'All Lives Matter' march draws more than 20,000 in Alabama

a reply to: seagull

Yes I'm aware. Are you aware that no one is saying only black lives matter now too? Interpreting that way is a choice all too many are willing to make.

a reply to: poncho1982

History likes to forget that he was also a radical.

a reply to: Kali74

Don't think I even remotely said or implied anything of the sort.

If I did, mea culpa. You're not the first one to call me on that...so maybe I did inadvertently say/imply just that.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: poncho1982

History likes to forget that he was also a radical.

He was radical in his views for equality

He was not violent , radical, or used racially provocative language to further his movement.........theres a difference......

originally posted by: Indigo5


Where in any part of the "Black Lives Matter" movement do they espouse that ONLY black lives matter????

How did you manage to misread 3 words??????

"Black Lives Matter" NEVER and STILL DOESN'T mean other lives do not matter...

It seems as if the Black Lives Matter movement themselves misread these words. To me it would mean al black lives matter, but they only seem concerned with the small amount killed by police.

"Black Lives Matter" was and is a retort to those who disagree to various degrees about that simple truth.

What an idiotic argument...asking to not be shot while unarmed by police in hugely disproportionate numbers IS NOT asking for SPECIAL TREATMENT...IT IS ASKING FOR AN END TO SPECIAL TREATMENT LIKE PROFILING WITH ITCHY TRIGGER FINGERS.

AND before you start with those BS Stats on Police Involved Fatalities that ALMers like to cite in their not so subtle effort to discredit people asking for justice...African Americans make up 14% of the population...What percentage of Police Involved Homicides do they represent.

The fact that they are 14% of the population is not what is relevant. The relevant number is what percentage of violent crimes are they involved in.

www.vdare.com...

The DOJ numbers for 2012-2013 (the most recent I could find) show that blacks are responsible for 22.4% of violent crime. There have been 779 police related deaths this year. 201 of them have been black people. That amounts to about 26% of the deaths this year. That is about a 4% increase what you would expect based on violent crime numbers.

www.theguardian.com...

Using the same charts, whites committed 42.9% of violent crime. Of the 779 killed by police this year, 386 were white. Thats about 50%, which is 7% above what you would expect based on violent crime.

This is what is frustrating many people. Many folks, particularly on ATS, have been saying for a long time that police corruption against us all is out of hand. BLM has made the issue that blacks are uniquely affected which the numbers show is to be expected based on the amount of violent crime they are involved in. Rather justified or not, this makes people who are not black who would have otherwise agreed with BLM feel left out, and hence the ALM movement.

For the love....Black Lives Matter and that is not saying anything at all about yours or mines lilly white asses..

What exhausting nonsense lately...These are the exactly the same folks who spent YEARS calling Pres. Barack Obama a Kenyan...Glenn Beck on down...

I could give too sh&^s about what he claims to stand for...I know precisely what he does not stand for..

Isn't this the same thing people who support BLM criticize oppents for, taking one example from the BLM and and claiming it represents the whole group? Thats fine if you want to sink to that level, but don't get upset when people discredit the BLM movement because of Sharpton or the Bernie Sanders protesters.

*sigh*

"All lives matter" is like instead of saying "save the rain forest" you say "save all the forests"...

It totally dismisses the issue and downplays its significance. Way to really side skirt the issue and try to ignore the elephant in the room by expanding the definition.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I have no problem with Black Lives Matter choosing that title. If that is what members want to focus on, so be it

As I said earlier in this thread though this discussion is far to complex to boil down to a simple analogy.

You say "save the rain forest". You only focus on rain forests being chopped down by Brazilians. I say "well thats only less than 1% of the rain forest being chopped down, what about the rest?"

I also say that all forest are being chopped at an equal rate, so we should focus on saving all forest. You respond by saying that I am killing your movement and probably secretly hate rain forest.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I don't think I'd go that far, really.

Personally, and I admit my view could be the minority, hardly for the first time around these parts; I think it reemphasizes the fact that all life, regardless of pigmentation, is, and always will be sacred.

Be your skin whatever shade... No one has the right to take the life encased within unnecessarily.

Feel free to disagree, of course.

By saying "all lives matter" your essentially hijacking the issue that black people are having. This is an issue important to them and their communities -- by saying, "oh, well yeah .... you know ALL lives matter..." you're side stepping the issue that the African American community is trying to raise.

This is a specific issue that warrants attention, and it doesn't deserve to be drowned out and shoved in the closet by making the blanket "all lives matter".. .IMO "all lives matter" is just some kind of feel good buzz word for people who don't want to acknowledge or admit to t he problem black Americans want addressed.

Look, the civil wars was what....200 or so years ago? That's maybe 3 generations of people. It wasn't that long ago that people were owning other people like property in this country. So after the civil war ended and slavery was abolished the plantation owners said, "So...you guys are all free and stuff...so...we're all good, right? How about we have you do the same work as before, this time we'll pay you though?"

And in three, maybe four generations we somehow think that everyone in this country has abandoned racism (on both sides)? We really think that there isn't a racial component to black people being targeted by authority figures and the court system?

And some would argue it's not all about race....some would argue that it's about soci-econimics, that poor people in general are treated worse by police due to their predisposition to crime. Well, would a poor white person trade place with a poor black person? The argument could be made that it's easier in America being a poor white person than a poor black person.

"All lives matter" is just some kind of way to sweep the issues of black America back under the carpet, as we all want to believe so badly that racism just isn't alive anymore.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I suppose it could seem that way... Hmmm. Never really thought about it, truth to tell.

I know that a disproportionate number of blacks are in jail, or killed by police; I guess I thought most people see that as well and really wouldn't need to be told specifically. Naive, on my part, I suppose; to expect that...

Guess maybe I'll rethink how I phrase things.

More race war, more race baiting, more ignorance. Is this anything new from the sold out MSM? Shame that the common man must abide by certain rules and not cause a ruckus but the rampant BS from the tubes is allowed to continue. I would call it a circus, but even a circus has standards, albeit low standards.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: poncho1982

History likes to forget that he was also a radical.

He was radical in his views for equality

He was not violent , radical, or used racially provocative language to further his movement.........theres a difference......

He was radical by today's standards too. He was non-violent but he refused to condemn the violence some black activists engaged in, he never condemned the Black Power movement, he never condemned riots and said about them "...riots are the language of the unheard". He never said not to engage in violence either.

I think you most likely don't really know that much about him.

BLM activists today, don't call for riots in fact they call for non-violent civil disobedience the same way MLK did. Like him they cannot control what happens after, like him they don't condone nor condemn any violence that happens on the protest side, like him they are blamed for it anyway.

Like then, people don't listen, like then have no capacity for nuance and readily blanket judge or accept the blanket judgements of others. If you'd been alive back then but were still the same person as you are now, there's not a doubt in my mind that what you say about BLM, you would say about Dr. King.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Indigo5


Where in any part of the "Black Lives Matter" movement do they espouse that ONLY black lives matter????

How did you manage to misread 3 words??????

"Black Lives Matter" NEVER and STILL DOESN'T mean other lives do not matter...

It seems as if the Black Lives Matter movement themselves misread these words. To me it would mean al black lives matter, but they only seem concerned with the small amount killed by police.

This makes no sense? A movement to raise awareness about one issue is illegitimate for not focusing on all issues?
Again...Choosing issues not represented by an activist and blaming them for not giving equal airtime is nonsensical at best...and a thinly veiled agenda to discredit a call for equal justice at worst.

By your logic...it is OK for police to shoot an unarmed African American as long as other people of the same skin color are involved in crime or reckless behavior????????

The fact that they are 14% of the population is not what is relevant. The relevant number is what percentage of violent crimes are they involved in.

WTF??? How so?

Unless you consider selling cigarettes, or having a broken turn signal or not walking on the side-walk a violent crime worthy of being shot to death?

You are justifying racist policies that treat "blacks" as one homogenous "thing" to be policed differently than whites.

That pulling over someone that is Black means the officer can employ less just and humane tactics and protocol.

I don't understand that thinking.

a reply to: Indigo5

Or, blacks have created their own problem by committing the crimes, and popularizing a culture of violence and criminal activity. Then not doing anything to stop it. They don't tell on each other "snitches get stitches"

Have you even listened to Hip Hop?

You're looking at stopping the result of the problem, not the root of it.

Until they acknowledge that black crime is indeed a problem, and do something about it, then their neighborhoods will continue to be policed more, and blacks will continue to be arrested more.

You're trying to say that these poor souls are just victims...ALL of them.

Truth is, they are not. Sure, SOME are, but not all, and certainly not even close to a majority. The people these victims should be mad at are the people in their own community that perpetuate this image of black thugs. When the crime rate goes down, guess what? The arrests will too.

Black crime is a real issue, and you can try to minimize it in you mind, and try to convince others all you want. It does not change reality.

You have blinders on to reality. I take it you've never gone to a majority black school (I have). I take it you've never lived in a ghetto. (I have as well) There are real issues with lawlessness, and indifference to laws in the black community.

Again, not all of them, but yes, a number big enough to make the problem very real.

Fix the community, you fix the arrests.

What BLM wants is for police to just leave them alone to do whatever they want. Without repercussions.

I can't do whatever I want. I get pulled over for stupid reasons. I'm mostly white, but it still happens. The difference is, I show respect when pulled over, and I don't get belligerent. If you met me in real life, you would see that I am a "biker" type. I have tattoos, long hair, I do not dress in a fashionable way AT ALL. Jeans and t-shirt mostly. I get instantly judged all the time. but it's up to ME to show them that their perception is wrong. I'm friendly, I help people, and I show respect to EVERYONE. See how that works?

"Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" will NOT get them the respect they're after.

Blaming cops for problems in their community will not either.

I applaud the growing number of black people who are standing up and saying that very thing. The civil rights leaders who were at this march, and the pastors in the churches who are preaching change to their followers. They have the right idea.

This BLM is as doomed as the ill fated Occupy Wall Street movement was.

originally posted by: poncho1982
a reply to: Indigo5

Or, blacks have created their own problem by committing the crimes, and popularizing a culture of violence and criminal activity. Then not doing anything to stop it. They don't tell on each other "snitches get stitches"

Have you even listened to Hip Hop?

"They"?? I'd say that White People represent 100% of Skin Head and KKK membership...Does this statement work?

"Or, Whites have created their own problem by joining racist groups and committing horrific murders of minorities, and popularizing a culture of racism and criminal hate. Then not doing anything to stop it. They don't hold eachother accountable "look out for your own kind""

Or might you say...whoa...maybe it doesn't make sense to judge an entire race of human beings on the tone of their skin color and the worst examples of behavior?

Until they acknowledge that black crime is indeed a problem, and do something about it,

What is "Black Crime"?...Curious as to how skin color differentiates a crime. There certainly appears to be a difference in enforcement as I have to imagine the average white guy doesn't end up shot dead for having expired insurance or mouthing off to a traffic cop. You might be on to something I was unaware of...Please enlighten me on what constitutes a "Black Crime"?

a reply to: Indigo5

Well, to use your words against you...

If Black Lives Matter doesn't mean ONLY Black Lives Matter, then Black Crime in no way means ONLY Black Crime.

It's a just way of differentiating between crime in general, and crimes committed by blacks. Still crime, and no less or more serious, but committed by a black person.

Get it now?

SMH. You and your mincing of words.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
By saying "all lives matter" your essentially hijacking the issue that black people are having. This is an issue important to them and their communities -- by saying, "oh, well yeah .... you know ALL lives matter..." you're side stepping the issue that the African American community is trying to raise.

As I mentioned before, I have no problem with people using the name Black Lives Matter and focusing in on this issue. If they feel like All lives matter is belittling them, they again have that right. By the same token, you can see how people would feel belittled by their identities being excluded from the BLM movement.

Also I don't think it is as universal as you are claiming here that this is an issue that African Americans is raising. Some African Americans are raising this issue, some African Americans are marching with All Lives Matter, and still the vast majority have done neither.

This is a specific issue that warrants attention, and it doesn't deserve to be drowned out and shoved in the closet by making the blanket "all lives matter".. .IMO "all lives matter" is just some kind of feel good buzz word for people who don't want to acknowledge or admit to t he problem black Americans want addressed.

That's right, it is just your opinion, and you are entitled to that. My opinion is that at least on this thread most of the people arguing for ALM seemed genuinely concerned with all lives and police brutality, and are worried that the media is trying to separate us when we should all to come together as a whole. It's also my opinion that most of the belittling done on this thread has been done by BLM supporters or those against ALM.

Look, the civil wars was what....200 or so years ago? That's maybe 3 generations of people. It wasn't that long ago that people were owning other people like property in this country. So after the civil war ended and slavery was abolished the plantation owners said, "So...you guys are all free and stuff...so...we're all good, right? How about we have you do the same work as before, this time we'll pay you though?"

And in three, maybe four generations we somehow think that everyone in this country has abandoned racism (on both sides)? We really think that there isn't a racial component to black people being targeted by authority figures and the court system?

You are right. It is a very complicated issue. No doubt progress has been made though. You wouldn't know it from all of the hype the media is portraying. Any life lost to police misconduct or abuse is unjustified. It seems however that the amount that this is happening is being exaggerated. As I showed on my previous post, 26% of people killed by police this year have been black. Compared to the amount of violent crimes in that community, that is comparable to the amount of whites killed this year by police.

And some would argue it's not all about race....some would argue that it's about soci-econimics, that poor people in general are treated worse by police due to their predisposition to crime. Well, would a poor white person trade place with a poor black person? The argument could be made that it's easier in America being a poor white person than a poor black person.

That argument could be made. So could the reverse argument. It would be a better argument if you backed it up with facts however. I would say the main reason that it may be easier to be poor and white is that you are far less likely to be the victim of violence perpetrated by a criminal. If you look at violence in very poor white area like Appalachia there is much less violence than in a predominantly black poor areas. This has nothing to do with the police however.

"All lives matter" is just some kind of way to sweep the issues of black America back under the carpet, as we all want to believe so badly that racism just isn't alive anymore.

Again, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I would think pretty much everyone else in this thread would agree that racism exist amongst people of all colors today. Regardless of it will work or not, I think that is why people here are happy that people of all races showed up to an All Lives Matter rally.

originally posted by: poncho1982
a reply to: Indigo5

Well, to use your words against you...

If Black Lives Matter doesn't mean ONLY Black Lives Matter, then Black Crime in no way means ONLY Black Crime.

It's a just way of differentiating between crime in general, and crimes committed by blacks.

Thank you for that...Now can you see that..

"If Black Crimes doesn't mean ONLY Black Crimes, then Black Lives in no way means ONLY Black Lives.

It's a just way of differentiating between Lives in general, and Black Lives ended through unnecessary violence by police."

You can say well "Black Crimes" is a necessary distinction to make in the contest of the discussion...

And BLM would say that "Black Lives" is a necessary distinction to make in the context of the discussion.

Ahem...Not to use your words against you or anything...

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
By saying "all lives matter" your essentially hijacking the issue that black people are having. This is an issue important to them and their communities -- by saying, "oh, well yeah .... you know ALL lives matter..." you're side stepping the issue that the African American community is trying to raise.

As I mentioned before, I have no problem with people using the name Black Lives Matter and focusing in on this issue. If they feel like All lives matter is belittling them, they again have that right. By the same token, you can see how people would feel belittled by their identities being excluded from the BLM movement.

"All Lives Matter" simply fails as a legitimate movement, because it is premised on a snarky retort to an existing movement not it's own volition or cause. Or put another way...It's momentum and cause is rather a retort to the initiated cause being highlighted by BLM. Or to put it another way...it would have no legs at all if it had started absent BLM with a twitter campaign "Lives Matter"...it is the dog-whistle of the retort to the BLM that has given it life. This reality seems obvious and one that seems strange for people to deny.

originally posted by: Indigo5


This makes no sense? A movement to raise awareness about one issue is illegitimate for not focusing on all issues?
Again...Choosing issues not represented by an activist and blaming them for not giving equal airtime is nonsensical at best...and a thinly veiled agenda to discredit a call for equal justice at worst.

I was merely replying to the fact you said it is hard to misread the words Black Lives Matter. I said to me that means all black lives matter, not just ones killed by cops.

By your logic...it is OK for police to shoot an unarmed African American as long as other people of the same skin color are involved in crime or reckless behavior????????

I never came close to saying anything like that. I'll say it again here plainly, all unjustified homicides by police should be tried to the fullest extent of the law. If they are guilty then they are murderers who deserve to rot in jail like all murderers.

WTF??? How so?

Unless you consider selling cigarettes, or having a broken turn signal or not walking on the side-walk a violent crime worthy of being shot to death?

You are justifying racist policies that treat "blacks" as one homogenous "thing" to be policed differently than whites.

That pulling over someone that is Black means the officer can employ less just and humane tactics and protocol.

I don't understand that thinking.

Cops are more likely to shoot people they interact with. They are most likely to use violence against perpetrators who use violence. Although blacks make up 14% of the population, they commit 22% of the violent crime. Police are more actively involved in poor black communities because the amount of violent crime that occurs there.

To say they shoot a huge percentage of blacks because they are only 14% of the population but to leave out that they commit 22% of violent crime is disingenuous.

Put another way, I will grant you that blacks should be critical of cops because a huge disproportionate amount of blacks are killed by them as they are only 14% of the population. Non-cops, however, should be frightened and critical of blacks because they commit a hugely disproportionate amount of violent crime for only having 14% of the population.

That is why using the 14% number makes no sense.

As far as deadly violence being used for the nonviolent crimes you mentioned, in no way would I defend that. The cops that did that should be charged and arrested. However, this cases happen to people of all colors. The majority of police shootings are usually involve someone who was armed or was engaging in violence.