ALL LIVES MATTER

[Worldtraveller]

I think an All lives matter movement that lived up to it's name had the potential to be very effective in making a change. Too often these days do people find a reason to take an us verse them approach either as a scapegoat or means to mask bigotry. If an all lives matter movement can show that it seeks justice for those unjustly killed, whether it's a police officer or civilian (of all races) it will be difficult for anyone from either side of the issue to say it doesn't speak to/for them. This would serve to unify rather than divide people. Regrettably that's not the case and it is a complete waste of an opportunity since All Lives Matter hasn't done a damn thing for anyone.

It's worse than that. The ALM people are actively working against making things better for anyone.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You do your position an injustice when you keep claiming they kill black people unreasonably. The data clearly shows they don't. When you keep claiming this obviously false point you distract from the actual problem--but the problem is mostly mistreatment of criminals regardless of race.

They don't kill black people unreasonably? WTF is wrong with you? OK, Loren, whatever you say from over there in whitewashed lalaland.

"Unreasonably" as cases that aren't justified homicide.

For example, we have a recent case where it's clearly suicide by cop. It's not unreasonable that he succeeded.

George Floyd is definitely unreasonable, though.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You do your position an injustice when you keep claiming they kill black people unreasonably. The data clearly shows they don't. When you keep claiming this obviously false point you distract from the actual problem--but the problem is mostly mistreatment of criminals regardless of race.

I like how Loren frequently refers to "data", "figures", "numbers" etc. But never actually cites a source. Like we're all supposed to take his word for it that whatever this "data" is, it exists and his interpretation of it is accurate. (I'm pretty sure that whenever Loren says "when you control for" he really means "when I generalise this thing that happened when I was at the supermarket with my wife".)

Loren's just some guy fixated on a classical liberal narrative that says that everyone's on a level playing field, and these silly claims he makes every damn day are just a lame bluff.

It's been presented on here multiple times. Keeping asking for it over and over is a way of avoiding addressing it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think an All lives matter movement that lived up to it's name had the potential to be very effective in making a change. Too often these days do people find a reason to take an us verse them approach either as a scapegoat or means to mask bigotry. If an all lives matter movement can show that it seeks justice for those unjustly killed, whether it's a police officer or civilian (of all races) it will be difficult for anyone from either side of the issue to say it doesn't speak to/for them. This would serve to unify rather than divide people. Regrettably that's not the case and it is a complete waste of an opportunity since All Lives Matter hasn't done a damn thing for anyone.

Note that the underlying cause of this is that society as become pro-black racist. Hence the white racists and the anti-racists end up taking similar positions--they have very different end objectives but this isn't obvious.

 

[bigfield]

It's been presented on here multiple times. Keeping asking for it over and over is a way of avoiding addressing it.

Here you're basically saying "I've already made this argument and you're pretending I didn't." It's a weak bluff. I don't believe you or anyone else on this forum has ever presented any evidence that shows police don't kill black men unreasonably, and I don't believe that you or anyone else has ever presented any evidence that police mistreatment suspects is just as bad regardless of the race of the suspect.

 

[bigfield]

For example, we have a recent case where it's clearly suicide by cop. It's not unreasonable that he succeeded.

Loren Pechtel & Declaring Suicide by Cop.

Name a more iconic duo.

 

[Harry Bosch]

It's been presented on here multiple times. Keeping asking for it over and over is a way of avoiding addressing it.

Here you're basically saying "I've already made this argument and you're pretending I didn't." It's a weak bluff. I don't believe you or anyone else on this forum has ever presented any evidence that shows police don't kill black men unreasonably, and I don't believe that you or anyone else has ever presented any evidence that police mistreatment suspects is just as bad regardless of the race of the suspect.

That's not how it works. It's your side that needs to present evidence that all cops are bad or kill black people for sport.

 

[Worldtraveller]

It's been presented on here multiple times. Keeping asking for it over and over is a way of avoiding addressing it.

Here you're basically saying "I've already made this argument and you're pretending I didn't." It's a weak bluff. I don't believe you or anyone else on this forum has ever presented any evidence that shows police don't kill black men unreasonably, and I don't believe that you or anyone else has ever presented any evidence that police mistreatment suspects is just as bad regardless of the race of the suspect.

That's not how it works. It's your side that needs to present evidence that all cops are bad or kill black people for sport.

https://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/2020/know-their-names/index.html

 

[ruby sparks]

Note that the underlying cause of this is that society has become pro-black racist.

That is such a load of complete cobblers.

 

[thebeave]

Just heard about this yesterday on my local radio station, though it happened back in June:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/29257525/kings-play-play-announcer-grant-napear-resigns-all-lives-matter-tweet

Longtime Sacramento Kings play-by-play announcer Grant Napear has resigned after tweeting "ALL LIVES MATTER" on Sunday in response to a question about Black Lives Matter.

"I want to thank the fans for their overwhelming love and support," Napear said in a statement Tuesday. "I will always remain a part of Kings nation in my heart."

Napear, who had called games for the Kings since 1988, was answering a question from former Sacramento star DeMarcus Cousins asking for his opinion on Black Lives Matter.

"Hey!!!! How are you? Thought you forgot about me," Napear responded. "Haven't heard from you in years. ALL LIVES MATTER...EVERY SINGLE ONE!!!"

So, apparently Grant had not been up to date on what the acceptable response to a question about Black Lives Matter was. Even after apologizing, it wasn't enough. Apparently, he has now left California and is taking up residence in the Northeast US somewhere, trying to start over after his June mis-tweet.

This is insane. It started me thinking that when someone fucks up bad, we take them to civil court, give them a trial, and if found guilty, they are fined an amount that pretty much assures their current way of life is destroyed. Nowadays, you can just say the three awful words "All Lives Matter", and the same thing is essentially accomplished.

 

[Harry Bosch]

That's not how it works. It's your side that needs to present evidence that all cops are bad or kill black people for sport.

https://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/2020/know-their-names/index.html

Oh gotcha. The form of evidence that you like is anecdotal. The weakest form of evidence. Well, I can play at that game also. My sister, who is a cop, has never pulled a gun on the job and dosn't hunt black people for sport. Therefore, I can conclude that all cops are good and peaceful.

Anecdotal

 

[ruby sparks]

This is insane. It started me thinking that when someone fucks up bad, we take them to civil court, give them a trial, and if found guilty, they are fined an amount that pretty much assures their current way of life is destroyed. Nowadays, you can just say the three awful words "All Lives Matter", and the same thing is essentially accomplished.

I would have thought so too.

One thing, it is reported (on wiki) that Napear defended Donald Sterling (owner of the LA clippers) saying this to his mistress:

"It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you're associating with black people", and, "You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want", but "the little I ask you is ... not to bring them to my games"

 

[DrZoidberg]

That objection doesn't make any sense--you can't simply use other words when the specific topic is filler words!

The lesson seems to have been about the usefulness of filler words… not an exhaustive list of filler words to memorize. There are hundreds of languages and dialects in the world. This professor chose to use one of the most common Chinese filler words as an example instead of a different word in Chinese or one of the hundreds of other languages.

That said, I think this is likely a good candidate for "too woke. " I don't want my professors censoring themselves from expressing objective facts.

Do you know what isn't "too woke?" Asking police officers not to murder people in custody. Asking police officers to treat civilians (even suspects) with compassion and respect regardless of their skin color.

Just like there is only a small minority of bad BLM protestors causing problems, there is only a small percentage of bad police officers causing problems.

I'm not so sure. There's few things more dangerous and destructive than self-richous people sure of their own goodness fighting the good fight. They tend to justify shitty behaviour with their goodness and be blind of the bullshit they do. A police officer is a hammer. It can hit things... hard. That's all they ever do. The police exist to cause problems for bad people. So they'll treat everybody they're in contact with either a person who needs to be protected or a person who is bad. Whether or not they're aware of this is another matter. But that's certainly how they behave. Their view of the world is black and white. It's all angels and demons.

The police is a necessary evil. But it is evil. It is fundamentally evil. They can only hurt people. More or less. Usually more.

My two cents.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Just like there is only a small minority of bad BLM protestors causing problems, there is only a small percentage of bad police officers causing problems.

I'm not so sure. There's few things more dangerous and destructive than self-richous people sure of their own goodness fighting the good fight. They tend to justify shitty behaviour with their goodness and be blind of the bullshit they do. A police officer is a hammer. It can hit things... hard. That's all they ever do. The police exist to cause problems for bad people. So they'll treat everybody they're in contact with either a person who needs to be protected or a person who is bad. Whether or not they're aware of this is another matter. But that's certainly how they behave. Their view of the world is black and white. It's all angels and demons.

The police is a necessary evil. But it is evil. It is fundamentally evil. They can only hurt people. More or less. Usually more.

My two cents.

I'm pulling out this quote by you: "The police exist to cause problems for bad people." I have to say that maybe it is that way in some places in the world. Maybe in some others the police also help good people, like stop and help you in an emergency where your life or your car is having problems. But then there's also another aspect of police which is to get money. I don't know if it is like this in Sweden, but in the US, the police are budgeted locally and then some of the money police take from people is used to go to the local budget.

In one town in the state I live, the town had a budget deficit and so the police diverted all resources to do giant speed traps and text/cell-phone usage traps and when they caught someone, they hit them with everything in the book. And they did this for weeks until the town budget was balanced.

 

[Jokodo]

It's been presented on here multiple times. Keeping asking for it over and over is a way of avoiding addressing it.

Here you're basically saying "I've already made this argument and you're pretending I didn't." It's a weak bluff. I don't believe you or anyone else on this forum has ever presented any evidence that shows police don't kill black men unreasonably, and I don't believe that you or anyone else has ever presented any evidence that police mistreatment suspects is just as bad regardless of the race of the suspect.

That's not how it works. It's your side that needs to present evidence that all cops are bad or kill black people for sport.

Why would anyone present evidence for a claim they never made? All I see claimed is that *some* cops are bad and the police as an institution tends to protect those bad cops rather than help identify them and bring them to justice.

 

[Jarhyn]

That's not how it works. It's your side that needs to present evidence that all cops are bad or kill black people for sport.

Why would anyone present evidence for a claim they never made? All I see claimed is that *some* cops are bad and the police as an institution tends to protect those bad cops rather than help identify them and bring them to justice.

All cops are bad. There. I said the thing. Now you can't claim otherwise.

Now let the justification: if you don't bring bad behavior to light and fight it when you see it, at the very least you are apathetic to evil. Allowing criminal behavior in a segment of society dedicated to eliminating such behavior means you are not doing your job. If you are not doing your job as a cop, you are a bad cop. Thus any cop who does not fight police corruption is bad. No cops these days seem to fight police corruption and those that do get bounced.

Therefore all cops are bad.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Just like there is only a small minority of bad BLM protestors causing problems, there is only a small percentage of bad police officers causing problems.

I'm not so sure. There's few things more dangerous and destructive than self-richous people sure of their own goodness fighting the good fight. They tend to justify shitty behaviour with their goodness and be blind of the bullshit they do. A police officer is a hammer. It can hit things... hard. That's all they ever do. The police exist to cause problems for bad people. So they'll treat everybody they're in contact with either a person who needs to be protected or a person who is bad. Whether or not they're aware of this is another matter. But that's certainly how they behave. Their view of the world is black and white. It's all angels and demons.

The police is a necessary evil. But it is evil. It is fundamentally evil. They can only hurt people. More or less. Usually more.

My two cents.

I'm pulling out this quote by you: "The police exist to cause problems for bad people." I have to say that maybe it is that way in some places in the world. Maybe in some others the police also help good people, like stop and help you in an emergency where your life or your car is having problems. But then there's also another aspect of police which is to get money. I don't know if it is like this in Sweden, but in the US, the police are budgeted locally and then some of the money police take from people is used to go to the local budget.

In one town in the state I live, the town had a budget deficit and so the police diverted all resources to do giant speed traps and text/cell-phone usage traps and when they caught someone, they hit them with everything in the book. And they did this for weeks until the town budget was balanced.

We have that to. But the traffic police function is separated out from the other policing functions. So they don't really intersect. It's different types of cops.

Amnesty international has Sweden on the naughty list because of how badly they treat people who have been arrested. Torture is common. Cops can harrass whoever they want with little repurcussion. Cops who missbehave do not get fired. Internal punishments are rarely more than slaps on the wrist. So they tend to behave attrociously. It's just one of these things that people outside Sweden aren't aware of. But police corruption is extremely low (comparatively). So it's not all bad.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I'm pulling out this quote by you: "The police exist to cause problems for bad people." I have to say that maybe it is that way in some places in the world. Maybe in some others the police also help good people, like stop and help you in an emergency where your life or your car is having problems. But then there's also another aspect of police which is to get money. I don't know if it is like this in Sweden, but in the US, the police are budgeted locally and then some of the money police take from people is used to go to the local budget.

In one town in the state I live, the town had a budget deficit and so the police diverted all resources to do giant speed traps and text/cell-phone usage traps and when they caught someone, they hit them with everything in the book. And they did this for weeks until the town budget was balanced.

We have that to. But the traffic police function is separated out from the other policing functions. So they don't really intersect. It's different types of cops.

Amnesty international has Sweden on the naughty list because of how badly they treat people who have been arrested. Torture is common. Cops can harrass whoever they want with little repurcussion. Cops who missbehave do not get fired. Internal punishments are rarely more than slaps on the wrist. So they tend to behave attrociously. It's just one of these things that people outside Sweden aren't aware of. But police corruption is extremely low (comparatively). So it's not all bad.

Interesting. I guess if I ever go to visit my cousins I will stay clear of the police in Odskolt.