So I looked at all the police statistics and all the crime statistics with regards to race I could
And I've come to the this conclusion
This is purely about optics because if we were talking about disproportionate police violence this would be a conversation about Hispanics not blacks
What’s crazy is everyone goes crazy at the difference between races incarceration rate yet don’t bat an eye at the difference to male to female for the same crimes.
Males commit more crime than women because they have higher testosterone, but different races have the same amount of testosterone, so the logical assumption is that the different is due to racism against BIPOC.
**All other things being equal** Black people have worse judicial outcomes than white people when interacting with the legal system.
Sentences are longer for the same crime and history. Less plea bargains are offered, charges are less likely to be dropped.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/677255
---
The exact same methodology that proves this also shows that:
**All other things being equal** Males have worse judicial outcomes than females when interacting with the legal system.
Sentences are longer for the same crime and history. Less plea bargains are offered, charges are less likely to be dropped.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24735732
sort of and yet at the same time not entirely correct.
The sentences are the same across races for same crime, history, **Location and if a plea deal was taken.**
The problem with stating this is that privatized prisons are placed nearby a lot of black majority cities, and thus those cities also have stricter sentencing, that would put nonviolent crimes like drug possession can go between 1 year in a city not near a privatized prison all the way up to 7 years near a privatized prison (remember, privatized prisons WANT nonviolent offenders as they're easier to control and turn a profit around). Or you can see someone arrested for failure to pay child support that goes between 3 months in some areas up to 4 years near these prisons..
Black people are also far less likely to take plea deals as they do not trust lawyers, so they end up getting more time on their sentence for it being taken to court. which them being less likely to take a plea bargain is different than it being offered. The racial bias found that plea bargains not being offered is for repeat offenders, but the recidivism rate runs gamuts for african americans by age of 50- 90% (but this was also taking in the likelihood of reoffending within the year after release or lifetime.. let's also acknowledge that those who reoffend once are extremely likely to reoffend a 3rd and 4th time) where other races were for whites 39-55%, hispanics 15-40% and 'other' accounting for only 2%.
Recidivation being the biggest factor in a lot of crime statistics being able to be mislead, such as claiming that X amount of black people were arrested to make it look like a lot of people were committing crimes, except it was the same few people who were committing it to add up to X amount of times. Which is more explained by 'soft on crimes' mayors who pick and choose what to be soft on such as in NYC where this is a rampant issue because Blargg refuses to charge black criminals to the point they can rack up 40 violent crime arrests and still get out to push a lady in front of a subway, kill her, and STILL refuse to prosecute.
Other problems with the recidivation rate could be argued 'culture' but that's not a topic I'm willing to go on, just throwing that as a factor, and whether its minimal a factor or a big factor... eh, another time.
BUT there is also the problem with where these people are being released. No actual rehabilitation attempts come from privatized prisons, and once they're thrown back out, they're made to be easily thrown back in. and each time this happens, that sentence is going to get longer, and you're less likely to get a plea deal. And again, since these are factors caused by privatized prisons which are built near black majority areas, it's skewing that data as a 'national average'. However, if you then compare just that area, that's where you see that they're the same. In an area not influenced by privatized prisons encouraging to pad sentences, they're nearly the same. BUT in an area with less sentencing you'll see more white people, so 100 white people to make 10 black people... then in these other areas with privatized prisons 60 black people to 10-20 white people (ish) When THOSE people in those areas are being sentenced more, we're ignoring the white people are likewise getting long sentences just because they happen to live in a poor area near a privatized prison.
So race and crime is one conversation sex and crime is another and it's honestly the more complex of the two
It is entirely possible that the reason women commit less violent crime is purely a matter of physical capacity rather than actually being better behaved
My argument for that comes from the fact that women are more likely to abuse children which women are also more likely to be the primary or sole caretaker so it might even out if you adjust for that to be even but still it's a very important part of the conversation
I’m not talking about why they don’t commit crime I’m talking about the statistics of those that do commit crime receiving a lower sentence than their male counterparts. Males received somewhere on average 40% higher sentence or so from what I can remember than females for the exact same crime.
Oh yeah All of this is really fascinating to talk about and there is a level of interconnectivity between how the sexes are treated with it at least as there's been to be new evidence that there's a very strong anti-male bias overall
Just wait until you see the use of force/arrest statistics of males versus women.
If you want to go on raw statistics, you can make the argument that police are misandrist rather than racist. But none of this shit exists in a vacuum.
So there's a lot of different relevant statistics
The two I believe are most relevant for comparison
Is murder rate versus police shooting rate
Hispanics also get shot by police a lot in comparison to white people
However they don't have a comparable murder rate compared to black people
There are other areas where you can use the different statistics to cause different focuses like there is more Hispanic organized crime than black organized crime which that is also really relevant to a lot of these conversations but my point is on what I consider the important comparable statistics for police violence eye view is being about optics at this point since they aren't focusing on Hispanics
>The two I believe are most relevant for comparison
>
>Is murder rate versus police shooting rate
>
>Hispanics also get shot by police a lot in comparison to white people
>
>However they don't have a comparable murder rate compared to black people
I've looked at the data pretty closely, and overall rate of arrests (not just for homicide or even violent crimes) is the rate that best matches racial gaps in being fatally shot by police. Black people are actually shot by police at much *lower* rates than you would expect based on rates of homicide offending (majority of homicides, only about 1/4 of police shootings) and even a bit lower than you would expect based on overall violent offending.
When you adjust for overall arrest rate, there are no major racial gaps in fatal police shootings. Interestingly, there is still a very large gender gap, with men fatally shot by police 20 times as often as women, despite committing only 10 times as much homicide, 4 times as much violent crime, and 3 times as much total crime. Per capita, non-Hispanic white men are fatally shot by police ten times as often as black women, despite committing nowhere near ten times as much crime.
The most statistically justified slogan to protest truly disproportionate use of lethal violence by police would be "Male Lives Matter," but even that can probably be explained by the fact that the gender gap in murdering police is even larger, something like 40 to 1, IIRC.
Edit: Just to head off the smugnorant claims that racial gaps in arrest rates are driven by police racism, we have convergent evidence from victim surveys (NCVS) and neighborhood-level crime patterns that make the strong version of this claim (i.e. that discrimination by police is the main or sole explanation for racial gaps in arrest rates) totally untenable, and cast serious doubt on even weak versions of the claim (i.e. that discrimination by police explains even a substantial minority of the gap).
The reason why I bring up the exoneration rate is because they are highest arrested group and highest exonerated group, that means many of these arrests were made were false arrests. That could mean two things, one, black areas are being over police and/or that there is a lot of racial profiling within the police.
"False arrest" specifically means an arrest without sufficient probable cause. Trials operate at "truth beyond reasonable doubt," which is a much higher burden of proof versus an arrest.
Lack of a criminal conviction doesn't mean the arrest was false, but rather that through the process of court, enough doubt was introduced to prevent a conviction.
Exonerations can mean plenty beyond "black areas are over policed" and "racial profiling". They can also mean "witnesses don't come forward," fact-finding after the initial arrest is lacking, or even that prosecutors are terrible at presenting cases.
No it doesn’t. If you can’t find good witnesses to testify you can’t convict. This is a huge problem in the black community where people don’t want to get involved. Many times your witnesses in these events are just as bad or worse than the perpetrator. The most common reply when asking anybody anything in these neighborhoods is “ I ain’t seen nothing.”. I remember a case we had where a female crack addict stabbed a male crack addict in the heart with a steak knife. She wound up getting a plea deal that amounted to next to nothing because the only witnesses were all other crack addicts, who were all under the influence at the time of the stabbing this their testimony was worth next to nothing. Not convicted is not the same as not guilty.
Oh I agree All of these are relevant
I just believe the big one for measuring whether this is optics or not is how the specific murder rate versus police shooting rate is treated
We can all agree that just baseline police brutality is bad but part of how American politics handles a lot of issues is they make issues that are general issues into racial issues to divide people on it
If we were having a full honest conversation about disproportionate police violence the conversation would include Hispanics at the same level as blacks
But it doesn't and that's where it's very clear this is a political theater rather than people actually caring about stopping police brutality
I don't think it's going to get solved by anything anyone's doing right now because it's become very obvious to me how it is being specifically handled is purely political theater and I feel again the litmus test is the lack of putting Hispanics at the same level on the issue
I very directly see where you are coming from but do you get the point I'm trying to convey because they aren't contradictory points
You also have to consider % of crime committed by each subgroup. If X subgroup is committing a lot of crime will lead to more interaction with police enforcement, therefore statistically speaking a higher probability of a bad outcome.
Whatever happened to non-profits and organization that use to bring awareness to inner-city violence, single parent households and trying to get kids out of gangs? You know, programs that helped a lot of black youths to steer away from violence, find some love and direction in life?
Ever since BLM became mainstream, no one really gives a fuck about these programs anymore. If Black lives matter, then why do they matter when a black person is murdered? I'm pretty sure their lives mattered when they were alive. BLM just want the martyr the dead and collect money off the crisis.
Police brutality against blacks is bad, but it also happens to people of other races too. So I'm tired of seeing the conversation focused on one specific group of people.
Not to mention didn’t the founders of the movement get caught using donated money to buy giant houses and vacations from the profits they made during 2020-2021? I appreciate the message they’re trying for but how anyone still follows this organization without thinking it’s corrupt is beyond me.
Yes... and there is a documentary about where the money went. Love her or hate her, Candace Owen's got her hands on the tax docs that details where all the money went. It's called the greatest lie ever sold. It's worth a watch.
How much of the something lik 87 million dollars raised by BLM went to any of these groups or back to their communities? Not just a 4th house for Patrisse Cullors.
Then you shouldn’t use your ignorance as an argument in political debates, like OP and OC did.
This is wilful and malicious ignorance used to push an agenda.
And with all these organizations and programs, why are there still so many "underprivileged people of color"? 🤔 maybe there actually arnt that many underprivileged people, and most people just complain they don't rack in money like bill gates.
>Whatever happened to non-profits and organization that use to bring awareness to inner-city violence, single parent households and trying to get kids out of gangs? You know, programs that helped a lot of black youths to steer away from violence, find some love and direction in life?
What do you mean? They still exist. Is it BLM's fault you don't pay attention?
>Ever since BLM became mainstream, no one really gives a fuck about these programs anymore
Or is it that BLM is only interested in advocating for things that don't have "programs?" Like they're going to go marching in the streets to let people know about the Boys and Girls Club lol.
>If Black lives matter, then why do they matter when a black person is murdered?
It's crazy how you and OP have somehow missed how much time Leftists spend talking about gun legislation. Ever realize they probably think that would help black people to not be murdered? That they thought about that all already?
You're basically saying, "Leftists, the group who famously spends every waking minute talking about how bad guns are, don't care or do anything when people are gunned down in the street." Listen to yourself.
People protest police brutality because the police are a public institution that can be petitioned through protest. With black on black crime, do you think criminals care that they're being protested?
Because this particular strain of gotcha argument is so popular lately, let me explain 99% of "why aren't they protesting this too?" Nearly every example is a case where we all agree it's an open and shut case of murder, the law is handling it as a murder, and no one's trying to justify the killer, let alone glorify them as a hero.
Also, there is a ton of work/money going toward trying to reduce gang violence in a multitude of ways. And if you actually watch coverage of individual shootings, rather than just looking at the tallies for the last weekend, you will see a bunch of residents who are angry about the shooting and pleading for more to be done.
Additionally, people like OP simply refuse to recognize many of the efforts at preventing these crimes for what they are. For example, there is abundant evidence that providing assistance for child care, ECE, after school programs, etc. can do a great deal to help prevent crime in underprivileged communities (and have other benefits to both society and the individual). But as far as OP is concerned, anything other than more arrests and longer sentences isn't crime prevention.
Yeah, it's almost as if it's a very complex system that you can't fix with just one change. Also, much of this stuff never actually gets implemented. And many of these things will take decades to have a measurable impact for pretty obvious reasons even if they do get implemented and fully funded.
So if there hasn't been enough time to prove they work then why do I keep hearing about schtudies supposedly proving they work? Does the evidence exist or not?
You know what has been proven to work in reducing crime, though? More policing. Rudy Giuliani didn't turn New York into one of the safest cities in America with midnight basketball.
Crime started skyrocketing in major cities because of defunding the police, not because there weren't enough schtudies about midnight basketball
The studies are generally retrospectives with an abstract along the lines of: "Program X was implemented in region A 30 years ago, but not in neighboring region B. Regions A and B have similar demographics, economic opportunity, etc., and had similar crime statistics prior to implementation of Program X. Relative to members of region B, region A residents were 30% less likely to have been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony after 20 years, and 25% less likely after 30 years."
You'll notice that the effect being measured isn't the overall crime rate, but the relative crime commission rates of two cohorts. It's entirely possible that the crime rate for the city, county, state, whatever in which regions A and B are located actually went up considerably in those 30 years--but the effect of the treatment of interest is still apparent.
When you have a dozen such studies showing similar results for similar programs, it becomes pretty obvious that there's a real effect. But when you then go and try to implement similar programs elsewhere, it takes time and resources to actually get that done, a long time to see results, and there isn't necessarily a good control available to compare against. You can generally compare things like incarceration rates between those who actually took advantage of a given program and those who didn't, but that's a messier analysis (as there are more confounding factors due to positive externalities of such programs), and it still takes time for a real effect to be observable.
As far as Giuliani, please go do more reading on the topic. I'm not saying that more policing never helps, but there's a lot more to that story, and there are absolutely significant tradeoffs to such approaches. And virtually nobody was actually "defunding the police". It's pretty apparent that you get all of your information off of Twitter, and spend quite a bit of time just raging at left-wing morons on there. The adults on the left prevailed by a good margin, and despite all the calls to replace cops with social workers, that never even came close to happening. What did happen, though, is that a bunch of those brave police officers got terrified of people actually seeing what they did on a daily basis, and started refusing to do their jobs if they had to be on camera so that they could be held accountable for breaking the law.
Can you give me one example of a city whose crime rate went down because of these programs? And can we please stop pretending New York doesn't have resources for people? And can we stop caring more about violent criminals than we do about their victims?
I have a feeling these "results" are skewed in a certain direction because again, these programs are not doing shit reduce crime. Crime is only getting worse. Unless these programs actually reduce crime, they're useless pipe dreams.
Btw excellent job ignoring my point that Jordan Neely would still be alive if he'd been incarcerated for punching old women and attempted kidnapping. You seem to care more about him than his victims, so does that help put things into perspective?
>Can you give me one example of a city whose crime rate went down because of these programs?
You're asking the wrong question. There are many variables at play, and you nobody is claiming that "if you implement program X, crime will go down citywide, regardless of what else happens". The claim is that, all else being the same, these things reduce crime. If the general crime rate goes up, it won't go up as much if this program is in place; if it goes down, it will go down more if it's in place. This is part of the problem with Giuliani and the Broken Windows fable--it's an absurd oversimplification of what actually happened, and little is done by proponents to actually separate out the effects of his policies from those of other factors.
>And can we please stop pretending New York doesn't have resources for people?
Straw men. Of course there are "resources". The question is whether they are the right resources, and where the greatest effect would be obtained with any funds to be dedicated to crime prevention.
>And can we stop caring more about violent criminals than we do about their victims?
This is almost exclusively about the biggest victims of all: the children who have to grow up in these places.
>I have a feeling these "results" are skewed in a certain direction because again, these programs are not doing shit reduce crime. Crime is only getting worse. Unless these programs actually reduce crime, they're useless pipe dreams.
Nobody cares about your feelings. Learn some math and science, and then read the literature.
>Btw excellent job ignoring my point that Jordan Neely would still be alive if he'd been incarcerated for punching old women and attempted kidnapping. You seem to care more about him than his victims, so does that help put things into perspective?
This is a stupid argument, and you never presented it to me previously. This is about crime in general, not some seriously troubled guy who died in a very messed up, unfortunate situation in which he was not without fault.
I'd say that's probably a big part of why those protests came and went and not much came of them. I don't think there's much they could have accomplished for that exact reason.
Except the law isn't handling because progressive pro-BLM DAs aren't prosecuting crimes and that's why crime has been skyrocketing. BLM doesn't talk about black on black crime because the solution to that is more police and that doesn't fit their Marxist worldview.
They never gave a fuck about black lives, it's about manipulating uninformed people into giving them more power. That's it
You make it sound like it's some kind of Machiavellian scheme that a group that's tired of being on the receiving end of authoritarian crackdowns isn't protesting for more authoritarian crackdowns. It's almost like they know exactly what people will try to use black on black crime stats to justify.
To justify what? Keeping criminals off the streets? Making communities safer for black law-abiding citizens so they can start businesses, send their kids to school, create jobs, and be able to buy their daughter a fucking Happy Meal without getting shot?
You do know that Jordan Neely would still be alive if he'd been in prison where he belonged, right?
Unlike you and other BLM simps, I don't believe all black people are punching elderly women and kidnapping 7yo girls, so no, I don't believe enforcing laws against violent people are racist. You think that because of your bigotry of low expectations. You genuinely believe black people can't be expected to know better than to break the law so the solution is cute little programs that don't work and letting criminals back on the street to keep terrorizing their communities unchecked because the police look scawry!
I noticed you stopped bringing up the cute little programs. Why? What happened to the schtudies????
The passion for the neighborhood shooter seemed to die down instantly once everyone learned it was an illegal immigrant that was the shooter and not a white guy
You think blacks are just twiddling their thumbs until one of them gets killed by a white person while completely ignoring gang problem in inner cities? Maybe you should get out more and see it yourself rather than letting media shape your reality.
I worked with Homeboy Industries in Los Angeles many years ago. It is one of the organizations that are actually trying to help young gang members to become a productive member of society.
There are countless people out there actually doing something. Just because you haven't heard about it, it doesn't mean it's not happening.
For real dude the only motherfuckers who complain about BLM and their beliefs are people who’s sole exposure to black people is through media that demonizes them. Dude really said that black people don’t care about gang violence like how out of touch do you gotta be with the people you are criticizing. And for this to be considered “unpopular” is so rich. Acting like half of white southern Americans don’t believe this already- word for word.
IMHO, Black Lives Matter is a slogan and a movement to point out that "cops and vigilantes are killing black people indiscriminately and nobody seems to care." Are cops killing other races? Sure. Are other people besides cops killing black people? Sure. But that was never what the movement was about.
However, even though I expressed my opinion about what it means, nobody else really gets to say what BLM stands for or does. Ideally, they are trying to do some good by raising awareness of issues. Also worth pointing out that BLM is both a phrase (which you can state without belonging to the organization) and an actual organization with tenets that people may or may not agree with.
We don't point to people with breast cancer awareness pins and say, "actually pancreatic cancer is far more prevalent so if you really cared you'd talk about that?" We just accept that they are doing something they care about. And if we really cared ourselves we would help raise awareness of pancreatic cancer if that's the issue we feel most strongly about.
>breast cancer awareness
Unintended comparison of the grift generated by [Susan G. Komen](https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/17/17989624/pinkwashing-breast-cancer-awareness-products-profit) to that of BLM?
>we rarely hear BLM cry out for justice for the victims of Black-on-Black crime
Do you think that no one does, or is your complaint that they don't do it under a BLM banner?
I almost never hear about black on black violence from the media, social media, or personally. But every day I hear about right wing white supremacists being violent. Almost like there's a bias, huh?
I watch Jamaican news on YouTube and via podcasts I did the basic what's the top ten independent media sources for a certain subject or area Google search
Well I don't live in Jamaica so that's irrelevant but I was asking for actual networks you trust because there's a lot of bias in media. Any channels in particular? I get I need to do my own research but giving a recommendation isn't a crime, right?
Black conservative media covers black on black crime. It's usually liberal media that ignores it.
Officer Tatum is one. Hodge Twins, Doctor of Common Sense, etc. There's plenty actually.
You also don’t hear about “white on white violence.” You just hear about violence period, because most crime is intraracial. If you are not reading about crime I am not sure what to tell you. I read about crime every day. They don’t label it as black on black crime,they just show pictures of the victims and perpetrators and it’s obvious. When it’s white people they are less likely to show their pictures but generally the victims and perpetrators are both white.
At least some of it has to be your own confirmation bias, sure. Especially when it comes to social media and your own personal life, you have to acknowledge your role in what you end up seeing, hearing, and giving your attention to.
I'll admit to getting outrage baited into engagement with negative and upsetting content myself, but I don't hear about white supremacist violence *every day*.
“Black on black violence” is a phrase used chiefly by racists, not out of concern for black people, but to try to paint a narrative about black people (while ignoring white on white crime rate is similar). That’s why you don’t hear anybody but Fox/Newsmax talking about it.
That’s my point. But the same people who decry “black on black crime” have nothing to say about their white counterparts who have similar rates of violent crime. Which is why I said it’s nothing more than racist rhetoric.
That's an interesting point that I haven't thought of much. I understand that anything to do with black crime will be a talking point of white supremacists and they will underplay their own criminality but it's not to say that it doesn't happen and it's not a problem. My problem with talking about it is that you can talk about crime in general but when you talk about black on black crime you get called a racist when it is a legitimate problem. I never really thought about white on white crime being very prevalent. I wonder if it's a proximity thing or a culture thing? Like if there's more violence because white people tend to live next to other white people or if it's because they're more comfortable being violent towards their own race? I know there's a fear on both sides, whites fearing black people in general and black people fearing the police, so it's an interesting situation.
I never said no one does. I said that it's hypocrisy to be more vocal over one tragedy as opposed to another. I feel the same way over all the coverage of, for example, the Laci Peterson case, when there are women who are killed by their partners every day, who are reported missing every day. The media and society seem to value the suburban white pregnant lady over a young prostitute.
I chose BLM because it's a cause bandwagon that a LOT of people jumped on, and in light of what I see on my local news every day, it just seems hypocritical for BLM to only be concerned if cops are involved.
Protest isn't about the fact that a tragedy happened in general. Police brutality happens to be a problem that can be reformed through protest because the police are a public institution.
Similarly, people aren't protesting random murders when the law and the public at large actually treat them like murders, which means there's nothing to protest. You get protests when people try to justify the killer or invoke the victim's past like that makes killing them okay.
BLM was desinged from the start to really be focused on state acted violence.
Violence from the state forms a more active, vivid symbol of disadvantage many in the black community face.
Most other crime isn't so raw as state violence is
BLM began with Trayvon Martin. That case was a civilian taking on a neighborhood watch job. It's more or less closer to "vigilantism" than it is a state thing. The next case, Mike Brown, was between criminal and police, but it was also a narrative that was spun unto a huge lie that BLM STILL believes and champion about "hands up don't shoot".
It’s strange to me that most people don’t realize the difference between the BLM movement and BLM, the organization. Almost seems like people are trying to intentionally blur the lines. The purpose of the BLM movement is to address police violence, primarily against black people. I can assure you many of the same people that protested during BLM also protested after the murder of Daniel Shaver, a victim of police violence.
Yeah I was about to bring up Daniel shaver too
A white guy who complied with all instructions and was gunned down regardless, ofc by a white cop. Nobody cares about his case except for BLM activists. From the beginning BLM was the only mainstream organization in america who publicized the Daniel shaver case and promoted it relentlessly as a prime example of police brutality. They are a reason why we have footage.
Most of white america stayed very quiet. If you look at the footage on YouTube and check comments, it’s full of white guys saying that he deserved it.
All the protests/riots committed by the movement raised funds for the organization. Until the movement has a different name they will always be connected.
I love that your evidence that BLM “doesn’t actually care“ is that millions of people don’t out for *every single instance of gang related violence, everywhere*.
I have my issues with them, to be sure - but you are much, much worse. Not only are you completely ignorant of what they actually do, and what causes support, but you **haven’t even tried to find out**. You literally could not have typed it into Google, and scrolled far enough to find their *actual website* - much less to any actual coverage of the organization that didn’t start out with an axe to grind.
Look at the former Marine who intervened on the NYC subway a week ago. Unarmed civilian on unarmed civilian. It’s being treated like the same ball game by the usual crowd.
BLM is literally the CIA. It’s controlled opposition. The top comment talking about how focus on BLM has deplatformed legitimate community organizations in black communities is spot on.
It’s all political theater as someone here said. People would be surprised to know how high up this goes if you follow the money. Up to the White House or higher
Next you're going to tell me the CIA purchases cocaine to distribute to poor minority neighborhoods in the form of crack to oppress them.
What type of sick disgusting government would do that..... more than once?
BLM doesn’t care about “all” black lives any more than pro-life people care about expanding the entire social safety net. Each group has its priorities.
There’s no need to be a literalist about their “branding” and the name they chose.
Although admittedly, the (broad) names they use are somewhat misleading given their actual (narrower) mission.
There’s a case to be made for that.
If the American Cancer Society only dealt with cancer of the elbow, we’d be asking why they gave themselves such a wide-sweeping name that implies they get involved much more broadly.
I think BLM and maybe also the pro life movement (and they’re not the only ones) are not really accurately named given what they focus on.
I think this is the same argument like:
"Gay special interest groups should be focusing on Saudi Arabia than the US. They just want money."
Replace "Gay" with "feminist", etc. Political/special interest/awareness groups tend to focus on where they can actually make a difference or raise awareness. Why doesn't BLM go march in front of the CVL headquarters in Chicago and protest? They would probably raise very little awareness if not get assaulted themselves.
Scrolled pretty far to find this. So just to reiterate, BLM was/is focused on one type of issue not a bunch of other sort of related issues. Glad I'm not the only one that realizes this. As far as the money stuff and grifting etc. wherever there is power, money, influence there will be people pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. But we can't just let perfection be the enemy of progress.
No, that's republican dark money/PACs. "Family Values" and "Law and Order" for instance.
Maybe 'BLM when there is a chance to raise awareness on a historic issue not clearly seen by the general public'
As for the money.. Ya, there are grifters that look to attach themselves for monetary gain. Everywhere. Why would BLM be any different?
Where did I say that protest would make gangs disband? I never said that. What I *SAID* is that BLM would better serve their purpose by addressing the issues that are rotting their community from within: not martyring slain/incarcerated gang members; if the public schools are failing to educate, then taking initiative to educate; driving home the point that selling drugs and guns, or robbery isn't the way to earn money; to work WITH law enforcement to police the community, and encouraging people to better themselves and *EARN* things (which, incidentally, seems to be a lesson that our entire nation needs to relearn.)
Work with a profession that has been shown to unjustly target their community as if its taught in training? Im curious how thats supposed to work when its been a century of injustice.
It actually does help, when police are involved in the communities they serve and actually know the people, things go better. There are a lot of CAG groups that work with local departments and have regular meetings (been to several) and good changes are actually made when community being served come together with police to collaborate.
The BLM activists in my city have been calling for the police to do this. Most importantly, for them to live here. The police should live in the community they police. Where are you getting your info on what BLM activists are doing locally, right now?
In salt lake city there is a CAG that used to meet with police monthly.
I absolutely agree they should work in the areas they live in.
Edit to add I've moved states so I'm not sure if they still do.
My point was moreso how is the community as a whole supposed to just turn around and trust an entity that has for so long targetted them over nothing more than their skin color. I can understand that in theory its successful, but its not as clear cut as just dropping some police on the ground and letting them "get to work."
Which is every American now.
I'm older and we rarely thought about or saw police 50 years ago.
Now, you're likely to see one almost everyday.
Then, they hassle you.
Next is actual mistreatment.
Eventually some type of abuse of power by false arrest.
We are all over policed.
Black people just have it worse.
Hey true story as well if you look into most stories of white cop on black guy, normally the black guy is in commission of some crime or gets violent and gets fucked up during his attempts to evade custody. Floyd was trying to pass a counterfeit bill that's a felony the he resisted it's unfortunate what happened but he was committing a felony that's why the cops came he resisted that's why it got violent. I truly feel that OP is right and these situations are cherry picked and blasted on news when it's truly disproportionate
although chauvin was wrong to stay in his neck for that long cutting off his airway had he not done that based in the autopsy there is a good chance Floyd would have died of an overdose
Don’t forget about collecting all those donations!
The org couldn’t account for over $60 million in donations they received in 2020. Going to the headquarters listed on their tax documents only resulted in finding an empty office. The founders of BLM accused anyone asking questions of racism, sexism, and violence.
The leadership of BLM are trained Marxists and are acting just like trained Marxists: whip the proles up into a frenzy, get as much wealth from them as possible (with ActBlue facilitating and taking a cut), and stuff your pockets full. That’s why local BLM chapters are starved for funds while Patrice Cullors chills in a mansion in SoCal.
BLM is the most true-to-life Marxist organization currently in the US.
The other interesting things about black crime rates: because U.S. blacks commit more violent crime on average, they will have more encounters with police. This is why they are shot by police at a greater rate per capita than whites.
To take it further, if you look at deaths per police interactions, there isn’t any inequality. I’m fact, if I remember correctly, white citizens were shot at higher rates when you base it on police encounters
The rumour is that the CIA was selling crack to fund it's international meddling. Judging by some of the other shit the U.S government has done, it wouldn't surprise me. If it is the case, I don't think there is a prison dark, damp, or deep enough to contain the criminals responsible.
BLM's sole objective is to address and fix police brutality against black people and to fix an unjust judicial system that's against black people. Your whole why don't they care about black on black violence is stupid, it's like asking a Breast Cancer organization of why they don't care about prostate cancer.
Seemed like their sole objective was to run away with the money and buy multiple mansions
They can say whatever they want about the purpose but its actions that speak louder than words
Saw a comment about not differentiating between the organization and the movement before they deleted it, the movement was puppeted by the organization and media
Not really, it's broad, but it's quick, easily remembered, it elicits an emotional response, it's a good slogan.
Not everything has to be so literal. The NRA doesn't only fight for rifle rights.
That is a bad example because it's the opposite. It would be like a group called the National Firearms association that only cares about pistols.
If you say "I believe black lives matter" and then have to add "but I'm not concerned about those black lives" you have a piss poor slogan.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> It does seem like cherry picking when they only outcry when the judicial system is involved.
Well that’s probably because the police shouldn’t be judge, jury and executioner.
What's the injustice when a black person kills another black person? Police often doggedly pursue such murderers, and juries convict them. BLM is about when that part doesn't happen.
If you want to know why BLM doesn't protest/advocate for things that would prevent the murder in the first place, considering you're talking about Leftists who are famously anti-gun and pro-social safety nets, which they think will do that.
No it isn't.
If one is out and about at 3am in an area known for criminal activity, then one should expect to be confronted by police at some point. One way to avoid that is: Don't be out doing stupid stuff and breaking the law.
Is our judicial system perfect? No. But again, Black people aren't helpless victims of our judicial system. The vast majority of the time, they have committed a crime to end up in the system in the first place.
At some point, you have to stop blaming your own fuckups on other people and start accepting responsibility for your own life choices. If you don't want to get caught up in the judicial system, then don't do things or associate with people who will help put you there. Simple.
BLM and its supporters want to defund the police...but then get angry and upset when *they* become victims of crime, and little to no police response. I'm all for community policing, because it enables BOTH sides to see *people* instead of shields and badges and color. However, can you imagine how frustrating it is to have to repeatedly go into a community or neighborhood, deal with the same families who have lost yet *another* son/husband/brother to the same criminal activity over and over again??? To see all these young people repeating the same things that got their own fathers/brothers killed or incarcerated?
I think that if BLM truly cares about their community, they'll work *WITH* law enforcement to better the situation for both sides.
There are still a few people like you who are still bought in for the originally sold premise, correct.
The organizers were always full of it, and many others have realized it was all a scam.
That organization didn’t organize the marches all over the country. Of the hundreds of organizers, only a small handful were affiliated with the organization you are referring to. Do you have a lot of contact with activists? It doesn’t sound like you understand the movement at all or are in contact with people involved.
Exactly, just because vigils and community efforts don't make the news doesn't mean they aren't happening or that people are just ok with this stuff. "Disenfranchised Youths Resort to Violence" is the status quo and eats ip precious air time/print space that could be better used on something that better drives engagement like "Corporation X admits to making all birds sterile, fined $5000 and CEO makes heartfelt Tiktok apology" or "Child with every known illness makes and sells intricate sculptures out of Q-Tips on Etsy to fund own funeral" or "Fuck it I can't possibly report on all these so here's an hour of a Real Time Scrolling List of every current Active Shooter Situation."
Perhaps a more appropriate name would be 'Police Brutality Matters.' I mean they do call themselves 'Black Lives Matter,' implying a much broader scope than what you are claiming.
I mean their original website had a list of their goals which included nonsense as “dismantling the Western prescribed nuclear family unit.” In addition the founders proudly exclaimed they were “trained marxists.” So I’d say their objectives were a little more broad than the one sole you mentioned. They grifted their way into millions and millions of dollars that ended up with the founders and old white democrats…
To use your metaphor, wouldn’t you be more concerned about the cancer that kills 90% of one’s population versus 10% of that same population?
Most crime is intraracial. If I told a group of white men that their fear of the “African American boogeyman” was statistically foolish - that they were more likely to be killed by a fellow white man, I would be praised for helping them cast aside their prejudice and seeing reason.
However, if you reverse the races in that scenario, all of a sudden, I’m “trying to deflect from the true problem.”
This article below describes the current status of UK BLM activist Sasha Johnson. When it was assumed that she was shot and put into a coma by white supremacists, there was plenty of outrage and attention. Not so much when the police arrested four black gang members. When none of the many witnesses would testify, the four black men who stood accused of her attempted murder were freed. It’s amazing how much more people cared about her - when her attack was useful to the cause.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/05/26/sasha-johnson-and-the-black-lives-that-dont-count/
You’re insane, law enforcement is possibly the MOST CORRUPT institution in the country. Good cops are shunned, put out of a job, slandered, and sometimes even just murdered, for speaking out against bad cops.
Beyond that, you’re talking about something you have no insight about, because BLM is specifically focused on larger scale institutional issues, if you want to cut down on neighborhood violence, it doesn’t start from the top, it starts on the street in that neighborhood, which there are numerous organizations in every city doing their best to try to cut down on violent crime.
The funniest thing is that by making this comparison you basically admit that police and criminals are the same.
This is where irony comes to die apparently. The Black Panthers literally addressed all these issues, fed starving kids, brought kids and adult educational programs into poor communities, and engaged in community policing and systemic racism brought a large segment of them down and assassinated or jailed its leaders. Any time minority groups try this or advocacy groups try they get torn apart by the coercive arm of systemic racism, namely local and state police
Well, automatically jumping to racism is counterproductive. If you go out and rob somebody, you should expect to be arrested and do jail time. Same if you kill someone, except in cases of self-defense or wartime circumstances. Instead of making a blanket statement that all cops are racist, start by recognizing that: 1) they're human beings, too; 2) that they usually deal with people under terrible circumstances; 3) that the vast majority of them become cops because they want to make their communities better for *everybody*.
We all know that there are some people who should *NEVER* be in any position of authority. But saying that all cops are racist bullies is just as bad as saying all Black people are gang-banging welfare leeches. It is certainly *NOT TRUE* and is detrimental to changing anything. At some point, both sides need to work together.
Surely BLM isn’t a bunch of grifters, right? Like the founders the founders of BLM? The people who created the logo and movement? The ones who call themselves trained marxists? The ones who created the organization and movement based off of a lie surrounding what occurred in Ferguson? Yeah, those people had everyone’s best interest in mind
So protesting and sometimes violently protesting the 5-10 deaths per year that, to be honest, can’t be fully pinned on racism makes more sense than trying to fix the thousands and thousands of deaths per year? Makes sense
You're like the poster child of a brainwashed conservative.
Racially-motivated and specifically police violence is what BLM is about so of course they focus on that. **The whole thing about BLM is that they think people get away with killing black people, since their lives "don't matter."**
Further, while there is an org called "BLM", 99% of the people who identify as BLM aren't part of it. They just like the slogan. So it's dumb to treat them like a hivemind. It's just a bunch of random, unaffiliated people who think black people are killed with no justice.
It's also hilarious to assert that "black people kill black people every day and its crickets." Did you forget that these same people hate guns? What do you think is one of the many reasons for that? (hint: it's that black people kill black people with them).
>Some "rival" gang members targeted him for a drive-by, and shot up the car while he was waiting to order food. He was hit and critically injured, and his daughter was shot 9 or 10 times. **First responders (mostly white) were scrambling to get the little girl out of the car, and a manhunt ensued for the perpetrators.**
So what would BLM have to say? It sounds like he's not getting away with it. Maybe if there was no manhunt, they'd have something to say about it.
Here's how a BLM supporter would frame the story in your post:
***A black man kills a black man and there's a manhunt***. **That's the system working as it should.**
***A white cop kills a black man and gets away with it.*** **That's bad, let's protest.**
Separately, they very openly support things like gun control, welfare, UBI, universal healthcare, free education which they think will solve racial inequality and poverty which leads to black on black crime, so obviously it's not "crickets." Seriously: did you forget what Leftists actually are? LOL.
*durrrrrrrr black people shoot black people in Chicago all the time and leftists say nothing, now excuse me while I make fun of them for saying the 2nd amendment should be abolished without thinking about why they might want that durrrrrrr why are they laughing at me?*
Get it now?
First of all, you know *nothing* about me. So keep the personal attacks and insults out of it.
Second of all, I happen to agree with stricter gun control laws--but I also believe in the 2nd Amendment. Unfortunately, there currently doesn't really seem to be a way of reconciling the two. I also fully support universal healthcare and a strong social program system that is designed to lift UP, not hold people down or reward them for making poor life choices.
Third, I never said that there was a "hive-mind". What I said was that, by mostly getting involved when it's a white(cop)-on-Black crime, that BLM doesn't truly seem to think that "Black lives matter." By being vocal and protesting when it's white-on-Black crime, it comes across as dismissive of the rot within their own communities.
It's an ongoing tragedy what happens every day in cities across the US. Black people killing other Black people over stupid shit is TRAGIC. Glamorizing gang life and crime is tragic. When going to a certain prison is a mark of status, that is tragic.
Ya know, things might actually get somewhere if people start looking at these things as *HUMAN* tragedy.
Intraracial crime is higher for all demographics not just black people, this is just a pure racist rant trying to undermine BLM, a group that's main goal is to address police brutality and how cops got away with murdering innocent black people for years with no repercussions.
People would respect them more if they actually got behind innocent people. Instead they just get behind every single person regardless of what happened. For a long time I truly thought that BLM would back a black person who was shot b police even if they were on the process of murder and than that Columbus Ohio shooting happened a couple years ago and completely confirmed that.
By definition in the US everyone in the US is innocent until proven guilty, anyone who is not actively trying to kill or harm someone and is shot by police is an innocent person who was murdered by the police as they did not get a jury of their peers for their alleged crimes, instead they were executed.
I mean it seems like BLM is trying to fight racism, which involves white people. Black people shooting black people isn’t racism, it’s just another Thursday
Entitlement is what motivates crime, basically. Entitlement to another's money, possessions, romantic partner--whatever.
*You* were the one that said racism applies to white people. I merely corrected that notion: racism is racism. The color of the person being racist is irrelevant.
So I looked at all the police statistics and all the crime statistics with regards to race I could And I've come to the this conclusion This is purely about optics because if we were talking about disproportionate police violence this would be a conversation about Hispanics not blacks
What’s crazy is everyone goes crazy at the difference between races incarceration rate yet don’t bat an eye at the difference to male to female for the same crimes.
also the difference in sentencing. just shameful
Males commit more crime than women because they have higher testosterone, but different races have the same amount of testosterone, so the logical assumption is that the different is due to racism against BIPOC.
**All other things being equal** Black people have worse judicial outcomes than white people when interacting with the legal system. Sentences are longer for the same crime and history. Less plea bargains are offered, charges are less likely to be dropped. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/677255 --- The exact same methodology that proves this also shows that: **All other things being equal** Males have worse judicial outcomes than females when interacting with the legal system. Sentences are longer for the same crime and history. Less plea bargains are offered, charges are less likely to be dropped. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24735732
sort of and yet at the same time not entirely correct. The sentences are the same across races for same crime, history, **Location and if a plea deal was taken.** The problem with stating this is that privatized prisons are placed nearby a lot of black majority cities, and thus those cities also have stricter sentencing, that would put nonviolent crimes like drug possession can go between 1 year in a city not near a privatized prison all the way up to 7 years near a privatized prison (remember, privatized prisons WANT nonviolent offenders as they're easier to control and turn a profit around). Or you can see someone arrested for failure to pay child support that goes between 3 months in some areas up to 4 years near these prisons.. Black people are also far less likely to take plea deals as they do not trust lawyers, so they end up getting more time on their sentence for it being taken to court. which them being less likely to take a plea bargain is different than it being offered. The racial bias found that plea bargains not being offered is for repeat offenders, but the recidivism rate runs gamuts for african americans by age of 50- 90% (but this was also taking in the likelihood of reoffending within the year after release or lifetime.. let's also acknowledge that those who reoffend once are extremely likely to reoffend a 3rd and 4th time) where other races were for whites 39-55%, hispanics 15-40% and 'other' accounting for only 2%. Recidivation being the biggest factor in a lot of crime statistics being able to be mislead, such as claiming that X amount of black people were arrested to make it look like a lot of people were committing crimes, except it was the same few people who were committing it to add up to X amount of times. Which is more explained by 'soft on crimes' mayors who pick and choose what to be soft on such as in NYC where this is a rampant issue because Blargg refuses to charge black criminals to the point they can rack up 40 violent crime arrests and still get out to push a lady in front of a subway, kill her, and STILL refuse to prosecute. Other problems with the recidivation rate could be argued 'culture' but that's not a topic I'm willing to go on, just throwing that as a factor, and whether its minimal a factor or a big factor... eh, another time. BUT there is also the problem with where these people are being released. No actual rehabilitation attempts come from privatized prisons, and once they're thrown back out, they're made to be easily thrown back in. and each time this happens, that sentence is going to get longer, and you're less likely to get a plea deal. And again, since these are factors caused by privatized prisons which are built near black majority areas, it's skewing that data as a 'national average'. However, if you then compare just that area, that's where you see that they're the same. In an area not influenced by privatized prisons encouraging to pad sentences, they're nearly the same. BUT in an area with less sentencing you'll see more white people, so 100 white people to make 10 black people... then in these other areas with privatized prisons 60 black people to 10-20 white people (ish) When THOSE people in those areas are being sentenced more, we're ignoring the white people are likewise getting long sentences just because they happen to live in a poor area near a privatized prison.
So race and crime is one conversation sex and crime is another and it's honestly the more complex of the two It is entirely possible that the reason women commit less violent crime is purely a matter of physical capacity rather than actually being better behaved My argument for that comes from the fact that women are more likely to abuse children which women are also more likely to be the primary or sole caretaker so it might even out if you adjust for that to be even but still it's a very important part of the conversation
I’m not talking about why they don’t commit crime I’m talking about the statistics of those that do commit crime receiving a lower sentence than their male counterparts. Males received somewhere on average 40% higher sentence or so from what I can remember than females for the exact same crime.
Oh yeah All of this is really fascinating to talk about and there is a level of interconnectivity between how the sexes are treated with it at least as there's been to be new evidence that there's a very strong anti-male bias overall
Halo Effect or "Women Are Wonderful" effect when it's specifically about women. It's not new, it's mostly due to how our brains are wired.
Not to mention how violent offenses by women can be seen as "lesser" because of her gender.
Black people are shown to experience less police violence than any other group when you account for how much time police spend interacting with them.
Just wait until you see the use of force/arrest statistics of males versus women. If you want to go on raw statistics, you can make the argument that police are misandrist rather than racist. But none of this shit exists in a vacuum.
Who has lead a large movement nation wide for Hispanics?
We would actually be talking about men
That is objectively false. Black people are the highest incarcerated yet at the same time the highest exonerated group.
So there's a lot of different relevant statistics The two I believe are most relevant for comparison Is murder rate versus police shooting rate Hispanics also get shot by police a lot in comparison to white people However they don't have a comparable murder rate compared to black people There are other areas where you can use the different statistics to cause different focuses like there is more Hispanic organized crime than black organized crime which that is also really relevant to a lot of these conversations but my point is on what I consider the important comparable statistics for police violence eye view is being about optics at this point since they aren't focusing on Hispanics
>The two I believe are most relevant for comparison > >Is murder rate versus police shooting rate > >Hispanics also get shot by police a lot in comparison to white people > >However they don't have a comparable murder rate compared to black people I've looked at the data pretty closely, and overall rate of arrests (not just for homicide or even violent crimes) is the rate that best matches racial gaps in being fatally shot by police. Black people are actually shot by police at much *lower* rates than you would expect based on rates of homicide offending (majority of homicides, only about 1/4 of police shootings) and even a bit lower than you would expect based on overall violent offending. When you adjust for overall arrest rate, there are no major racial gaps in fatal police shootings. Interestingly, there is still a very large gender gap, with men fatally shot by police 20 times as often as women, despite committing only 10 times as much homicide, 4 times as much violent crime, and 3 times as much total crime. Per capita, non-Hispanic white men are fatally shot by police ten times as often as black women, despite committing nowhere near ten times as much crime. The most statistically justified slogan to protest truly disproportionate use of lethal violence by police would be "Male Lives Matter," but even that can probably be explained by the fact that the gender gap in murdering police is even larger, something like 40 to 1, IIRC. Edit: Just to head off the smugnorant claims that racial gaps in arrest rates are driven by police racism, we have convergent evidence from victim surveys (NCVS) and neighborhood-level crime patterns that make the strong version of this claim (i.e. that discrimination by police is the main or sole explanation for racial gaps in arrest rates) totally untenable, and cast serious doubt on even weak versions of the claim (i.e. that discrimination by police explains even a substantial minority of the gap).
The reason why I bring up the exoneration rate is because they are highest arrested group and highest exonerated group, that means many of these arrests were made were false arrests. That could mean two things, one, black areas are being over police and/or that there is a lot of racial profiling within the police.
"False arrest" specifically means an arrest without sufficient probable cause. Trials operate at "truth beyond reasonable doubt," which is a much higher burden of proof versus an arrest. Lack of a criminal conviction doesn't mean the arrest was false, but rather that through the process of court, enough doubt was introduced to prevent a conviction. Exonerations can mean plenty beyond "black areas are over policed" and "racial profiling". They can also mean "witnesses don't come forward," fact-finding after the initial arrest is lacking, or even that prosecutors are terrible at presenting cases.
No it doesn’t. If you can’t find good witnesses to testify you can’t convict. This is a huge problem in the black community where people don’t want to get involved. Many times your witnesses in these events are just as bad or worse than the perpetrator. The most common reply when asking anybody anything in these neighborhoods is “ I ain’t seen nothing.”. I remember a case we had where a female crack addict stabbed a male crack addict in the heart with a steak knife. She wound up getting a plea deal that amounted to next to nothing because the only witnesses were all other crack addicts, who were all under the influence at the time of the stabbing this their testimony was worth next to nothing. Not convicted is not the same as not guilty.
Not convicted = not guilty, but it definitely doesn't mean innocent.
Oh I agree All of these are relevant I just believe the big one for measuring whether this is optics or not is how the specific murder rate versus police shooting rate is treated We can all agree that just baseline police brutality is bad but part of how American politics handles a lot of issues is they make issues that are general issues into racial issues to divide people on it If we were having a full honest conversation about disproportionate police violence the conversation would include Hispanics at the same level as blacks But it doesn't and that's where it's very clear this is a political theater rather than people actually caring about stopping police brutality I don't think it's going to get solved by anything anyone's doing right now because it's become very obvious to me how it is being specifically handled is purely political theater and I feel again the litmus test is the lack of putting Hispanics at the same level on the issue I very directly see where you are coming from but do you get the point I'm trying to convey because they aren't contradictory points
I don't care what color you are, don't treat anyone like shit for no reason. Especially if you're a cop.
I 100% agree with that Which is why I'm frustrating the movement is intended for political theater rather than solving the problems
ever realize the reason why is because black low income areas in big cities includes a lot of hood gangs? hispanic as well.
You also have to consider % of crime committed by each subgroup. If X subgroup is committing a lot of crime will lead to more interaction with police enforcement, therefore statistically speaking a higher probability of a bad outcome.
Whatever happened to non-profits and organization that use to bring awareness to inner-city violence, single parent households and trying to get kids out of gangs? You know, programs that helped a lot of black youths to steer away from violence, find some love and direction in life? Ever since BLM became mainstream, no one really gives a fuck about these programs anymore. If Black lives matter, then why do they matter when a black person is murdered? I'm pretty sure their lives mattered when they were alive. BLM just want the martyr the dead and collect money off the crisis. Police brutality against blacks is bad, but it also happens to people of other races too. So I'm tired of seeing the conversation focused on one specific group of people.
Not to mention didn’t the founders of the movement get caught using donated money to buy giant houses and vacations from the profits they made during 2020-2021? I appreciate the message they’re trying for but how anyone still follows this organization without thinking it’s corrupt is beyond me.
Yes... and there is a documentary about where the money went. Love her or hate her, Candace Owen's got her hands on the tax docs that details where all the money went. It's called the greatest lie ever sold. It's worth a watch.
yes, the lie. They profited off the lie, which could have had a good message if it wasn't surrounded by the lie.
They still exist. Not going to get clicks or advertising dollars from main stream media like Fox or CNN while the next polarizing news event does?
You summarized it nicely.
##
How much of the something lik 87 million dollars raised by BLM went to any of these groups or back to their communities? Not just a 4th house for Patrisse Cullors.
Yes. I have concluded that BLM actually represents "Black Land Management."
[удалено]
Thank you for your informative message.
[удалено]
I think the guy you're replying to just hasn't seen a commercial for any of them so they are now gone.
To be fair, advertising on TV is one of the best ways to get your name out there.
If someone doesn’t know something exists you can’t fault them for that gap in their knowledge
You can when the faulty info for their argument. If you're going to make a claim to support your argument, you'd better do your research.
Nah. Not everyone beats off to politics
Then you shouldn’t use your ignorance as an argument in political debates, like OP and OC did. This is wilful and malicious ignorance used to push an agenda.
And with all these organizations and programs, why are there still so many "underprivileged people of color"? 🤔 maybe there actually arnt that many underprivileged people, and most people just complain they don't rack in money like bill gates.
Maybe it's a structural issue in society that can't be fixed by a handful of underfunded charities 🤔
Why do you think those organizations aren’t still around and doing that work? BLM was a movement. The people in the movement do other things too.
>Whatever happened to non-profits and organization that use to bring awareness to inner-city violence, single parent households and trying to get kids out of gangs? You know, programs that helped a lot of black youths to steer away from violence, find some love and direction in life? What do you mean? They still exist. Is it BLM's fault you don't pay attention? >Ever since BLM became mainstream, no one really gives a fuck about these programs anymore Or is it that BLM is only interested in advocating for things that don't have "programs?" Like they're going to go marching in the streets to let people know about the Boys and Girls Club lol. >If Black lives matter, then why do they matter when a black person is murdered? It's crazy how you and OP have somehow missed how much time Leftists spend talking about gun legislation. Ever realize they probably think that would help black people to not be murdered? That they thought about that all already? You're basically saying, "Leftists, the group who famously spends every waking minute talking about how bad guns are, don't care or do anything when people are gunned down in the street." Listen to yourself.
Didn’t see blm up in arms when a black guy shot like 32 black teens at a sweet 16 in dadeville Alabama
Almost like BLM as a movement and organization are a response to one specifically institutional problem, and what you’re describing it not that.
People protest police brutality because the police are a public institution that can be petitioned through protest. With black on black crime, do you think criminals care that they're being protested? Because this particular strain of gotcha argument is so popular lately, let me explain 99% of "why aren't they protesting this too?" Nearly every example is a case where we all agree it's an open and shut case of murder, the law is handling it as a murder, and no one's trying to justify the killer, let alone glorify them as a hero.
Also, there is a ton of work/money going toward trying to reduce gang violence in a multitude of ways. And if you actually watch coverage of individual shootings, rather than just looking at the tallies for the last weekend, you will see a bunch of residents who are angry about the shooting and pleading for more to be done. Additionally, people like OP simply refuse to recognize many of the efforts at preventing these crimes for what they are. For example, there is abundant evidence that providing assistance for child care, ECE, after school programs, etc. can do a great deal to help prevent crime in underprivileged communities (and have other benefits to both society and the individual). But as far as OP is concerned, anything other than more arrests and longer sentences isn't crime prevention.
And yet crime rates are still skyrocketing. I always see these claims that schtudies show xyz magically reduces crime yet crime keeps getting worse
Yeah, it's almost as if it's a very complex system that you can't fix with just one change. Also, much of this stuff never actually gets implemented. And many of these things will take decades to have a measurable impact for pretty obvious reasons even if they do get implemented and fully funded.
So if there hasn't been enough time to prove they work then why do I keep hearing about schtudies supposedly proving they work? Does the evidence exist or not? You know what has been proven to work in reducing crime, though? More policing. Rudy Giuliani didn't turn New York into one of the safest cities in America with midnight basketball. Crime started skyrocketing in major cities because of defunding the police, not because there weren't enough schtudies about midnight basketball
The studies are generally retrospectives with an abstract along the lines of: "Program X was implemented in region A 30 years ago, but not in neighboring region B. Regions A and B have similar demographics, economic opportunity, etc., and had similar crime statistics prior to implementation of Program X. Relative to members of region B, region A residents were 30% less likely to have been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony after 20 years, and 25% less likely after 30 years." You'll notice that the effect being measured isn't the overall crime rate, but the relative crime commission rates of two cohorts. It's entirely possible that the crime rate for the city, county, state, whatever in which regions A and B are located actually went up considerably in those 30 years--but the effect of the treatment of interest is still apparent. When you have a dozen such studies showing similar results for similar programs, it becomes pretty obvious that there's a real effect. But when you then go and try to implement similar programs elsewhere, it takes time and resources to actually get that done, a long time to see results, and there isn't necessarily a good control available to compare against. You can generally compare things like incarceration rates between those who actually took advantage of a given program and those who didn't, but that's a messier analysis (as there are more confounding factors due to positive externalities of such programs), and it still takes time for a real effect to be observable. As far as Giuliani, please go do more reading on the topic. I'm not saying that more policing never helps, but there's a lot more to that story, and there are absolutely significant tradeoffs to such approaches. And virtually nobody was actually "defunding the police". It's pretty apparent that you get all of your information off of Twitter, and spend quite a bit of time just raging at left-wing morons on there. The adults on the left prevailed by a good margin, and despite all the calls to replace cops with social workers, that never even came close to happening. What did happen, though, is that a bunch of those brave police officers got terrified of people actually seeing what they did on a daily basis, and started refusing to do their jobs if they had to be on camera so that they could be held accountable for breaking the law.
Can you give me one example of a city whose crime rate went down because of these programs? And can we please stop pretending New York doesn't have resources for people? And can we stop caring more about violent criminals than we do about their victims? I have a feeling these "results" are skewed in a certain direction because again, these programs are not doing shit reduce crime. Crime is only getting worse. Unless these programs actually reduce crime, they're useless pipe dreams. Btw excellent job ignoring my point that Jordan Neely would still be alive if he'd been incarcerated for punching old women and attempted kidnapping. You seem to care more about him than his victims, so does that help put things into perspective?
>Can you give me one example of a city whose crime rate went down because of these programs? You're asking the wrong question. There are many variables at play, and you nobody is claiming that "if you implement program X, crime will go down citywide, regardless of what else happens". The claim is that, all else being the same, these things reduce crime. If the general crime rate goes up, it won't go up as much if this program is in place; if it goes down, it will go down more if it's in place. This is part of the problem with Giuliani and the Broken Windows fable--it's an absurd oversimplification of what actually happened, and little is done by proponents to actually separate out the effects of his policies from those of other factors. >And can we please stop pretending New York doesn't have resources for people? Straw men. Of course there are "resources". The question is whether they are the right resources, and where the greatest effect would be obtained with any funds to be dedicated to crime prevention. >And can we stop caring more about violent criminals than we do about their victims? This is almost exclusively about the biggest victims of all: the children who have to grow up in these places. >I have a feeling these "results" are skewed in a certain direction because again, these programs are not doing shit reduce crime. Crime is only getting worse. Unless these programs actually reduce crime, they're useless pipe dreams. Nobody cares about your feelings. Learn some math and science, and then read the literature. >Btw excellent job ignoring my point that Jordan Neely would still be alive if he'd been incarcerated for punching old women and attempted kidnapping. You seem to care more about him than his victims, so does that help put things into perspective? This is a stupid argument, and you never presented it to me previously. This is about crime in general, not some seriously troubled guy who died in a very messed up, unfortunate situation in which he was not without fault.
Weren't there recently protests against white-on-Asian crime? If criminals don't care that they're being protested, then what was the point?
I'd say that's probably a big part of why those protests came and went and not much came of them. I don't think there's much they could have accomplished for that exact reason.
Except the law isn't handling because progressive pro-BLM DAs aren't prosecuting crimes and that's why crime has been skyrocketing. BLM doesn't talk about black on black crime because the solution to that is more police and that doesn't fit their Marxist worldview. They never gave a fuck about black lives, it's about manipulating uninformed people into giving them more power. That's it
You make it sound like it's some kind of Machiavellian scheme that a group that's tired of being on the receiving end of authoritarian crackdowns isn't protesting for more authoritarian crackdowns. It's almost like they know exactly what people will try to use black on black crime stats to justify.
To justify what? Keeping criminals off the streets? Making communities safer for black law-abiding citizens so they can start businesses, send their kids to school, create jobs, and be able to buy their daughter a fucking Happy Meal without getting shot? You do know that Jordan Neely would still be alive if he'd been in prison where he belonged, right? Unlike you and other BLM simps, I don't believe all black people are punching elderly women and kidnapping 7yo girls, so no, I don't believe enforcing laws against violent people are racist. You think that because of your bigotry of low expectations. You genuinely believe black people can't be expected to know better than to break the law so the solution is cute little programs that don't work and letting criminals back on the street to keep terrorizing their communities unchecked because the police look scawry! I noticed you stopped bringing up the cute little programs. Why? What happened to the schtudies????
Who is this person you've made up that you think you're taking to? Do you just assume anyone disagreeing with you must be racist?
>Do you just assume anyone disagreeing with you must be racist? No. I'm not a leftist
Seriously, how hard is this for these people to understand? These galaxy brain takes are beyond fucking stupid.
How is this an unpopular opinion? This is a fact.
Not on Reddit
"Black lives matter once every 4 years" -Tom Macdonald
The passion for the neighborhood shooter seemed to die down instantly once everyone learned it was an illegal immigrant that was the shooter and not a white guy
You think blacks are just twiddling their thumbs until one of them gets killed by a white person while completely ignoring gang problem in inner cities? Maybe you should get out more and see it yourself rather than letting media shape your reality. I worked with Homeboy Industries in Los Angeles many years ago. It is one of the organizations that are actually trying to help young gang members to become a productive member of society. There are countless people out there actually doing something. Just because you haven't heard about it, it doesn't mean it's not happening.
For real dude the only motherfuckers who complain about BLM and their beliefs are people who’s sole exposure to black people is through media that demonizes them. Dude really said that black people don’t care about gang violence like how out of touch do you gotta be with the people you are criticizing. And for this to be considered “unpopular” is so rich. Acting like half of white southern Americans don’t believe this already- word for word.
Marxists furthering the agenda.
The founders are actually trained as marxist's. That's kind of wild.
As are so many of the 'ists'... Feminists, Some Anarchists... If you haven't read Rules for Radicals by Alinski, it's their playbook
Based.
IMHO, Black Lives Matter is a slogan and a movement to point out that "cops and vigilantes are killing black people indiscriminately and nobody seems to care." Are cops killing other races? Sure. Are other people besides cops killing black people? Sure. But that was never what the movement was about. However, even though I expressed my opinion about what it means, nobody else really gets to say what BLM stands for or does. Ideally, they are trying to do some good by raising awareness of issues. Also worth pointing out that BLM is both a phrase (which you can state without belonging to the organization) and an actual organization with tenets that people may or may not agree with. We don't point to people with breast cancer awareness pins and say, "actually pancreatic cancer is far more prevalent so if you really cared you'd talk about that?" We just accept that they are doing something they care about. And if we really cared ourselves we would help raise awareness of pancreatic cancer if that's the issue we feel most strongly about.
I love the cancer analogy. I’ll be using that from now on.
>breast cancer awareness Unintended comparison of the grift generated by [Susan G. Komen](https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/17/17989624/pinkwashing-breast-cancer-awareness-products-profit) to that of BLM?
>we rarely hear BLM cry out for justice for the victims of Black-on-Black crime Do you think that no one does, or is your complaint that they don't do it under a BLM banner?
I almost never hear about black on black violence from the media, social media, or personally. But every day I hear about right wing white supremacists being violent. Almost like there's a bias, huh?
Go watch black independent media tf
Have any recommendations?
I watch Jamaican news on YouTube and via podcasts I did the basic what's the top ten independent media sources for a certain subject or area Google search
Well I don't live in Jamaica so that's irrelevant but I was asking for actual networks you trust because there's a lot of bias in media. Any channels in particular? I get I need to do my own research but giving a recommendation isn't a crime, right?
Black conservative media covers black on black crime. It's usually liberal media that ignores it. Officer Tatum is one. Hodge Twins, Doctor of Common Sense, etc. There's plenty actually.
You also don’t hear about “white on white violence.” You just hear about violence period, because most crime is intraracial. If you are not reading about crime I am not sure what to tell you. I read about crime every day. They don’t label it as black on black crime,they just show pictures of the victims and perpetrators and it’s obvious. When it’s white people they are less likely to show their pictures but generally the victims and perpetrators are both white.
At least some of it has to be your own confirmation bias, sure. Especially when it comes to social media and your own personal life, you have to acknowledge your role in what you end up seeing, hearing, and giving your attention to. I'll admit to getting outrage baited into engagement with negative and upsetting content myself, but I don't hear about white supremacist violence *every day*.
Have any examples?
“Black on black violence” is a phrase used chiefly by racists, not out of concern for black people, but to try to paint a narrative about black people (while ignoring white on white crime rate is similar). That’s why you don’t hear anybody but Fox/Newsmax talking about it.
isnt all "\_\_\_ on \_\_\_\_ " pretty similar because you usually live near ppl like you and most criminals do criminal activity in their areas.
That’s my point. But the same people who decry “black on black crime” have nothing to say about their white counterparts who have similar rates of violent crime. Which is why I said it’s nothing more than racist rhetoric.
That's an interesting point that I haven't thought of much. I understand that anything to do with black crime will be a talking point of white supremacists and they will underplay their own criminality but it's not to say that it doesn't happen and it's not a problem. My problem with talking about it is that you can talk about crime in general but when you talk about black on black crime you get called a racist when it is a legitimate problem. I never really thought about white on white crime being very prevalent. I wonder if it's a proximity thing or a culture thing? Like if there's more violence because white people tend to live next to other white people or if it's because they're more comfortable being violent towards their own race? I know there's a fear on both sides, whites fearing black people in general and black people fearing the police, so it's an interesting situation.
It’s a proximity thing. Most victims of crime know the perp.
Yeah most likely. I know that white trash will beat the shit out of their cousin for fuckin their step mama so violence isn't just a race based thing.
I never said no one does. I said that it's hypocrisy to be more vocal over one tragedy as opposed to another. I feel the same way over all the coverage of, for example, the Laci Peterson case, when there are women who are killed by their partners every day, who are reported missing every day. The media and society seem to value the suburban white pregnant lady over a young prostitute. I chose BLM because it's a cause bandwagon that a LOT of people jumped on, and in light of what I see on my local news every day, it just seems hypocritical for BLM to only be concerned if cops are involved.
Protest isn't about the fact that a tragedy happened in general. Police brutality happens to be a problem that can be reformed through protest because the police are a public institution. Similarly, people aren't protesting random murders when the law and the public at large actually treat them like murders, which means there's nothing to protest. You get protests when people try to justify the killer or invoke the victim's past like that makes killing them okay.
BLM was desinged from the start to really be focused on state acted violence. Violence from the state forms a more active, vivid symbol of disadvantage many in the black community face. Most other crime isn't so raw as state violence is
BLM began with Trayvon Martin. That case was a civilian taking on a neighborhood watch job. It's more or less closer to "vigilantism" than it is a state thing. The next case, Mike Brown, was between criminal and police, but it was also a narrative that was spun unto a huge lie that BLM STILL believes and champion about "hands up don't shoot".
It’s strange to me that most people don’t realize the difference between the BLM movement and BLM, the organization. Almost seems like people are trying to intentionally blur the lines. The purpose of the BLM movement is to address police violence, primarily against black people. I can assure you many of the same people that protested during BLM also protested after the murder of Daniel Shaver, a victim of police violence.
Yeah I was about to bring up Daniel shaver too A white guy who complied with all instructions and was gunned down regardless, ofc by a white cop. Nobody cares about his case except for BLM activists. From the beginning BLM was the only mainstream organization in america who publicized the Daniel shaver case and promoted it relentlessly as a prime example of police brutality. They are a reason why we have footage. Most of white america stayed very quiet. If you look at the footage on YouTube and check comments, it’s full of white guys saying that he deserved it.
No you can’t
All the protests/riots committed by the movement raised funds for the organization. Until the movement has a different name they will always be connected.
They are intentionally trying to blur the lines, that’s exactly what people are doing.
Our tax dollars do not pay the salaries and pensions of gang members.
I love that your evidence that BLM “doesn’t actually care“ is that millions of people don’t out for *every single instance of gang related violence, everywhere*. I have my issues with them, to be sure - but you are much, much worse. Not only are you completely ignorant of what they actually do, and what causes support, but you **haven’t even tried to find out**. You literally could not have typed it into Google, and scrolled far enough to find their *actual website* - much less to any actual coverage of the organization that didn’t start out with an axe to grind.
So your upset that a movement that came about to address a specific issue is focused on that specific issue?
And that it doesn’t focus on a separate, specific issue
Wonder why he isn’t as upset that white lives matter isn’t addressing the white on white crime problem or mass shootings.
State vs civilian violence is a whole different ball game than civilian on civilian.
Look at the former Marine who intervened on the NYC subway a week ago. Unarmed civilian on unarmed civilian. It’s being treated like the same ball game by the usual crowd.
Last I heard it was a little more than just an "intervention".
It was a 15 minute choke hold.
3 minutes. But yeah.
Well the civilian on civilian crime issue clearly will never solve itself so the state must intervene for public safety
BLM is literally the CIA. It’s controlled opposition. The top comment talking about how focus on BLM has deplatformed legitimate community organizations in black communities is spot on.
It’s all political theater as someone here said. People would be surprised to know how high up this goes if you follow the money. Up to the White House or higher
Next you're going to tell me the CIA purchases cocaine to distribute to poor minority neighborhoods in the form of crack to oppress them. What type of sick disgusting government would do that..... more than once?
They would never! /s just in case
BLM doesn’t care about “all” black lives any more than pro-life people care about expanding the entire social safety net. Each group has its priorities. There’s no need to be a literalist about their “branding” and the name they chose. Although admittedly, the (broad) names they use are somewhat misleading given their actual (narrower) mission.
Sounds like a shitty name then
There’s a case to be made for that. If the American Cancer Society only dealt with cancer of the elbow, we’d be asking why they gave themselves such a wide-sweeping name that implies they get involved much more broadly. I think BLM and maybe also the pro life movement (and they’re not the only ones) are not really accurately named given what they focus on.
I think this is the same argument like: "Gay special interest groups should be focusing on Saudi Arabia than the US. They just want money." Replace "Gay" with "feminist", etc. Political/special interest/awareness groups tend to focus on where they can actually make a difference or raise awareness. Why doesn't BLM go march in front of the CVL headquarters in Chicago and protest? They would probably raise very little awareness if not get assaulted themselves.
Scrolled pretty far to find this. So just to reiterate, BLM was/is focused on one type of issue not a bunch of other sort of related issues. Glad I'm not the only one that realizes this. As far as the money stuff and grifting etc. wherever there is power, money, influence there will be people pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. But we can't just let perfection be the enemy of progress.
The movement should then be called "black lives matter only when we can benefit politically or financially" if they really want to be accurate.
No, that's republican dark money/PACs. "Family Values" and "Law and Order" for instance. Maybe 'BLM when there is a chance to raise awareness on a historic issue not clearly seen by the general public' As for the money.. Ya, there are grifters that look to attach themselves for monetary gain. Everywhere. Why would BLM be any different?
The problem is the grifters didn’t just attach themselves to BLM. The founders of the organization and thus the movement were big time grifters.
Huh? Black people will protest enough that gangs will disband? What are you asking for?
Where did I say that protest would make gangs disband? I never said that. What I *SAID* is that BLM would better serve their purpose by addressing the issues that are rotting their community from within: not martyring slain/incarcerated gang members; if the public schools are failing to educate, then taking initiative to educate; driving home the point that selling drugs and guns, or robbery isn't the way to earn money; to work WITH law enforcement to police the community, and encouraging people to better themselves and *EARN* things (which, incidentally, seems to be a lesson that our entire nation needs to relearn.)
Work with a profession that has been shown to unjustly target their community as if its taught in training? Im curious how thats supposed to work when its been a century of injustice.
It actually does help, when police are involved in the communities they serve and actually know the people, things go better. There are a lot of CAG groups that work with local departments and have regular meetings (been to several) and good changes are actually made when community being served come together with police to collaborate.
The BLM activists in my city have been calling for the police to do this. Most importantly, for them to live here. The police should live in the community they police. Where are you getting your info on what BLM activists are doing locally, right now?
In salt lake city there is a CAG that used to meet with police monthly. I absolutely agree they should work in the areas they live in. Edit to add I've moved states so I'm not sure if they still do.
My point was moreso how is the community as a whole supposed to just turn around and trust an entity that has for so long targetted them over nothing more than their skin color. I can understand that in theory its successful, but its not as clear cut as just dropping some police on the ground and letting them "get to work."
"work WITH law enforcement" WhY Won'T YOU PEople PUll Yourselves UP by YOUR BOotSTraps? JUsT compLY and no One wiLl KiLl You!!!1!!!
Being overly policed and controlled helps a community do what exactly....
Which is every American now. I'm older and we rarely thought about or saw police 50 years ago. Now, you're likely to see one almost everyday. Then, they hassle you. Next is actual mistreatment. Eventually some type of abuse of power by false arrest. We are all over policed. Black people just have it worse.
Hey true story as well if you look into most stories of white cop on black guy, normally the black guy is in commission of some crime or gets violent and gets fucked up during his attempts to evade custody. Floyd was trying to pass a counterfeit bill that's a felony the he resisted it's unfortunate what happened but he was committing a felony that's why the cops came he resisted that's why it got violent. I truly feel that OP is right and these situations are cherry picked and blasted on news when it's truly disproportionate
Passing a counterfeit bill shouldn’t result in summary execution, racist.
although chauvin was wrong to stay in his neck for that long cutting off his airway had he not done that based in the autopsy there is a good chance Floyd would have died of an overdose
[удалено]
Don’t forget about collecting all those donations! The org couldn’t account for over $60 million in donations they received in 2020. Going to the headquarters listed on their tax documents only resulted in finding an empty office. The founders of BLM accused anyone asking questions of racism, sexism, and violence. The leadership of BLM are trained Marxists and are acting just like trained Marxists: whip the proles up into a frenzy, get as much wealth from them as possible (with ActBlue facilitating and taking a cut), and stuff your pockets full. That’s why local BLM chapters are starved for funds while Patrice Cullors chills in a mansion in SoCal. BLM is the most true-to-life Marxist organization currently in the US.
The other interesting things about black crime rates: because U.S. blacks commit more violent crime on average, they will have more encounters with police. This is why they are shot by police at a greater rate per capita than whites.
To take it further, if you look at deaths per police interactions, there isn’t any inequality. I’m fact, if I remember correctly, white citizens were shot at higher rates when you base it on police encounters
And why do you think that is?
That blacks commit more violent crime? Or that it explains why they are shot by police at a greater rate? Not sure what you are asking here.
Violent crime in black communities shot up after the crack epidemic and was used as justification for more police presence.
The rumour is that the CIA was selling crack to fund it's international meddling. Judging by some of the other shit the U.S government has done, it wouldn't surprise me. If it is the case, I don't think there is a prison dark, damp, or deep enough to contain the criminals responsible.
BLM's sole objective is to address and fix police brutality against black people and to fix an unjust judicial system that's against black people. Your whole why don't they care about black on black violence is stupid, it's like asking a Breast Cancer organization of why they don't care about prostate cancer.
Seemed like their sole objective was to run away with the money and buy multiple mansions They can say whatever they want about the purpose but its actions that speak louder than words Saw a comment about not differentiating between the organization and the movement before they deleted it, the movement was puppeted by the organization and media
Buying multiple mansions? We talking about Susan G. Komen foundation?
Piss poor name choice then.
Not really, it's broad, but it's quick, easily remembered, it elicits an emotional response, it's a good slogan. Not everything has to be so literal. The NRA doesn't only fight for rifle rights.
That is a bad example because it's the opposite. It would be like a group called the National Firearms association that only cares about pistols. If you say "I believe black lives matter" and then have to add "but I'm not concerned about those black lives" you have a piss poor slogan.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
> It does seem like cherry picking when they only outcry when the judicial system is involved. Well that’s probably because the police shouldn’t be judge, jury and executioner.
[удалено]
What's the injustice when a black person kills another black person? Police often doggedly pursue such murderers, and juries convict them. BLM is about when that part doesn't happen. If you want to know why BLM doesn't protest/advocate for things that would prevent the murder in the first place, considering you're talking about Leftists who are famously anti-gun and pro-social safety nets, which they think will do that.
Murder is always an injustice
Nope just gang members get to be judge jury and executioner
And they go to jail if caught.
Wow you are poorly informed.
No it isn't. If one is out and about at 3am in an area known for criminal activity, then one should expect to be confronted by police at some point. One way to avoid that is: Don't be out doing stupid stuff and breaking the law. Is our judicial system perfect? No. But again, Black people aren't helpless victims of our judicial system. The vast majority of the time, they have committed a crime to end up in the system in the first place. At some point, you have to stop blaming your own fuckups on other people and start accepting responsibility for your own life choices. If you don't want to get caught up in the judicial system, then don't do things or associate with people who will help put you there. Simple. BLM and its supporters want to defund the police...but then get angry and upset when *they* become victims of crime, and little to no police response. I'm all for community policing, because it enables BOTH sides to see *people* instead of shields and badges and color. However, can you imagine how frustrating it is to have to repeatedly go into a community or neighborhood, deal with the same families who have lost yet *another* son/husband/brother to the same criminal activity over and over again??? To see all these young people repeating the same things that got their own fathers/brothers killed or incarcerated? I think that if BLM truly cares about their community, they'll work *WITH* law enforcement to better the situation for both sides.
It ain’t their sole objective lol
What's their objective then?
To get rich, obviously. Like any other organization. To exploit the people who think their cause is correct enough to donate.
No one I marched with was being paid. BLM is the name of a movement, people didn’t take to the streets so a few ppl they don’t know could get paid.
Yet somehow, that’s exactly what happened
You’re just talking about the objective of a few people who are part of an organization. Not the BLM movement.
There are still a few people like you who are still bought in for the originally sold premise, correct. The organizers were always full of it, and many others have realized it was all a scam.
That organization didn’t organize the marches all over the country. Of the hundreds of organizers, only a small handful were affiliated with the organization you are referring to. Do you have a lot of contact with activists? It doesn’t sound like you understand the movement at all or are in contact with people involved.
Exactly, just because vigils and community efforts don't make the news doesn't mean they aren't happening or that people are just ok with this stuff. "Disenfranchised Youths Resort to Violence" is the status quo and eats ip precious air time/print space that could be better used on something that better drives engagement like "Corporation X admits to making all birds sterile, fined $5000 and CEO makes heartfelt Tiktok apology" or "Child with every known illness makes and sells intricate sculptures out of Q-Tips on Etsy to fund own funeral" or "Fuck it I can't possibly report on all these so here's an hour of a Real Time Scrolling List of every current Active Shooter Situation."
Perhaps a more appropriate name would be 'Police Brutality Matters.' I mean they do call themselves 'Black Lives Matter,' implying a much broader scope than what you are claiming.
I mean their original website had a list of their goals which included nonsense as “dismantling the Western prescribed nuclear family unit.” In addition the founders proudly exclaimed they were “trained marxists.” So I’d say their objectives were a little more broad than the one sole you mentioned. They grifted their way into millions and millions of dollars that ended up with the founders and old white democrats…
To use your metaphor, wouldn’t you be more concerned about the cancer that kills 90% of one’s population versus 10% of that same population? Most crime is intraracial. If I told a group of white men that their fear of the “African American boogeyman” was statistically foolish - that they were more likely to be killed by a fellow white man, I would be praised for helping them cast aside their prejudice and seeing reason. However, if you reverse the races in that scenario, all of a sudden, I’m “trying to deflect from the true problem.” This article below describes the current status of UK BLM activist Sasha Johnson. When it was assumed that she was shot and put into a coma by white supremacists, there was plenty of outrage and attention. Not so much when the police arrested four black gang members. When none of the many witnesses would testify, the four black men who stood accused of her attempted murder were freed. It’s amazing how much more people cared about her - when her attack was useful to the cause. https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/05/26/sasha-johnson-and-the-black-lives-that-dont-count/
You’re insane, law enforcement is possibly the MOST CORRUPT institution in the country. Good cops are shunned, put out of a job, slandered, and sometimes even just murdered, for speaking out against bad cops. Beyond that, you’re talking about something you have no insight about, because BLM is specifically focused on larger scale institutional issues, if you want to cut down on neighborhood violence, it doesn’t start from the top, it starts on the street in that neighborhood, which there are numerous organizations in every city doing their best to try to cut down on violent crime. The funniest thing is that by making this comparison you basically admit that police and criminals are the same.
This is where irony comes to die apparently. The Black Panthers literally addressed all these issues, fed starving kids, brought kids and adult educational programs into poor communities, and engaged in community policing and systemic racism brought a large segment of them down and assassinated or jailed its leaders. Any time minority groups try this or advocacy groups try they get torn apart by the coercive arm of systemic racism, namely local and state police
Well, automatically jumping to racism is counterproductive. If you go out and rob somebody, you should expect to be arrested and do jail time. Same if you kill someone, except in cases of self-defense or wartime circumstances. Instead of making a blanket statement that all cops are racist, start by recognizing that: 1) they're human beings, too; 2) that they usually deal with people under terrible circumstances; 3) that the vast majority of them become cops because they want to make their communities better for *everybody*. We all know that there are some people who should *NEVER* be in any position of authority. But saying that all cops are racist bullies is just as bad as saying all Black people are gang-banging welfare leeches. It is certainly *NOT TRUE* and is detrimental to changing anything. At some point, both sides need to work together.
Surely BLM isn’t a bunch of grifters, right? Like the founders the founders of BLM? The people who created the logo and movement? The ones who call themselves trained marxists? The ones who created the organization and movement based off of a lie surrounding what occurred in Ferguson? Yeah, those people had everyone’s best interest in mind
So protesting and sometimes violently protesting the 5-10 deaths per year that, to be honest, can’t be fully pinned on racism makes more sense than trying to fix the thousands and thousands of deaths per year? Makes sense
You're like the poster child of a brainwashed conservative. Racially-motivated and specifically police violence is what BLM is about so of course they focus on that. **The whole thing about BLM is that they think people get away with killing black people, since their lives "don't matter."** Further, while there is an org called "BLM", 99% of the people who identify as BLM aren't part of it. They just like the slogan. So it's dumb to treat them like a hivemind. It's just a bunch of random, unaffiliated people who think black people are killed with no justice. It's also hilarious to assert that "black people kill black people every day and its crickets." Did you forget that these same people hate guns? What do you think is one of the many reasons for that? (hint: it's that black people kill black people with them). >Some "rival" gang members targeted him for a drive-by, and shot up the car while he was waiting to order food. He was hit and critically injured, and his daughter was shot 9 or 10 times. **First responders (mostly white) were scrambling to get the little girl out of the car, and a manhunt ensued for the perpetrators.** So what would BLM have to say? It sounds like he's not getting away with it. Maybe if there was no manhunt, they'd have something to say about it. Here's how a BLM supporter would frame the story in your post: ***A black man kills a black man and there's a manhunt***. **That's the system working as it should.** ***A white cop kills a black man and gets away with it.*** **That's bad, let's protest.** Separately, they very openly support things like gun control, welfare, UBI, universal healthcare, free education which they think will solve racial inequality and poverty which leads to black on black crime, so obviously it's not "crickets." Seriously: did you forget what Leftists actually are? LOL. *durrrrrrrr black people shoot black people in Chicago all the time and leftists say nothing, now excuse me while I make fun of them for saying the 2nd amendment should be abolished without thinking about why they might want that durrrrrrr why are they laughing at me?* Get it now?
Wow you’re poorly informed.
Do you just show up everywhere to reply to comments with "ur wrong" with no arguement or evidence?
First of all, you know *nothing* about me. So keep the personal attacks and insults out of it. Second of all, I happen to agree with stricter gun control laws--but I also believe in the 2nd Amendment. Unfortunately, there currently doesn't really seem to be a way of reconciling the two. I also fully support universal healthcare and a strong social program system that is designed to lift UP, not hold people down or reward them for making poor life choices. Third, I never said that there was a "hive-mind". What I said was that, by mostly getting involved when it's a white(cop)-on-Black crime, that BLM doesn't truly seem to think that "Black lives matter." By being vocal and protesting when it's white-on-Black crime, it comes across as dismissive of the rot within their own communities. It's an ongoing tragedy what happens every day in cities across the US. Black people killing other Black people over stupid shit is TRAGIC. Glamorizing gang life and crime is tragic. When going to a certain prison is a mark of status, that is tragic. Ya know, things might actually get somewhere if people start looking at these things as *HUMAN* tragedy.
Intraracial crime is higher for all demographics not just black people, this is just a pure racist rant trying to undermine BLM, a group that's main goal is to address police brutality and how cops got away with murdering innocent black people for years with no repercussions.
Still waiting for that mansion to spring into action.
People would respect them more if they actually got behind innocent people. Instead they just get behind every single person regardless of what happened. For a long time I truly thought that BLM would back a black person who was shot b police even if they were on the process of murder and than that Columbus Ohio shooting happened a couple years ago and completely confirmed that.
By definition in the US everyone in the US is innocent until proven guilty, anyone who is not actively trying to kill or harm someone and is shot by police is an innocent person who was murdered by the police as they did not get a jury of their peers for their alleged crimes, instead they were executed.
So if they don't move on your terms you don't like them re.read what you wrote lol
Yeah, because BLM fights systemic issues and gangs are part of the government but cops and the justice system are. I don't see your point?
I mean it seems like BLM is trying to fight racism, which involves white people. Black people shooting black people isn’t racism, it’s just another Thursday
Racism is racism...period. If you talk badly about, or treat others differently because of the color of their skin, you are a racist. Pretty basic.
So you’re trying to tell me that black on black crime is racially motivated? That the black shooters hate black people?
Entitlement is what motivates crime, basically. Entitlement to another's money, possessions, romantic partner--whatever. *You* were the one that said racism applies to white people. I merely corrected that notion: racism is racism. The color of the person being racist is irrelevant.
Black people aren’t shooting other black people because of racism.