Writing Forums

Writing Forums is a privately-owned, community managed writing environment. We provide an unlimited opportunity for writers and poets of all abilities, to share their work and communicate with other writers and creative artists. We offer an experience that is safe, welcoming and friendly, regardless of your level of participation, knowledge or skill. There are several opportunities for writers to exchange tips, engage in discussions about techniques, and grow in your craft. You can also participate in forum competitions that are exciting and helpful in building your skill level. There's so much more for you to explore!

The Problem With All Lives Matter vs X Lives Matter

Real quick...why does a group of people decide to walk down the street asking for rights? Because they feel they either have none, or that they are in some way adversely affected in a way that is beyond their direct control to remedy.

Recently there was a thing called Black Lives Matter. However, there have been many other types like this. Sometimes we don't like them. When the Klu Klux Klan have their rallies, or the Tea Party, or something of that sort, they all get maligned by the Press as being basically self-aware agencies in the world out for self promotion to the detriment of everyone else. There is some truth to this, but I think there is also a broad slander at work here. Like most of the topical social-justice themes (yes, All Lives Matter is as much a social justice theme as X Lives Matter), it relies on an instinctive recruitment of your sentiments and doesn't actually look into the actual problems or reasons behind the event.

Here's my take. When a people in the world ask for help by saying something like..."Think of the Filipinos" How bad is it that someone shouts back at them, "No, you're wrong. All people in the world matter, not just Filipinos." That's retarded. What you did was just drown out a person whose trying to speak up for themselves. If a woman tries to speak up for womans rights in the workplace, at home, or whatever by saying "Woman Matter Also" how stupid is it for someone to say, "No you're wrong. All people matter." Your child starving. Tough luck, Tommy. Children starving in Africa as well.

Am I getting somewhere with this?

People have legitimate grievances. There's not a person or group out there without a list of grievances. But this counter-call to X Lives Matter shuts it all down with something that doesn't even really mean anything. All Lives Matter. It sounds good, but that's not the reality. That's like telling a person being tortured, "Jesus Loves Everyone, Not Just You." Bitch, get me some help please.

The most insane problem about this topic is that the people who supposedly support "All Lives Matter" are the same people who are likely to support Freedom of Speech. Yet at no point do they realize that saying X Lives Matter is not saying that All Lives Don't Matter. It's saying that, hey, maybe you aren't aware (and many people typically aren't) of the kinds of injustices that we face on a day to day in small or big ways that affect our ability to prosper as citizens, let alone people. They are calling attention to their problems. It's called Public Advocacy. It's part of our system of representation, the basis of freedom and liberty and justice, not "just us". Men have done it. Women have done it. Native Americans have done it. And always, there's a group that rejects them and their claims as overblown or selfish or (unbelievably) greedy. At every point there is a considerable number of people- half the nation or more- that believes there is no problem and that these so-called maligned groups receive enough if not more than their share and that if they do have a problem, it's usually self-generated.

Is this a good argument in the case of All Lives vs X Lives?

TLDR: Saying All Lives Matter is like saying All Men Are Created Equal. Pretty words. But if the real world doesn't reflect that, it's just another injustice piled on those people who live in reality.

Comments

Any "lives matter" movement is retarded (unless you're currently a white South African or under threat from ISIS). "Other lives matter too" is the weakest counter-argument anybody can muster, and it definitely came from people who thought they were being humorous smart-asses. All they've done is be a disservice to people who have actual gripes with "lives matter" movements.

To me, a "lives matter" movement is really only appropriate when your people are being enslaved or genocided (new verb). Having your rights taken away based on the color of your skin. Subject to violence because of melanin levels. You know, whenever your life is in literal danger thanks to systemic racism. But then who are you protesting to? The very people who don't believe your lives matter? Lol.

There's a reason why first-wave feminists didn't use the slogan "female lives matter". Because nobody was saying their lives didn't matter. They'd take some responsibility and stop undermining themselves by asking Big Brother to do it for them.

The Black Lives Matter movement started thanks to a bunch of media stupidity, media cherrypicking, and a deliberate misrepresentation and misinterpretation of statistics. Their cause advocates for PRIVILEGES, not rights. If you want to draw attention to a specific injustice, you draw attention to that injustice. You don't make it about race, ironically something racists do (see: KKK). This shows a lack of intelligence on behalf of the people who can't distinguish the fact that racism is one facet in a multi-faceted problem, and that their issues do not automatically 100% of the time boil down to racism. They're delusional, self-victimizing, and nobody is under any obligation to entertain their delusions.

If the downtrodden blacks want to improve their situation and grow, they'd get the Democrats out of their cities, and tell them to take their free hand-outs with them.
 
Smith;bt11763 said:
The Black Lives Matter movement started thanks to a bunch of media stupidity, media cherrypicking, and a deliberate misrepresentation and misinterpretation of statistics. Their cause advocates for PRIVILEGES, not rights. If you want to draw attention to a specific injustice, you draw attention to that injustice. You don't make it about race. This shows a lack of intelligence on behalf of the people who can't distinguish the fact that racism is one facet in a multi-faceted problem, and that their issues do not automatically 100% of the time boil down to racism. They're delusional, and nobody is under any obligation to entertain their delusions.

This is quite a statement. Do you have any statistics or facts to back this claim?
 
Jack of all trades;bt11764 said:
This is quite a statement. Do you have any statistics or facts to back this claim?

You want me to prove to you that all of their problems don't boil down to a giant conspiracy of systemic racism, and that the problem - believe it or not - is actually far more complicated than what they purport it to be, and that racism is one small, exaggerated facet in a multi-faceted issue?

Or the part where they're asking for privileges, not rights?

While we're at it, should kamino drop some sources as well? I personally don't think he should; he set the tone for this discussion and I detect it to be one that isn't very academic but more layman. He threw up his opinion on the matter and there's mine. All opinions matter.

The last time you and I talked on my blog - and correct me if I'm wrong - you seemed to be getting frustrated for no reason, and half-way through said you didn't have the time, and weren't there to "chat". So I'm not going to waste my time with you again if that's how things will proceed here, too.

P.S. Let me also add that I'm not really here to get into a long, drawn out debate about this. I've ran circles around this subject with numerous people, and multiple times with Kamino, for better or for worse.
 
@ Kaminoshiyo - I’m inclined to agree. The sort of counterargument you talk about is a logical fallacy. But even so, it deserves examination in my view. Let’s first off agree that black lives matter. They do, and perhaps they warrant special mention simply because of the weight of history plus an ongoing host of contemporary injustices.

But let’s also agree for now that those issues are outside the scope of this blog and examine instead why people feel compelled to make these counterarguments. Are they too not being listened to or are they pushing some nasty agenda? Are they in need in some way or is this a power grab? If we give them the benefit of the doubt and give them a listen, might that diffuse their counterargument? If taking that stance can head off another Parkland shooting then it’s worth a tentative try. Unhappiness is unhappiness, and we should strive to mitigate it in every sector of society.
 
Smith;bt11765 said:
You want me to prove to you that all of their problems don't boil down to a giant conspiracy of systemic racism, and that the problem - believe it or not - is actually far more complicated than what they purport it to be, and that racism is one small, exaggerated facet in a multi-faceted issue?

Or the part where they're asking for privileges, not rights?

While we're at it, should kamino drop some sources as well? I personally don't think he should; he set the tone for this discussion and I detect it to be one that isn't very academic but more layman. He threw up his opinion on the matter and there's mine. All opinions matter.

The last time you and I talked on my blog - and correct me if I'm wrong - you seemed to be getting frustrated for no reason, and half-way through said you didn't have the time, and weren't there to "chat". So I'm not going to waste my time with you again if that's how things will proceed here, too.

P.S. Let me also add that I'm not really here to get into a long, drawn out debate about this. I've ran circles around this subject with numerous people, and multiple times with Kamino, for better or for worse.

I'm talking about the part where you claim they're asking for privileges. As for getting busy, it happens. I'm not responsible if you don't understand that.
 
And now we find out yesterday, it’s the
Russians!! Making trouble, creating conflict.
Yes, all lives matter...much of the notoriety
is to create an awareness of the problem/issue
and there’s so many... freezing animals, women’s
rights, gay rights, save the rainforest, pipelines,
save the ocean and on and on....
but we hear it so much and there’s not much
we can do sometimes, except agree, that we get
annoyed when we’re bombarded with the
repetition. So... pick your cause, choose one
or as many as you think you can handle and
dedicate some time... online petitions are free
or donate or rally etc... if you do something for
someone it may ease your frustration.
 
Smith;bt11763 said:
Any "lives matter" movement is retarded (unless you're currently a white South African or under threat from ISIS). "Other lives matter too" is the weakest counter-argument anybody can muster, and it definitely came from people who thought they were being humorous smart-asses. All they've done is be a disservice to people who have actual gripes with "lives matter" movements.

To me, a "lives matter" movement is really only appropriate when your people are being enslaved or genocided (new verb). Having your rights taken away based on the color of your skin. Subject to violence because of melanin levels. You know, whenever your life is in literal danger thanks to systemic racism. But then who are you protesting to? The very people who don't believe your lives matter? Lol.

I see what you mean, but I don't necessarily agree that a persons life has to be in danger in order for them to have a legitimate reason to protest. Things like "separate but equal" do not place a persons life in danger, but they should be protested. Things like police harassment of a specific group of people can be dangerous.

Also...most people protest to their abusers. The American's protested against the English...as did the Indians (both types, lol). But they aren't exclusively protesting to these people. The movement is designed to bring awareness on a larger scale, promote unity or solidarity, but not simply to protest.

There's a reason why first-wave feminists didn't use the slogan "female lives matter". Because nobody was saying their lives didn't matter. They'd take some responsibility and stop undermining themselves by asking Big Brother to do it for them.

Probably because women have a different situation than Black people. Besides. Indon’t think BLM is saying Black people have no responsibility in their problems. Thats probably your add-on.

The Black Lives Matter movement started thanks to a bunch of media stupidity, media cherrypicking, and a deliberate misrepresentation and misinterpretation of statistics. Their cause advocates for PRIVILEGES, not rights. If you want to draw attention to a specific injustice, you draw attention to that injustice. You don't make it about race, ironically something racists do (see: KKK). This shows a lack of intelligence on behalf of the people who can't distinguish the fact that racism is one facet in a multi-faceted problem, and that their issues do not automatically 100% of the time boil down to racism. They're delusional, self-victimizing, and nobody is under any obligation to entertain their delusions.

If the downtrodden blacks want to improve their situation and grow, they'd get the Democrats out of their cities, and tell them to take their free hand-outs with them.

This is a little more complicated, but I'll start by saying I don't support the BLM, itself. I support the issues it claims to lobby, but I think it's a bull-crap organization that's not run by a sincere group of people actually representing the grievances of Black people- which I find mostly legitimate. I think many such organizations are prone to corruption and ideological drift.

I guess my main point is that I stopped having a knee-jerk reaction to things like KKK, BLM, feminists, etc. Granted, I find issue with many things that each one says, but I realize that these are only products of how people are attempting to address core issues. Legitimate issues. I think the Republican and Democrat parties, themselves, are highly corrupt institutions which people support in a poor attempt to address legitimate issues. Some of the BLM's grievances and solutions are very legitimate to me. Police are unregulated, have corruption issues, and tend to target minorities more than necessary.

As for fixes, I don’t have any informed suggestions. It’s a problem with a lot of parts. I don’t want to go the way of offering up simplistic, tone-deaf solutions like election-time politicians
 
Smith;bt11765 said:
While we're at it, should kamino drop some sources as well? I personally don't think he should; he set the tone for this discussion and I detect it to be one that isn't very academic but more layman. He threw up his opinion on the matter and there's mine. All opinions matter.

Hm. “Facts” are so ambiguous. Everyone has their own set...

What facts do you want, exactly?
 
kaminoshiyo;bt11783 said:
I see what you mean, but I don't necessarily agree that a persons life has to be in danger in order for them to have a legitimate reason to protest. Things like "separate but equal" do not place a persons life in danger, but they should be protested. Things like police harassment of a specific group of people can be dangerous.

I agree that a person's life doesn't have to be in danger in order to legitimately protest. I was only referring to the "lives matter" vein. If you're going to protest about the examples you gave (police, separate but equal) then you make it clearly about those things, and you don't use some ambiguous mob under the banner of a skin color as your political vehicle.

As a caveat, it would've been unavoidable to refer to race in cases like the civil rights movement, slavery, etc. We're not talking about that though.

Probably because women have a different situation than Black people. Besides. Indon’t think BLM is saying Black people have no responsibility in their problems. Thats probably your add-on.

There are similarities as there are differences. Both groups had to fight for their right to vote.

Regarding the rest, I can only refer you to this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg0rTlq0u7A&t=68s

It may start a few minutes in. If so, just restart from the beginning when you have the time. But rest assured I'm not adding anything when I say the kettle is black. The horse speaks for itself.

This is a little more complicated, but I'll start by saying I don't support the BLM, itself. I support the issues it claims to lobby, but I think it's a bull-crap organization that's not run by a sincere group of people actually representing the grievances of Black people- which I find mostly legitimate. I think many such organizations are prone to corruption and ideological drift.

Fair enough. I more or less agree, depending on exactly what you mean by "the issues it claims to lobby".

I guess my main point is that I stopped having a knee-jerk reaction to things like KKK, BLM, feminists, etc. Granted, I find issue with many things that each one says, but I realize that these are only products of how people are attempting to address core issues. Legitimate issues. I think the Republican and Democrat parties, themselves, are highly corrupt institutions which people support in a poor attempt to address legitimate issues. Some of the BLM's grievances and solutions are very legitimate to me. Police are unregulated, have corruption issues, and tend to target minorities more than necessary.

I mostly stopped as well. Modern feminists and the rest of those groups are low hanging for me at this point, and the bigger fish to fry are the psychological and philosophical roots. I still reach up to grab a ripe snack from time to time though.

The two-party system needs to go. No question there. Washington said it'd be bad. Pretty sure Lincoln said the same thing. People should lobby to change it in a way that isn't hi-jacked by race or genitals.

Police are not "unregulated". Whether they need additional regulations or something is a different question.

"Tend to target minorities more than necessary" is couched in a relative qualifier that I'd like to avoid. People need to look at the actual reasons as to why a police force would target a minority more than other groups including other minorities, and not just in the ex-slavery Bible Belt but all across the country, including liberal and supposedly progressive states. It isn't a coincidence. One needs to look at the kind of areas this is happening in (Democrats). And one needs to understand that it doesn't boil down to racism.

Corruption happens in any system or structure. It happens with or without humans, too. None of which is to say we shouldn't do anything about it, but there's a reason why we have the saying "the cure is worse than the disease", which is a perfect description for the kind of society we live in. We live in a pharmaceutical commercial. You cannot create utopia, and in trying to do so you will inevitably begin sliding down the other side of the metaphorical bell curve toward dystopia.

You have to actually do the research yourself (not literally you, kamino; just in general). What you see on the news or even read about online - depending on your sources - are often not honest interpretations or representations of the actual issue. Obviously the only thing they'll ever report are the times when a cop commits a crime, and they'll rarely if ever mention anything good about the police, because that's what fits their narrative.

In the same way, you won't hear about a cop committing murder if the victim was white. This is because they want to racialize the issue. I'm not interested in that bullshit. I have better things to do than make it about race. Cops shouldn't be committing murder, period, and that's the only thing I care about. Doesn't matter who they murdered. This skin color stuff is designed to distract everybody from the real issue at hand (albeit an issue that statistically does not occur very often), divide people and prevent them from working together to solve the problem.

kaminoshiyo;bt11785 said:
Hm. “Facts” are so ambiguous. Everyone has their own set...

What facts do you want, exactly?

No, you're fine. Your arguments are easy to understand and make sense, and I'm so familiar with the subject that I know what you're talking about. I was asked by somebody else to provide evidence for my claims, and I was simply saying that you didn't provide evidence for yours, and that the conversation was therefore going to have a more layman atmosphere, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I'm not saying there's no such thing as facts, and I'll fight any idiotic, cynical postmodernist on those grounds. Facts are parts of a whole truth. They're useful when you have all of them, and not your own "set" as you say.
 
Smith;bt11788 said:
I agree that a person's life doesn't have to be in danger in order to legitimately protest. I was only referring to the "lives matter" vein. If you're going to protest about the examples you gave (police, separate but equal) then you make it clearly about those things, and you don't use some ambiguous mob under the banner of a skin color as your political vehicle.

As a caveat, it would've been unavoidable to refer to race in cases like the civil rights movement, slavery, etc. We're not talking about that though.[\QUOTE]

Agreed.

Police are not "unregulated". Whether they need additional regulations or something is a different question.

"Tend to target minorities more than necessary" is couched in a relative qualifier that I'd like to avoid. People need to look at the actual reasons as to why a police force would target a minority more than other groups including other minorities, and not just in the ex-slavery Bible Belt but all across the country, including liberal and supposedly progressive states. It isn't a coincidence. One needs to look at the kind of areas this is happening in (Democrats). And one needs to understand that it doesn't boil down to racism.
I think there should be a separation between suspecting an individual on the grounds of direct evidence linking them to a crime, and suspecting an entire neighborhood, group, or people based on the actions of anpart of that group. In the same way I don’t want to be treated like a potential rapist because I happen to be a college male, I don’t want to see people stopped and frisked simply because they happened to be a minority in the vicinity of a crime or in a particular neighborhood. If pursuing the law means violating the rights of innocent people based solely on suspicion and correlation what’s the point?

Corruption happens in any system or structure. It happens with or without humans, too. None of which is to say we shouldn't do anything about it, but there's a reason why we have the saying "the cure is worse than the disease", which is a perfect description for the kind of society we live in. We live in a pharmaceutical commercial. You cannot create utopia, and in trying to do so you will inevitably begin sliding down the other side of the metaphorical bell curve toward dystopia.

You have to actually do the research yourself (not literally you, kamino; just in general). What you see on the news or even read about online - depending on your sources - are often not honest interpretations or representations of the actual issue. Obviously the only thing they'll ever report are the times when a cop commits a crime, and they'll rarely if ever mention anything good about the police, because that's what fits their narrative.

In the same way, you won't hear about a cop committing murder if the victim was white. This is because they want to racialize the issue. I'm not interested in that bullshit. I have better things to do than make it about race. Cops shouldn't be committing murder, period, and that's the only thing I care about. Doesn't matter who they murdered. This skin color stuff is designed to distract everybody from the real issue at hand (albeit an issue that statistically does not occur very often), divide people and prevent them from working together to solve the problem.

I agree. Even though I think a considerable number of these issues does have elements racism in it I always felt the proper method should be to prosecute the behavior alone. Racism drags the issue into this quagmire where peoples bias automatically makes them choose sides without respect to reality. The Angel Martin (trayvon) thing or the angelic, faultless police are both absurd arguments.
 
kaminoshiyo;bt11792 said:
I think there should be a separation between suspecting an individual on the grounds of direct evidence linking them to a crime, and suspecting an entire neighborhood, group, or people based on the actions of anpart of that group. In the same way I don’t want to be treated like a potential rapist because I happen to be a college male, I don’t want to see people stopped and frisked simply because they happened to be a minority in the vicinity of a crime or in a particular neighborhood. If pursuing the law means violating the rights of innocent people based solely on suspicion and correlation what’s the point?

The college rape thing is a whole different can of worms. The 1/5 statistic is a myth in the same way the 70 cents on the dollar is a myth.

---

What if the murderer was last seen driving a white 2016 Escalade? I think cops in the immediate area, as well as the surrounding areas, have every right to pull over any and all white Escalades. And if you or me drive a white Escalade, too bad so sad. It's an inconvenience.

Tinted windows didn't just become illegal because cops couldn't see into the vehicle. They become illegal because the people who were using them would shoot the cop as he approached during a traffic stop. This began to build an association and connotation where tinted windows were no longer seen as a way to keep your car cool, or make it easier for the driver to see during the day time. Instead it was associated with criminal culture.

I'm not a criminal. But I have tinted windows on my car and so I'm potentially put into that category by any police officer who sees my car. In the same way gangsters dress a certain way and that will draw attention from police, or tattoos say something about an individual. It's prejudice, but prejudice isn't always the enemy it's made out to be. Instead of fighting it, I got myself a prescription from my eye doctor for my tinted windows, and I roll BOTH of the driver side windows completely down when the officer steps out of their vehicle. So far so good; haven't received a ticket for them, knock on wood.

Some cops might profile based on race, but many of them profile behaviors. And if those behaviors are more prevalent in a certain race (whether it's learned behavior or biology), then that's too bad. Don't loiter on street corners, and don't dress like you're in a gang.

I watch police shows where they have cameramen follow the cops around, like Live PD. On average in my viewing experience, the blacks are more prone to mistreat the officers, be uncooperative, and don't know how to shut their big mouth, and they bring it upon themselves when they get handcuffed. And while they get cuffed, what do they do? They resist while simultaneously claiming they aren't resisting. The cop then has to use force in order to cuff the individual and then they try to play to the camera- "Stop hurting me! Oh my Gawd! I dindu nuffin!"

It's obnoxious to watch, and it happens over and over and over again. It's a problem in the black community. I'm sure economic status is a factor, as you tend to see similar behavior with a person of any color who comes from those environments.

Black people need to take personal responsibility for their cultural problems and their neighborhoods, just like any other group of people. They can start by not calling successful blacks "Uncle Toms" when they leave the bad areas and actually make something of their lives. And they can try the whole "family unit" thing, which due to appalling stupidity is now being shunned in white suburbia because "muh womenz was uppressed in 1950, so Leave it to Beaver must be destroid". The government needs to stop subsidizing single parent households, and blacks in those areas need to stop asking for handouts with their ballot.
 
Smith;bt11807 said:
The college rape thing is a whole different can of worms. The 1/5 statistic is a myth in the same way the 70 cents on the dollar is a myth.

Laws get written based on myths. People go to war based on myths. Now that i think about, a lie is like a bit of magic isn't it? An unreal thing that can affect reality.

What if the murderer was last seen driving a white 2016 Escalade? I think cops in the immediate area, as well as the surrounding areas, have every right to pull over any and all white Escalades. And if you or me drive a white Escalade, too bad so sad. It's an inconvenience.

Tinted windows didn't just become illegal because cops couldn't see into the vehicle. They become illegal because the people who were using them would shoot the cop as he approached during a traffic stop. This began to build an association and connotation where tinted windows were no longer seen as a way to keep your car cool, or make it easier for the driver to see during the day time. Instead it was associated with criminal culture.

I'm not a criminal. But I have tinted windows on my car and so I'm potentially put into that category by any police officer who sees my car. In the same way gangsters dress a certain way and that will draw attention from police, or tattoos say something about an individual. It's prejudice, but prejudice isn't always the enemy it's made out to be. Instead of fighting it, I got myself a prescription from my eye doctor for my tinted windows, and I roll BOTH of the driver side windows completely down when the officer steps out of their vehicle. So far so good; haven't received a ticket for them, knock on wood.

This is kinda what scares me because this sort of legal creep (i don't have better wording...) is how rights get eroded little by little. I'm wondering how many cops were shot to necessitate this garnishing of legal rights? I can understand outlawing something that is directly threatening, but tinted windows...? You might as well outlaw guns while you're at it. That's seems like a bigger threat than tinted windows.

Some cops might profile based on race, but many of them profile behaviors. And if those behaviors are more prevalent in a certain race (whether it's learned behavior or biology), then that's too bad. Don't loiter on street corners, and don't dress like you're in a gang.

No. Absolutely not, Smith. You can't tell people they can't stand on a corner in their neighborhood. You can't tell people not to dress a certain way because that's how "criminals dress". Does it occur that criminals might be dressing like normal people? I don't find what I would call "soft profiling" a crime- like police hanging around and area where they think crime might occur. If it doesn't present any undue obstruction to the community be my guest as far as I'm concerned. But when your pulling people over because their standing around their neighborhood or dressing a certain way- even if it was like a freaking banger from "The Warriors", that's wrong. "Evidence-based" determinations of guilt is supposed to be the benchmark. You ease up and that's where you start further and further eroding peoples liberties based more and more on fear, paranoia, and assumptions.

I watch police shows where they have cameramen follow the cops around, like Live PD. On average in my viewing experience, the blacks are more prone to mistreat the officers, be uncooperative, and don't know how to shut their big mouth, and they bring it upon themselves when they get handcuffed. And while they get cuffed, what do they do? They resist while simultaneously claiming they aren't resisting. The cop then has to use force in order to cuff the individual and then they try to play to the camera- "Stop hurting me! Oh my Gawd! I dindu nuffin!"

It's obnoxious to watch, and it happens over and over and over again. It's a problem in the black community. I'm sure economic status is a factor, as you tend to see similar behavior with a person of any color who comes from those environments.

Yeah? And how many times do these cop shows show you a cop beating the crap out of someone? Soliciting sex from a "suspect"- guilty or not? Planting evidence? Provoking violent reactions from suspects? Running drugs and weapons? Pulling people over for the laughs, because they're bored, because they look sexy? Television is not reality. Cops deal with assholes. I get it. Yes, they have a hard time, but that's no excuse to excuse them any sort of behavior. That's supposed to be were their lauded professionalism comes in. They sign up for the job. They know the conditions. If they don't like it, quit, because they're not suited to the job. But their rising frustrations with criminals shouldn't be something everyone else pays for.

Black people need to take personal responsibility for their cultural problems and their neighborhoods, just like any other group of people. They can start by not calling successful blacks "Uncle Toms" when they leave the bad areas and actually make something of their lives. And they can try the whole "family unit" thing, which due to appalling stupidity is now being shunned in white suburbia because "muh womenz was uppressed in 1950, so Leave it to Beaver must be destroid". The government needs to stop subsidizing single parent households, and blacks in those areas need to stop asking for handouts with their ballot.

Do all Black people call successful Blacks "Uncle Toms", Smith? Do all Black people talk like that, Smith? I'm beginning to see that people who so often seem to think they understand Black culture have this minstrel interpretation of it- or that it's even a singular thing. "Thug culture" right? Kids dancing to devil-worshipping music and deifying people like Scarface and Al Capone as heroes? They dress in weird, spiked clothes and do drugs, and have no respect for police. Police being shot occurs, but with all the recent buzz I'm kinda wondering what sort of behavior leads up to this shooting. Are police over agressive and/or scaring the crap out of them? Do these people have the notion that they have a good chance of dying- guilty or not guilty- submissive or non-submissive? It's not an apology, I'm really wondering because the views seem a little one-sided. No citizen can police their neighborhood, that's ridiculous. At the very least, that's endangering them and opening themselves up for legal reprisal.

I'm not saying that there is no responsibility at all either. I really agree with you that there needs to be responsibility taken by a people, but I'm betting you do not understand the presence of an armed force with a corrosive attitude towards people like you moving around your neighborhood. People who treat you like criminals and animals. Call you animals to one another. It's not thee reason for the bad things that happen there, but it's a good reason why things won't change. Look up Ferguson and the investigation the FBI did their. That shooting wasn't isolated. They found that not only was there widespread racism with the police, but racism community wide up through the administrative level, leading to firings and resignations. The bad cannot be allowed to use the good they do as shields from criticism and because they are rarely held to account things like this happen, and only because of the recent availability of portable cameras do we get to see another side to the story than that of your typical cop program and it's Knights of the Night narrative.
 
Also, I've been pulled over and searched- had my pockets turned inside out- in the city of Norfolk, not very far from base, after showing the cops my Military ID card. They just rode up, shone a light in my face, searched me, and then told me I looked like a suspect before driving off. That was it.

I was on leave and in NYC I was stopped again. This time it was broad daylight in a residential area that was middle-class. Four plain clothes police officers stopped drove up, all got out of the car, stopped me, asked me for ID, asked me what I was doing, asked for my military ID, joked about my picture, and then drove off.

I can tell you, you don't feel real good about much of anything in those periods. You certainly don't suffer from some of the delusions of nobility and exceptionalism that others have.
 
kaminoshiyo;bt11812 said:
This is kinda what scares me because this sort of legal creep (i don't have better wording...) is how rights get eroded little by little. I'm wondering how many cops were shot to necessitate this garnishing of legal rights? I can understand outlawing something that is directly threatening, but tinted windows...? You might as well outlaw guns while you're at it. That's seems like a bigger threat than tinted windows.

Well, the laws vary state to state, and they're typically more nuanced than "any tinting on your windows is illegal". You can have full tint on certain windows, and on your driver windows you can have the top three inches or something. I don't remember them exactly but you get the point.

I don't know if it's a legal right. Driving itself is more of a privilege than anything. But in any case, it hasn't stopped me from doing what I want. So many people have tinted windows that the cops wouldn't be able to do their jobs if that's all they pulled you over for. I've only been pulled over ONCE for my tinted windows by a State Trooper. I treated him respectfully, showed him my prescription and I was good to go.

State Troopers have always been the best in my experience. The most professional.

No. Absolutely not, Smith. You can't tell people they can't stand on a corner in their neighborhood.

That's not what I said. You can stand there. But if that's a common drug dealing spot at noon on the weekends or a place for hookers at midnight on weekdays, then sucks to suck. The cop has a legitimate reason to inquire why you're there, and ask who you are. And if you answer his questions and provide ID, you'll be good to go. It's really that simple.

You can't tell people not to dress a certain way because that's how "criminals dress".

I didn't say it was illegal to dress a certain way. I said that how you dress is reflective of your culture (among many other things) and who you are as an individual. People like to deny this when convenient. One's dress is a form of self-expression, unless you're so poor that you're living on the street and will literally wear anything to stay warm.

Don't wear gang colors in a gang's neighborhood. Cops know what they are. And have some decency by wearing pants at least *near* your waist, which would be a large improvement from around your ankles.

"Evidence-based" determinations of guilt is supposed to be the benchmark.

I didn't say anything about being guilty.

Yeah? And how many times do these cop shows show you a cop beating the crap out of someone? Soliciting sex from a "suspect"- guilty or not? Planting evidence? Provoking violent reactions from suspects? Running drugs and weapons? Pulling people over for the laughs, because they're bored, because they look sexy? Television is not reality.

Television isn't a *complete representation* of reality is what you meant to say, in the same way CNN or Fox often don't give the *full story*. Nothing you described is a complete representation of reality, let alone happens very often.

Cops deal with assholes. I get it. Yes, they have a hard time, but that's no excuse to excuse them any sort of behavior.

I agree. I didn't say it was a justification for bad behavior.

That's supposed to be were their lauded professionalism comes in. They sign up for the job. They know the conditions. If they don't like it, quit, because they're not suited to the job.

In a city like Detroit, you're not going to get lauded professionals. You get people who go through their three month academy program and then they're out there doing things that police officers do.

Why?

Because nobody wants to work in a shitty place like Detroit, with terrible pay, and a high chance that you're going to get yourself shot every other traffic stop. They can't get people with college degrees, because by having a college degree means that you can work literally anywhere else. If you have a bachelor's in the state of Michigan, you can become a State Trooper.

So, Detroit takes applicants who need nothing more than a high-school diploma / GED in terms of education. And you can be 18, whereas most departments it's 21.

Detroit has response times of 45 minutes. That's because the dangerous criminals are usually gone by then and it's safe to investigate the scene with their undermanned, underpaid, undertrained police force.

Most of their applicants are Detroit residents, born and raised. That's the type of people you're getting for your police department.

Do all Black people call successful Blacks "Uncle Toms", Smith? Do all Black people talk like that, Smith?

Lol, you know I didn't say that.

I'm beginning to see that people who so often seem to think they understand Black culture have this minstrel interpretation of it- or that it's even a singular thing. "Thug culture" right? Kids dancing to devil-worshipping music and deifying people like Scarface and Al Capone as heroes? They dress in weird, spiked clothes and do drugs, and have no respect for police.

Maybe the last two, but not the rest. Devil-worshipping music and spiked clothes are associated with punk and metal music.

Police being shot occurs, but with all the recent buzz I'm kinda wondering what sort of behavior leads up to this shooting. Are police over agressive and/or scaring the crap out of them? Do these people have the notion that they have a good chance of dying- guilty or not guilty- submissive or non-submissive? It's not an apology, I'm really wondering because the views seem a little one-sided. No citizen can police their neighborhood, that's ridiculous. At the very least, that's endangering them and opening themselves up for legal reprisal.

The views seem one-sided to me, except going the other way. You never hear anything positive about police on the news. But you'll sure as Hell hear about the minuscule amounts of the bad.

I didn't say people should police their neighborhood.

People try to drive away from the police, hop fences, hide, and their excuse is always "I was scared mayne". Scared of what? Lights?

No. Scared of getting caught.

I'm not saying that there is no responsibility at all either. I really agree with you that there needs to be responsibility taken by a people, but I'm betting you do not understand the presence of an armed force with a corrosive attitude towards people like you moving around your neighborhood. People who treat you like criminals and animals. Call you animals to one another.

You're talking about the police in absolutes. I won't bite.

Yep, people need to take responsibility for the serious problems in their culture instead of trying to normalize them, and instead of asking the government to subsidize them.

[video=youtube;hEhUP4097JM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEhUP4097JM[/video]
 
kaminoshiyo;bt11813 said:
Also, I've been pulled over and searched- had my pockets turned inside out- in the city of Norfolk, not very far from base, after showing the cops my Military ID card. They just rode up, shone a light in my face, searched me, and then told me I looked like a suspect before driving off. That was it.

I don't understand how you could've been pulled over after showing the cops your Military ID. I mean that from a chronological point of view (they ask you for your ID after they pull you over).

Well, if you look like a suspect then you look like a suspect.

I was on leave and in NYC I was stopped again. This time it was broad daylight in a residential area that was middle-class. Four plain clothes police officers stopped drove up, all got out of the car, stopped me, asked me for ID, asked me what I was doing, asked for my military ID, joked about my picture, and then drove off.

I can tell you, you don't feel real good about much of anything in those periods. You certainly don't suffer from some of the delusions of nobility and exceptionalism that others have.

As for this instance, I can't explain (I wasn't there, and the officers didn't tell you), but I'm not going to assume malevolence.

---

I've been pulled over for having snow on my car. Got a ticket because my rear window was obstructed. Doesn't really make sense because people pulling trailers or semi-truck drivers don't have a rear window that isn't obstructed.

Oh well. Now I know to take the 10 extra seconds to clear my back window.

At the local, annual festival we have in our town, there was an arts and crafts show on the grounds of an elementary school. Me and 5-6 of my buddies were going to walk through the show (it was closed) to get to the other side.

This bitch of a cop made a huge scene, saying we were trespassing. My friend Nick yelled "Hail Satan!" as we were now walking around the outside of the show to get to where we wanted to go, and she yelled at us to stop. She's probably 100 pounds overweight and she came slowly over in her golf-cart (which was hilarious).

She said shit like, "See this badge? See this gun?" Obviously her point was to say "I'm a cop, and you're being punk kids by disrespecting me." She didn't mean for the gun comment to be a threat, but it easily could've been interpreted that way.

Anyway she actually let us go after that and said we were absolutely not to come back to that side of the school grounds (where the art show was). But Nick did it anyway about an hour later when he needed to use one of the portable toilets. And, of course, got himself detained.

She told the rest of us to go over there and we did as we were told. Another cop came FLYING into the parking lot at mach-speed, slams on the breaks, throws it into park, and without even closing his door comes sprinting over. Some bald headed fuck who looked and acted like he was on crack.

He asks my friend, "What's in the bag?"

"Uh, a bottle of pop, some chips and candy."

"Oh yeah? Let me see."

*pulls out a bottle of pop, some chips and candy*

The whole ordeal was ridiculous. We went to the police department, politely made a complaint, and went about our day.

Years later it's just become a funny story to describe how our town's police has nothing better to do. And that if you don't want to get in trouble, you just treat the cops with respect and follow the law. Which means when you're trespassing and have been sternly warned (which they're not required to do, by the way), you don't trespass there an hour later. She had orders from the chief of police and she was enforcing them and doing her job, even though she's a total bitch.

The type of bitch who will pull your friend's dad over on a hot summer day with a Dairy Queen ice-cream cone in hand for his son, and take so God damn long that the cone has literally melted all over his hand (yes, this actually happened lol).
 
See the person first, get to know them. Their skin color should be the last thing you notice.
Conversely, be a person first. Promoting grievances creates divides where there need not be any.
 
Winston;bt11836 said:
See the person first, get to know them. Their skin color should be the last thing you notice.
Conversely, be a person first. Promoting grievances creates divides where there need not be any.

That's very true. Unfortunately, I think some people don't get to see the person or the people, so they rely on hearsay. Most people never set foot outside of their hometown, let alone the state, let alone the country. But most of these people would believe they have a decent grasp of world-politics or the situation in areas within the country or in the world. They rely on hearsay.
 
/\ Agreed. That's why I stressed the word "person". Over-identifying with being a member of a group, any group, diminishes who we are individually.
It does not matter whether that group is BLM, NRA, or Antifa. When one is not a member of YOUR group, they become less of a person. Or even a non-person.
This is of course true with provincialism, where simply being from a certain area carries pre-judgment.
Much of this nonsense can be avoided by simply talking to people as a person. And not relying on the bias filter of any group. Including the media.
 

Blog entry information

Author
kaminoshiyo
Views
102
Comments
18
Last update

More entries in Creative Writing 101

Top