't have got their panties twisted over the original email.
They've lose credibility in the eyes of many people because they're unhappy about people saying "All lives matter."
They're too immature and self-involved to think through the PR consequences of anything they do.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
originally posted by: Jamie1
The irony is that taking the position that the it's a pissing contest between the hashtags, #alllivesmatter and #blacklivesmatter hurts their cause more than if they wouldn't have got their panties twisted over the original email.
They've lose credibility in the eyes of many people because they're unhappy about people saying "All lives matter."
They're too immature and self-involved to think through the PR consequences of anything they do.
Excuse me, but that's a load of horse poop. The people who disagree with the movement continue to disagree, and the people who agree with the movement continue to agree, regardless of some random email sent out to a random college student/faculty by the college president. The only people making a big deal about this email are the ones who disagree with the movement in general, so they are attempting to yet again, undermine it. Keep tryin'.
originally posted by: Jamie1
My posting a thread on ATS isn't going to affect their "movement." Get to reality.
Burning businesses down on national television in front of millions of people will.
Walking into restaurants and harassing people, and having Yahoo make it a front page story will.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
originally posted by: Jamie1
My posting a thread on ATS isn't going to affect their "movement." Get to reality.
Burning businesses down on national television in front of millions of people will.
Walking into restaurants and harassing people, and having Yahoo make it a front page story will.
Burning down businesses was not part of the black lives matter movement, just to be clear.
"Harassing" is the word used by the right wingers who are against the whole movement. The truth is, they said a few words, sang a song and read off some names of blacks killed by cops - took about 5 minutes - hardly what I would call "harassing". Then they asked the diners to stand and raise their fists in solidarity - which I heard several people did do.
As you seem to be so fond of saying, any "harassment" would be in the diner's minds only - they either choose to consider themselves harassed, or they choose to be enlightened by the rally -- completely their choice, right?
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1
Uh huh, more right wing propaganda.
Here are some facts:
Some peaceful protesters came in to some restaurants, said some words, then left. There were no riots, no one was hurt or shot, no one went to jail. Some protesters were asked to leave a couple of the restaurants, but other restaurants did nothing. When asked to stand and raise their fists in solidarity, many diners did so. Facts vs stories, right?