I don't believe that this had anything at all to do with Micah Johnson's actions. We know now that he had been planning some action against the police for some time. He was hell bent on attacking the police no matter what. He used the BLM demonstration because it conveniently offered him the opportunity to attack a large group of police officers in one place. Folks are blaming the BLM movement because they don't like their message because it involves black resistance to unjust police practices. That's an entirely different conversation from what happened here in Dallas. What Johnson did was no different from what Charles Whitman did back in 1966 only this time his actions were directed at police officers. With all of the guns and the easy access to them, we've always been vulnerable to an attack of this sort by a deranged lone gunman. Johnson was not the first and sadly, won't be the last - merely the latest in a long line.
You seem to assume the only grievances of BLM are the handful of anecdotes that catalyze protests. It's not Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, etc that people are upset about. It's the million and one small daily injustices that create the atmosphere of distrust. It doesn't matter, for example, if Michael Brown didn't have his hands up. Hands Up Don't Shoot is evocative because it speaks more generally to the police proposition that all blacks need to put their trust in cops (don't shoot) when cops have no trust in them (hands up). These shooting events have been useful to BLM to galvanize participation, to have an anchor to motivate some action. But, they are not the reason BLM exists. If there was a dozen of unjust shootings on Youtube but no widespread shared experience of persecution, there'd be no movement. BLM detractors wonder rhetorically why there are no protests when a white person is unfairly shot by law enforcement; the reason why is that the real driver, persecution by police, is not widely experienced by whites. Conservatives are too quick to look at Michael Brown and say that's a flimsy case and dismiss BLM altogether without examining why people are actually upset. Do you assume, really, that millions of black people are just being irrational? They may not be shared. But the leadership of legitimate leaders should be given respect, at least. You disagree with the direction he wants to take the country, which is your right. But, it strikes me as ridiculous to say the president is acting inappropriately by providing leadership on important issues of the day. It is his place to tell you what he thinks about race relations in our country. It really takes two to tango. If everyone responded to BLM by saying "you're right, we need to change!" you'd probably see fewer people get frustrated and despair of justice. But, instead they see white people say BLM is a racist movement, that blacks protesting for their rights are inciting violence and hatred. They see people say they have a persecution complex and that the injustices that complain about are not real. The reaction contributes every bit as much to the atmosphere as anything BLM can do.
I don't like to go 70 and run over small town folk either. I generally go a little bit slower on open country freeways for fear of stupid deer more than anything. I also use cruise control whenever I can. I frequently go to Lampasas as I have friends there but it amazes me how if I wanted I could go 80+ down 183 which is a 70 mph zone mostly and get away with it but once I get near a small town and I'm over 1 or 2 miles the speed limit, I'm a threat. Okay. There's other ways of generating tax dollars than having speed traps to get someone that lives in a big city and doesn't have the time to drive to middle of nowhere Texas to attend a court hearing to contest it. That's not the really the point of this thread. I'm just saying I miss the days of complaining over shady antics like that then more criminally nefarious antics that have been surfacing in the media from both citizens and law enforcement.
Explicit quotes from this 'race lecture' that might have offended the Dallas PD that was there? Also, since it would be the Dallas PD that has the actual right to be offended instead of the faux purely political outrage in this thread, find a quote of a Dallas officer stating that the speech was offensive. They should determine that, not you. They are the ones who lost brothers in arms, not you. WHY CAN'T ANYONE JUST GIVE A DAMN QUOTE ON WHY THE SPEECH WAS 'CLASSLESS'? WHY IS IT SO DIFFICULT?
No you don't have to. You just have to react without much thoughts and consideration. BLM has some violence toward cops; shooter targeted white cops; BLM to be blamed. I'm trying to said, each person need to look inside and take responsibility for their own reactions. That's a bigger problem than factual data. It really doesn't matter so much that the sniper had nothing to do with BLM. That's the real issue. I agree. I didn't said BLM is bad or what they fight for is bad. I don't generally agree with their tactics, but I do understand where they are generally coming from.
Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Sandra Bland and Alton Sterling would be prime examples of incidents where resisting arrest led down a path to death in 3 cases and arrest in Bland's From his perspective in the area where he patrols, I respect his opinion. I don't wonder, I know why. The left sold their consciences to get votes and toss out a never ending supply of crutches supporting every "grievance" valid or not. A little less crying wolf might go along way toward getting everyone to see it your way. Knee jerk reaction of vilifying the police as soon as an incident happens is what I am referring to and what you keep ignoring. Anyone can protest peacefully if they choose. The problem is a half ass ill thought out protest over an incident that later turns out was proven to be a justifiable act by law enforcement makes the protesters look foolish. No one is saying that there aren't incidents where the protesters would be protesting over a legitimate cause. It's just those are few and far between. How about looking at the incident objectively after hearing from both sides and then pass judgement?
And there in lies the problem. Apparently this is the Gestapo where any hints of resisting merits fatality. Eric Garner was selling single cigarettes. I don't care how much he was resisting. He waved his arms around for 3 seconds and then was pummeled to the ground and was in a choke hold just because of ****ing LOOSIES and you expect people not to be irked by that? The Gestapo will murder if there are any hints of resisting. A first world republic that values human's rights OUGHT TO NOT MURDER ITS CIVILIANS BECAUSE THEY 'RESIST'.
I think the KKK are vile, disgusting and shameless people. I would say those aren't peaceful rallies either. There's no legitimate rational thought behind that group either. It's just a hateful selfish inhuman agenda by a bunch of dumbasses. BLM is a disorganized mess right now that is spinning out of control. If they truly want to make a difference they need to get their **** together and expand the effort past officer related shooting if the lives of black people do matter to them. And yes, if you do use that type of hate speech and violence breaks out, it's not a peaceful rally.
I'll break my disregard. Why try to compare what happened to Eric Garner or someone like Walter Scott with what happened to Alton Sterling? Neither Garner nor Scott had guns or attempted to take an officer's gun.
And that's a big part of the problem. So often people have jumped at any opportunity to take to the streets and protest even when things are happening the way they are supposed to happen. At this point the BLM movement has no credibility whatsoever because of how stupid they've made themselves look in the past.....and they're still at it when it comes to the Alton Sterling incident. When the lack of a legitimate cause isn't enough to slow people down, it's evidence that their stated goals aren't their real goals.
I do feel the policeman that put the choke hold on Garner should go to jail. My point was that Garner broke the law by resisting arrest and it led down a path where force had to be applied. That matter hasn't been closed yet and if it is closed without charges, I share your outrage. But that outrage is confined to that incident not universally applied as the norm to every encounter a black person has with the police. If it comes out that the Police were wrong in the latest 2 cases then I want the police prosecuted there as well. Having gone through an incident involving a family member literally not having a voice being the victim of a criminal act, I know how frustratingly slow the judicial process is. The criminal has rights and frankly what I wanted to happen to the criminal had nothing to do with what the government decided to do with him. I didn't get to (and shouldn't have) be the one who decided if anything should happened to him or what the punishment should have been. I had to accept that, live with that and grow from that. The victim, my son, may have emotional scars that he can never tell me about so I understand the hopelessness of feeling like you have no voice and in my case if you do that no one is listening. What I'd tell you and anyone else, is don't waste what voice you do have without fully examining what you are going to speak out about or you may end up being the one who tunes out well meaning people. That voice is a gift, be wise in how you choose to use it.
McDonald's killed Eric Garner more so than the cops that arrested him did. If tons of fun wasn't such a tubby b**** then nothing done to him would have been fatal. As such it's just an accident resulting from resisting arrest.
I'm gonna side with the Medical Examiner on this one who ruled it a homicide. If the DOJ decides to end it's investigation with no charges I'd not be ok with it, just as I was when no charges were pressed by the Grand Jury. But yes, his poor health contributed to his demise.
Homicide merely means that humans were involved, it's not the same as the legal definition of murder or even manslaughter. There's no doubt that the officers trying to arrest him played a factor in his death, but if he wasn't such an unhealthy fat guy, what the officers did wouldn't have resulted in his death. If the guy was healthy, he'd have just gone to jail. It's simply a poor example of "police brutality" or racism, or whatever the embarrassing protesters would suggest. Now given that the "choke" that was briefly applied in order to get the blob on the ground and in cuffs was banned by the police department, firing the cop was the right move.
Come on, Eric Garner was hunted. Selling cigarettes "without paying taxes"? That has to be a dog whistle.
And those 3 cases don't account for every police interaction. So then you could admit that it is possible in one community and so could therefore be possible in others? Well that's one way to look at it yes. Or rather the left had a bit of empathy and fought for civil rights in the 60s while the GOP decided to go with the southern strategy and further the racial divide... Speaking of supporting every "Grievance" I've not once seen a conservative news outlet...ONCE have any empathy towards anything to do with black people. Whether it is this or making sure have outrage over a halftime performance from Beyonce. Can you confirm with 100% certainty it is crying wolf though? It seems rather dismissive otherwise and is a big part of the problem. Knee-Jerk is on the other side too and that Knee-jerk is often to find any dirt on the victim and make it seem like he had it coming all along. The problem is you taking one protest from one incident and seemingly applying it nationwide to any protest involving this issue.
No, that's not how freedom of speech works though and thankfully it doesn't work that way. Any wacko could blame his violence on anything, it doesn't make the thing he blamed his violence on less peaceful. "F The Police." is pretty vague, it doesn't explicitly say to KILL or MURDER them. It just says hey...F those guys. I say F the Utah Jazz often, it doesn't mean I want someone to kill any of their players. It means...hey...F those particular guys..not only that but it is the chorus of a very popular N.W.A song. This is the argument that has been used against video games and couldn't hold up. That video games are violent because some random wacko could shoot up a place and say "Hey, I did it in a game!"
Honestly playing the blame game gets nowhere. I just did it to show how easy it is to put it on someone or some group of people. It is always divisive and moves nothing forward but for the other side to just say "Nope, you are the one that is at blame!" yet it seems the cornerstone of politics today to just put all of the blame on one person or one group of people....
