You Can Be Pro-Cop and Pro-BLM

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Liquesence

Who are career criminals?

That moment where BLM defenders 'argument' falls apart ?

This is it.

www.weeklystandard.com...

Is that all you have?

Your "argument" boils down to: someone can't be a "victim" because he or she has a criminal record, as if people with records can't also be victims.

When again asked "who are career criminals?", you use a Bill Clinton speech as your supporting evidence.

Asked again: Who are career criminals?

I know the answer you don't have the balls to admit: blacks.

You mean

Where are the blacks speaking out against the "gangsta" culture. I'm listening.

There's a few, but not enough.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

I didn't ask you how BLM thinks.

I asked if you think they have a reasonable grievance in cases of unprofessional police conduct occurs?

Can we not support the police and also hold them accountable?

The people who were actually wronged by the police have a grievance. Everyone else has an agenda.

Who was actually wronged though?

I'm not really seeing anyone wronged - - except maybe the police.

EDIT: in recent headline cases.

That is pretty much the point: there aren't a lot of people that were actually wronged by the police. Yet there are an awful lot of people trying to make a big deal out of relatively few cases. The only people who have a grievance are the people that the police actually did something to unjustly. Everyone else is just projecting an agenda.

a reply to: Tsubaki

We're sorry we didn't know you were shot at.
If you are talking about getting STOPPED well PFFFT, you can take that.
I have long hair and a beard, WHAT happens when I leave Colorado in my car?
SAME DAMN thing.

UNLESS you were shot at..then I 'm with you.

So, I'm still stuck on the name - - its a name that creates division.

How is Black Lives Matter any different then White Supremacy?

If its not All Lives Matter, then its only Black Lives Matter?

originally posted by: Annee
So, I'm still stuck on the name - - its a name that creates division.

How is Black Lives Matter any different then White Supremacy?

If its not All Lives Matter, then its only Black Lives Matter?

That is absolutely correct. People tend to think if you are pro-cop you are automatically against blm and if you are pro blm you are anti-cop. The two are not mutually exclusive. Though I am in the all lives matter group, not backing blm, or any other single group who, by virtue of their name alone, are divisive and separatist in nature.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: Annee
So, I'm still stuck on the name - - its a name that creates division.

How is Black Lives Matter any different then White Supremacy?

If its not All Lives Matter, then its only Black Lives Matter?

That is absolutely correct. People tend to think if you are pro-cop you are automatically against blm and if you are pro blm you are anti-cop. The two are not mutually exclusive. Though I am in the all lives matter group, not backing blm, or any other single group who, by virtue of their name alone, are divisive and separatist in nature.

Oh, trust me - - anyone who knows me on ATS - - knows I am all about Equality. Equal Rights/Equal Treatment.

But, the name BLM and the way they are going about this is not OK in my opinion.

First off, they are defending thugs (recent headlines). Each case, as far as I can tell, was justified from the police perspective.

Let me know when they start promoting black scientists, lawyers, doctors, physicists, and others of higher learning.

As far as I can see, they are not supporting and defending those that have made a difference - - and have black skin.

a reply to: introvert

I think your first mistake was to name your thread with pro-cops and pro-BLM... just using the term "pro" you automatically created a division, a false dichotomy, one or the other, black or white.

There's no need to be "pro" anything or "anti" anything in this particular scenario.

There's just simply sitting down and rationally looking at both situations and coming to the realization that there are actual logical concerns and complaints coming from both groups:



The bad cops need to be weeded out right alongside systemic racial profiling within said law enforcement (which of course is causing problems - ie: unnecessary killings)

AND

The good cops need to not be forgotten about and erroneously lumped in with the bad apples (which of course is causing problems - ie: unnecessary killings)


In summary: The lumping generalizations on both sides of the coin are failing miserably



Which is what you were attempting to do with your OP, but unfortunately your message got lost in translation due to the either/or false dichotomy in your thread title.

Some people are able to see past that and grasp the overall concept of the message you were trying to get across... but based on the majority of responses in your thread thus far, not too many actually have been able to so.



Kudos for the attempt though.

Glad to see somebody is trying to step back and take the bird's eyeview of the situation.

a reply to: introvert

Yeah , Cops just Love Pigs in a Blanket , Fry'em Like Bacon . You know , this Propaganda Thread of Yours is Really Lame . who exactly are you trying to influence here with this tripe , Cops Kids ?

a reply to: Annee

It's always so weird when we're in full agreement. is nice.

originally posted by: neo96
You Can Be Pro-Cop and Pro-BLM

The Epitome of trying to have it both ways.

No.

It is the epitome of having empathy. something that several far right nutjobs on this site is deficient in.

I can sit here and say I do not want cops to be shot in ambushes by alleged lone wolf ex military nutjobs.

I can sit here and say I do not want unarmed black men (or ANY american citizen for that matter) to be gunned down by trigger happy cops taking pages out of Hitler's SS when dealing with minorities.

Why? Because people being killed unnecessarily is wrong. families being harmed by killings that could have been prevented are WRONG.

You have ZERO empathy for people you do not even begin to attempt to understand. you do not try to come to common ground with your fellow americans. you judge and approve of police killings with your rhetoric

make no mistake, I do not support BLM. But I understand why they exist, and its people with YOUR ATTITUDE that has brought this movement to life

YOU LACK EMPATHY.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Annee

It's always so weird when we're in full agreement. is nice.

I try to avoid anything race related, but sometimes . . . .

Asians were Shanghaied as slaves too. What's the difference? They are looked on as hardworking, diligent, detailed, and precise.

Mexicans are looked on as hard workers, doing jobs no one else wants to do.

The Irish were once the scum of the earth in America. But, worked hard to make their place.

I'm gonna lay it where it belongs. If, as a culture, you celebrate "gansta" style and behavior - - that's a choice. That choice belongs on you.

There are many successful people of dark skin. Are they celebrated as Icons to look up to? Not that I can see in the "culture" (not individuals).

Oh, and I've heard the excuse all the others had their culture to fall back on. Lame. So what. I'm not buying it anymore.

Im skeptical of the role of cops when their prime objective is the enforcement of prohibitionary laws designed to oppress rhe working class. Im skeptical of BLM because the organization itself is constructed as a hate group.

I dont think all cops are bad. I think some laws are unjust, that the justice system is rather flawed and that cops should also be subject to justice. I dont think everyone that relates to BLM is bad. I think BLM takes advantage of rightly frustrated and angry people to push its racist, divisive agenda.

originally posted by: Annee
So, I'm still stuck on the name - - its a name that creates division.

How is Black Lives Matter any different then White Supremacy?

If its not All Lives Matter, then its only Black Lives Matter?

As you well know, I respect your opinion and can see where you are coming from.

So I hope you also understand that I am not saying that we should support a movement that is solely directed at propelling a a supremacist agenda. I don't think BLM is doing that. I believe they are trying to bring attention to the belief that black people are treated differently at times by law enforcement.

I also believe you can support them in their addressing of grievances, as well as supporting law enforcement in what they do. The idea that you cannot support one while supporting the other as well seems illogical to me.

It seems to me that many people are saying you have to agree with one, and in doing so cannot also agree with the other. I don't see why it has to be that way.

a reply to: introvert

I will say this.

I support the individual that makes every effort to succeed.

"That Which is Not Earned Has No Value"

Blame and excuses only go so far.

NOTE: would I support the guy who was selling CD's out of the trunk of his car, threatened a homeless person with a gun, and refused to cooperate with police?

Not if he was white, pink, green or purple.

If this is the premise of the BLM movement - - they're on the wrong track.

a reply to: Annee

Blame and excuses only go so far.

Would you apply that equally to both sides of this debate?

originally posted by: Annee
So, I'm still stuck on the name - - its a name that creates division.

I've felt this way for a long time. It's stupid and divisive to have one side represented in the name of an equality movement if you want both sides to take part. All Lives Matter would be a good start. I feel that way about Feminism too if it's supposed to be about equality between sexes. It should be called Egalitarianism.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Annee

Blame and excuses only go so far.

Would you apply that equally to both sides of this debate?

In all these "headline" cases - - - I don't see police being wrong (except the one who shot the therapist).

I see belligerent men challenging the authority of the police. (skin color not relevant)

Equal would require an equal playing field.

a reply to: BelowLowAnnouncement

Martin Luther King Jr. started the Southern Christian Leadership Conference which was used to propel his movement of racial equality. Should we have discredited his movement because it was not named something that included non-Southern Christians?

a reply to: Annee

except the one who shot the therapist

So even you have to admit there are cases of wrongdoing.

When do we all admit that and support their grievances, while also supporting law enforcement in general?