"Blue Lives Matter"

[Slache]

Nm.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Slache

[Farrar]

My bad. Use feel instead of are for white people. Feel? Are? Both could be true depending on the situation. Didn't purposely use different words.

 

Of course you didn't. And of course it can be true depending on the situation. But this is what unconscious bias *is* - you displayed it so clearly.

 

We've entered an era where no one wants to admit to being racist (or, almost no one). In fact, we all have learned to espouse anti-racist sentiments. Yet racism persists. This is a truth borne out statistically - in this thread, most relevantly by the fact that blacks are much more likely to killed by police officers.

 

Most of what you're writing is based in the idea that being color blind in positive. As in, we should *all* get along. Skin color doesn't matter. Ethnicity doesn't matter. We're all the same. Except, again, statistically it does matter. Color blindness is a great contributor to racism at this point.

 

You know what, Everyday Feminism said it way better than I can...

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/02/colorblindness-adds-to-racism/

[Guest]

Whenever I see "Blue Lives Matter" I imagine the Blue Man Group and Smurfs being chased around by a SWAT team.

That was my first thought seeing the thread title until I read the OP :lol:

[Farrar]

Kinsa, I think you just created their next piece of performance art. They can have their weird drums seized. But what will the commentary mean!?!?

[SKL]

I am not a fan of the Black Lives Matter statement in the first place.  I believe our society, with all its faults, has long since passed the point where black lives / racial justice did not matter.  To me, "Black Lives Matter" implies "white people want black people dead," which seems unhelpful all the way around.  When our kids see this, they assume a sign is needed to wake their parents up to the fact that black people are actually people.  In my view that is taking backward steps.

 

As for Blue Lives Matter, I mostly see it with the close families of cops, and usually around the time when another cop has been murdered in cold blood.  It happens a lot and it's very scary for the families of LOEs.  It's been happening more since the Black Live Matters campaign started, and that's not a mere coincidence.  So I understand why they feel a need to push back.

 

I know nobody is saying black lives matter "more," but the reality is that it's the tiny tiny percentage of deaths that involve a white person killing a black person that get a large share of the news and protests.  It makes it seem like white people are constantly murdering black people for racist reasons and there's no other violence in America.  I don't see how that is supposed to improve the outcomes of black children who are far more likely to be killed or harmed by another person of color than by a white person, with or without a uniform.

[Tanaqui]

SKL, do you disagree with the statistics that show that non-whites are disproportionately more likely to be killed by the police than whites are? Do you have better numbers?

 

Given that nearly all violent crime is committed by somebody known to the victim, and given the segregation still inherent in the US, it's not at all surprising that blacks are more likely to be murdered by blacks and whites by whites than anybody is to be killed the other way around. However, that fact is not really relevant to the conversation of "why do cops often shoot first and ask questions later when dealing with non-whites".

[Katy]

My concern is this:  who polices the police in this country?  The police!  I don't know whose brilliant idea that was, but it was doomed from the beginning to result in abuse and corruption.  And black people have paid the bulk of the price for that abuse and corruption.  Let's not kid ourselves about that.  So now we have a movement in response to that incredibly unjust situation, and what is the police response to that movement?  "Blue lives matter"???  That sounds to me like an attempt to deflect attention away from the problems that led to this horrible situation in the first place, and paint themselves as the victims.  And yes, of course I realize that individuals officers have been the victims of horrible, inexcusable violence.  I'm not trying to sweep that under the rug or say it doesn't matter.  My point is that that response seems to me like they are trying really hard to sweep the injustices committed by the police under the rug and say they don't matter. 

 

There are a lot of good cops out there who are trying so hard to serve the public good and are even willing to put their own safety and lives at risk to do so.  They are heroes.  

 

There are some truly atrocious, horrible cops out there who use their badges as licenses to bully, rape, and kill.

 

The good cops need to do a better job of weeding out the bad cops.  They accepted responsibility for that.  That's what Internal Affairs is supposed to do.  They have failed miserably.  It's time for a change.  And I'd like to see some of those good cops saying, "you know, this isn't working. We need an EXTERNAL, independent organization to handle allegations of misconduct by the police."  THAT would impress me.  "Blue lives matter" does not.

 

I actually agree with you, though I want to point out that the way these things are handled varies greatly by state. You don't hear about controversies in Florida police shootings often.  Stand your ground stuff yes, but when the police are involved in a shooting it's handled uniquely well.

 

IE:  a couple years ago a relative was shot and killed by a criminal.  I'm going to leave out the heinous details for privacy, but he was a deputy sheriff.  The criminal killed my relative, another deputy fired at the criminal, and as soon as the call went out, the entire department went off duty, and deputies from a neighboring county came in and took over the immediate investigation AND routine patrols.  Then the state (FDLE) came in to take over the investigation as soon as possible.  That way there was no collusion.  The people who work together day to day don't police each other. The people making calls on if a shooting was justified or not don't know anyone in the department. The crime scene investigators are only looking at forensics and don't have any stake at all in how the evidence comes out.

 

I wish every state would do something similar.  I have no idea how that thing in Chicago went the way it did.  I'm actually surprised there weren't riots there, because that was just pure murder. And many local officials helped to cover it up.

[poppy]

I am not a fan of the Black Lives Matter statement in the first place. I believe our society, with all its faults, has long since passed the point where black lives / racial justice did not matter. To me, "Black Lives Matter" implies "white people want black people dead," which seems unhelpful all the way around. When our kids see this, they assume a sign is needed to wake their parents up to the fact that black people are actually people. In my view that is taking backward steps.

 

As for Blue Lives Matter, I mostly see it with the close families of cops, and usually around the time when another cop has been murdered in cold blood. It happens a lot and it's very scary for the families of LOEs. It's been happening more since the Black Live Matters campaign started, and that's not a mere coincidence. So I understand why they feel a need to push back.

 

I know nobody is saying black lives matter "more," but the reality is that it's the tiny tiny percentage of deaths that involve a white person killing a black person that get a large share of the news and protests. It makes it seem like white people are constantly murdering black people for racist reasons and there's no other violence in America. I don't see how that is supposed to improve the outcomes of black children who are far more likely to be killed or harmed by another person of color than by a white person, with or without a uniform.

Every time I see Blue Lives Matter -- and it is quite a bit, which promoted me to start this thread -- it is a general "like this if you support police!" Not tied to any specific death or incident

 

I would love to see statistics that show that killings of police happen "a lot more since the Black Lives Matter campaign started" because that's the first time I've ever heard that.

 

Though, to me, it is weird to tie it to the activist campaigning instead of the killings that inspired it.

Edited April 30, 2016 by poppy

[Greta]

I actually agree with you, though I want to point out that the way these things are handled varies greatly by state. You don't hear about controversies in Florida police shootings often.  Stand your ground stuff yes, but when the police are involved in a shooting it's handled uniquely well.

 

IE:  a couple years ago a relative was shot and killed by a criminal.  I'm going to leave out the heinous details for privacy, but he was a deputy sheriff.  The criminal killed my relative, another deputy fired at the criminal, and as soon as the call went out, the entire department went off duty, and deputies from a neighboring county came in and took over the immediate investigation AND routine patrols.  Then the state (FDLE) came in to take over the investigation as soon as possible.  That way there was no collusion.  The people who work together day to day don't police each other. The people making calls on if a shooting was justified or not don't know anyone in the department. The crime scene investigators are only looking at forensics and don't have any stake at all in how the evidence comes out.

 

I wish every state would do something similar.  I have no idea how that thing in Chicago went the way it did.  I'm actually surprised there weren't riots there, because that was just pure murder. And many local officials helped to cover it up.

 

 

Katy, I'm so sorry for your loss.  And I thank you for pointing out a place where the current system works.  That's very encouraging, because I don't actually expect that the system will change (I mean, change dramatically, as in a completely external and independent organization handling these things).  I really hope and pray that the states which have the worst problems will learn a lesson from those states which are managing things better.  And again, I'm so very, very sorry.

[Tanaqui]

I would love to see statistics that show that killings of police happen "a lot more since the Black Lives Matter campaign started" because that's the first time I've ever heard that.

 

I just did a very quick Google search, and this is the best I found.

 

It shows 109 police deaths in 2013, 122 in 2014, 123 in 2015. For reference, in 1922, when we surely had fewer police (as we had a much smaller population), 239 cops were killed.

 

Honestly, unless the 2016 numbers are through the roof, I can't find this claim believable.

[Carol in Cal.]

I just did a very quick Google search, and this is the best I found.

 

It shows 109 police deaths in 2013, 122 in 2014, 123 in 2015. For reference, in 1922, when we surely had fewer police (as we had a much smaller population), 239 cops were killed.

 

Honestly, unless the 2016 numbers are through the roof, I can't find this claim believable.

Again, it's not the overall increase, but rather the spate of execution style killings of police officers not in the line of duty, but when they are sitting in their cars or things like that, that I have seen cited WRT the blue lives matter issue.  Officers being killed not 'in the moment' but apparently because simply because as police officers they are targets.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I just did a very quick Google search, and this is the best I found.

 

It shows 109 police deaths in 2013, 122 in 2014, 123 in 2015. For reference, in 1922, when we surely had fewer police (as we had a much smaller population), 239 cops were killed.

 

Honestly, unless the 2016 numbers are through the roof, I can't find this claim believable.

 

Have to dig a little deeper into the statistics to address this claim.

 

Officers killed by gunshot did jump from 2013 to 2014 (from 30 to 48), but they don't have the 2015 number on that site.  48 is still lower than the deaths from gunshots a few years prior to 2013.

 

I haven't seen any 2015 data anywhere that I can put a lot of trust in, but I would be surprised to see a noticeable increase over 2015.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Again, it's not the overall increase, but rather the spate of execution style killings of police officers not in the line of duty, but when they are sitting in their cars or things like that, that I have seen cited WRT the blue lives matter issue.  Officers being killed not 'in the moment' but apparently because simply because as police officers they are targets.

 

I still don't but the Blue Lives Matter claim as it still ignores the key difference between those killings and the ones BLM takes issue with - those who kill police are pursued and convicted.

[goldberry]

I don't know enough about the Black Lives Matter movement to know if the leadership of the movement is encouraging violence or if it is only followers.  That would make a difference to me.

 

The pro-life movement has had followers that perpetrated violence, and the arguments of the leaders have been used as justification for perpetrating that violence.  But the leaders would insist that they are only drawing attention to a real problem, and that they are not responsible for the actions of the fringe followers.  Organizations can't be responsible for everything that agrees with their cause does.

 

Does anyone have any sources of actual leadership or anyone with authority to represent the group encouraging violence toward police officers?

[poppy]

Again, it's not the overall increase, but rather the spate of execution style killings of police officers not in the line of duty, but when they are sitting in their cars or things like that, that I have seen cited WRT the blue lives matter issue. Officers being killed not 'in the moment' but apparently because simply because as police officers they are targets.

This is a thing? Really? There is a spate?

[Carol in Cal.]

This is a thing? Really? There is a spate?

They keep popping up on facebook, it's kind of alarming.

 

I have a wide range of facebook friends, from people who were actually part of the blockage of Trump's arrival at the CA Republican convention yesterday to very conservative folks, and these incidents are being posted by a bunch of people.  I don't think I could hunt them down at present, but the next time I see one I'll bring it here.  It's been pretty sobering to see them.  And that's, I think, what is bringing up the Blue Lives Matter thing--that deranged people have had their hatred of the police fanned to the point of committing essentially first degree murder with no precipitating event.

[SKL]

I just did a very quick Google search, and this is the best I found.

 

It shows 109 police deaths in 2013, 122 in 2014, 123 in 2015. For reference, in 1922, when we surely had fewer police (as we had a much smaller population), 239 cops were killed.

 

Honestly, unless the 2016 numbers are through the roof, I can't find this claim believable.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/04/01/virginia-state-trooper-becomes-30th-law-enforcement-officer-killed-in-2016/

 

[SKL]

Does it matter, then, that more of our police officers are being shot and murdered?  Because when you say "Blue Lives Matters" is an insult to Black Lives Matter, it makes me wonder if in fact you don't think the safety of our LOEs matters.

 

It's not like LOEs in general don't prevent crimes against black people.  But I guess that is what some people believe.

Edited April 30, 2016 by SKL

[Farrar]

I was also going to link that WaPo article that SKL just linked. My understanding is that killings of the police is, indeed, up, though obviously the data isn't totally clear yet.

 

However, the most prominent of these murders had the killer crediting ISIS... none of the killers we know about have credited BLM with inspiring their act of violence.

 

And, importantly, anger and distrust of police in black communities has existed for many, many years. BLM is a movement trying to bring light to the issues so they can be discussed (hey, by us at the moment!) and potentially solved. Bringing light to issues can potentially bring out anger, but that doesn't mean BLM advocates violence. And if we don't bring light and try to solve the problem of police killings, then it can never get better. And that means that anger toward police, thus making their jobs more dangerous, also can't get better. The solution isn't to ignore or condemn BLM's message. It's to embrace it.

[SKL]

I was also going to link that WaPo article that SKL just linked. My understanding is that killings of the police is, indeed, up, though obviously the data isn't totally clear yet.

 

However, the most prominent of these murders had the killer crediting ISIS... none of the killers we know about have credited BLM with inspiring their act of violence.

 

And, importantly, anger and distrust of police in black communities has existed for many, many years. BLM is a movement trying to bring light to the issues so they can be discussed (hey, by us at the moment!) and potentially solved. Bringing light to issues can potentially bring out anger, but that doesn't mean BLM advocates violence. And if we don't bring light and try to solve the problem of police killings, then it can never get better. And that means that anger toward police, thus making their jobs more dangerous, also can't get better. The solution isn't to ignore or condemn BLM's message. It's to embrace it.

 

I'm all for justice.  I just think the choice of "Black Lives Matter" as a slogan is unfortunate, for the reasons I stated above.  I think it's divisive and walks us backward instead of forward.  There are better ways to build consensus if that's really what you want to do.

 

[Farrar]

Does it matter, then, that more of our police officers are being shot and murdered?  Because when you say "Blue Lives Matters" is an insult to Black Lives Matter, it makes me wonder if in fact you don't think the safety of our LOEs matters.

 

It's not like LOEs in general don't prevent crimes against black people.  But I guess that is what some people believe.

 

The thing that's offensive about "Blue Lives Matter" is how it co-opt's and diminishes the message of "Black Lives Matter." And, again, even if the statistics end up showing (as they well may) that police killings are up, we already agree as a society that police deaths matter. We already give institutional support to finding cop killers and putting them away. We already mourn police deaths and cover them on the news. No one in this thread has defended killing the police. No one has said that police lives don't matter. Of course they do.

 

But when the police kill people, even when the killing is unjustified, even when it's children, even when the victim is unarmed, even when the victim begs for their life, the police can go free and unpunished. Before BLM started trying to shine this light, deaths weren't even always covered in the media.

 

By co-opting BLM's message and implying that they're the ones who are oppressed, the people behind "Blue Lives Matter" as a slogan (which, I'm sure is not all police or all supporters of the police) are belittling, diminishing, and mocking the difference in the situations of the two groups.

[Farrar]

I'm all for justice.  I just think the choice of "Black Lives Matter" as a slogan is unfortunate, for the reasons I stated above.  I think it's divisive and walks us backward instead of forward.  There are better ways to build consensus if that's really what you want to do.

 

 

In this case, I think "consensus" is a code word - intentionally or not - for "colorblindness". And I'll just assert again that colorblindness is not a solution to racism.

[SKL]

The thing that's offensive about "Blue Lives Matter" is how it co-opt's and diminishes the message of "Black Lives Matter." And, again, even if the statistics end up showing (as they well may) that police killings are up, we already agree as a society that police deaths matter. We already give institutional support to finding cop killers and putting them away. We already mourn police deaths and cover them on the news. No one in this thread has defended killing the police. No one has said that police lives don't matter. Of course they do.

 

But when the police kill people, even when the killing is unjustified, even when it's children, even when the victim is unarmed, even when the victim begs for their life, the police can go free and unpunished. Before BLM started trying to shine this light, deaths weren't even always covered in the media.

 

By co-opting BLM's message and implying that they're the ones who are oppressed, the people behind "Blue Lives Matter" as a slogan (which, I'm sure is not all police or all supporters of the police) are belittling, diminishing, and mocking the difference in the situations of the two groups.

 

Each of the sentence in your first paragraph can be equally said about black lives.  Nobody says black lives don't matter.  Nobody thinks they don't matter.  Nobody needs to be told that they matter.

 

As to your second paragraph, yes people get upset when police do terrible things.  Yes both uniformed and un-uniformed criminals of all colors sometimes / often walk away without being punished for their crimes.  Yes, there are many killings of people of all colors, uniformed and un-uniformed, that don't make the news.

 

I honestly don't get being sensitive about the BLM slogan being "co-opted."  Is the argument that black lives really don't matter if you give any lip service to murder victims in other categories?

 

What does it really accomplish when we carve out a group for the label of who needs to "matter"?

 

Do people believe it isn't possible to care about both black people and police?  That's what this sounds like to me.  There seems to be no interest in seeking common ground.

[SKL]

In this case, I think "consensus" is a code word - intentionally or not - for "colorblindness". And I'll just assert again that colorblindness is not a solution to racism.

 

I didn't mean it that way.  Consensus is a word that makes sense if you believe it is possible for people to actually care about each other and about the community as a whole.  I guess if you don't believe that, it doesn't mean anything.

[Farrar]

Each of the sentence in your first paragraph can be equally said about black lives.  Nobody says black lives don't matter.  Nobody thinks they don't matter.  Nobody needs to be told that they matter.

 

As to your second paragraph, yes people get upset when police do terrible things.  Yes both uniformed and un-uniformed criminals of all colors sometimes / often walk away without being punished for their crimes.  Yes, there are many killings of people of all colors, uniformed and un-uniformed, that don't make the news.

 

I honestly don't get being sensitive about the BLM slogan being "co-opted."  Is the argument that black lives really don't matter if you give any lip service to murder victims in other categories?

 

What does it really accomplish when we carve out a group for the label of who needs to "matter"?

 

Do people believe it isn't possible to care about both black people and police?  That's what this sounds like to me.  There seems to be no interest in seeking common ground.

 

People can absolutely care about the police and black lives. I certainly do. I think it's disturbing that ambush killings of the police may be up. However, institutionally, our country does *not* care about black lives, especially black lives that were murdered by the police. I'm sure we all claim to care, but if we cared, then the perpetrators would be punished and by and large they're not.

 

I didn't mean it that way.  Consensus is a word that makes sense if you believe it is possible for people to actually care about each other and about the community as a whole.  I guess if you don't believe that, it doesn't mean anything.

 

I believe in consensus. I've, in fact, worked professionally in organizations that made all decisions based on consensus. In the case of saying that it's divisive to ask people to recognize that Black lives matter, I think that is making an appeal to homogenizing all people together. Saying, come on, can't we just agree that *all* lives matter. Except, that, again, institutionally, they don't. Statistically, they don't. Some lives are worth more. And that can't be solved until we acknowledge it. And that means saying specifically that Black lives matter. People feeling uncomfortable with that are basically feeling threatened. It's... what about me, what about my life? Don't *I* matter? Except in the case of whites (and, in the context of this discussion, the police) they've always mattered. They don't need a movement in order to bring attention to their lives to make them matter and get them equal treatment before the law. Black lives do need that movement.

[Tanaqui]

SKL, when we're dealing with numbers as small as 7 and 30, it's hard to see if a short-term increase is really an increase or if it's just a freak occurrence.

[Farrar]

SKL, when we're dealing with numbers as small as 7 and 30, it's hard to see if a short-term increase is really an increase or if it's just a freak occurrence.

 

When you add that the motives all seem to be different, it's difficult for sure to draw conclusions. Disturbing and bad... but hopefully a blip when you consider that the numbers have been pretty stable over several years.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Each of the sentence in your first paragraph can be equally said about black lives.  Nobody says black lives don't matter.  Nobody thinks they don't matter.  Nobody needs to be told that they matter.

 

As to your second paragraph, yes people get upset when police do terrible things.  Yes both uniformed and un-uniformed criminals of all colors sometimes / often walk away without being punished for their crimes.  Yes, there are many killings of people of all colors, uniformed and un-uniformed, that don't make the news.

 

I honestly don't get being sensitive about the BLM slogan being "co-opted."  Is the argument that black lives really don't matter if you give any lip service to murder victims in other categories?

 

What does it really accomplish when we carve out a group for the label of who needs to "matter"?

 

Do people believe it isn't possible to care about both black people and police?  That's what this sounds like to me.  There seems to be no interest in seeking common ground.

 

The bolded is assuming facts not in evidence.  And we don't need words to know this - actions and statistics tell us a lot.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

SKL, when we're dealing with numbers as small as 7 and 30, it's hard to see if a short-term increase is really an increase or if it's just a freak occurrence.

 

Even more so in a one quarter sample.

[poppy]

I am still waiting for evidence of the sharp increase in ambush killings of off duty cops killed because of their jobs.  If it's true, it is absolutely horrible. But I am very skeptical.

 

 

I'm all for justice.  I just think the choice of "Black Lives Matter" as a slogan is unfortunate, for the reasons I stated above.  I think it's divisive and walks us backward instead of forward.  There are better ways to build consensus if that's really what you want to do.
 

But you don't think Blue Lives Matter is divisive and walks us backwards instead of forwards?

 

[Carol in Cal.]

I am still waiting for evidence of the sharp increase in ambush killings of off duty cops killed because of their jobs.  If it's true, it is absolutely horrible. But I am very skeptical.

 

 

Clarification--not off duty, but not in the line of duty either.

Like, in uniform but pumping gas.  Or eating a burger.  The instances I have seen are like that.

[Daria]

I can find lots of different numbers, from groups with different agendas, but looking at them it seems pretty clear that the number of unarmed black people killed by police is significantly higher than the number of police killed by black people.  Yet you describe the two groups this way: 

 

 it's the tiny tiny percentage of deaths that involve a white person killing a black person

 

 

when another cop has been murdered in cold blood.  It happens a lot and it's very scary for the families of LOEs. 

 

You also reference the families of LOE's with empathy, but don't acknowledge that black people have families too, families who are also very scared.

 

How can you not see how your words reinforce the idea that one group (the police) matters more than the other?

[Daria]

Clarification--not off duty, but not in the line of duty either.

Like, in uniform but pumping gas.  Or eating a burger.  The instances I have seen are like that.

 

I'm pretty sure that "in the line of duty" numbers include those killings, just like they include officers who had heart attacks while climbing the stairs at work, and officers who lost control of their vehicle and crashed.  

[MotherGoose]

How many unarmed black people killed by the police were clearly resisting arrest, being threatening, or doing something else that might make a police officer feel that force was necessary? You absolutely cannot assume that just because the person didn't have a weapon when it was all over with that they didn't do something resulting in their deaths. We people on the Internet are not qualified to make judgements about whether or not a shooting was justified.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

How many unarmed black people killed by the police were clearly resisting arrest, being threatening, or doing something else that might make a police officer feel that force was necessary? You absolutely cannot assume that just because the person didn't have a weapon when it was all over with that they didn't do something resulting in their deaths. We people on the Internet are not qualified to make judgements about whether or not a shooting was justified.

 

While that is true, we also have documented cases where there was no evidence of someone placing an officer's life in danger yet the black suspect ended up dead anyway,

 

When we take a step back and look at it from the macro level, it also is abundantly clear that African Americans are being killed in disproportionate numbers, which allows us to reasonable draw the conclusion that something is greatly amiss.

[MotherGoose]

And my problem with Black lives matter is that they seem to assume every black person killed by the police was unarmed and innocent. That's clearly not true. Some of them are, but not all of them.

[MSNative]

While that is true, we also have documented cases where there was no evidence of someone placing an officer's life in danger yet the black suspect ended up dead anyway,

 

When we take a step back and look at it from the macro level, it also is abundantly clear that African Americans are being killed in disproportionate numbers, which allows us to reasonable draw the conclusion that something is greatly amiss.

Is there unbiased data that both sides agree on? Data for deaths with no evidence of putting the officer in danger, data of officers being targeted, etc? I've heard anecdotes on each side myself but don't have data. I've searched but am never sure which data is valid and which is massaged. So few actually give full details on how they classified data, etc.

CR- not just directing at you. Asking people on both sides who have been mentioning data.

Edited April 30, 2016 by MSNative

[SKL]

I can find lots of different numbers, from groups with different agendas, but looking at them it seems pretty clear that the number of unarmed black people killed by police is significantly higher than the number of police killed by black people.  Yet you describe the two groups this way: 

 

 

 

 

You also reference the families of LOE's with empathy, but don't acknowledge that black people have families too, families who are also very scared.

 

How can you not see how your words reinforce the idea that one group (the police) matters more than the other?

 

You took my words out of two totally different contexts.

 

The first is about the national media's choice of what to run and national / large local groups' choice of what to protest, with the effect of making it appear that blacks are murdered by whites far more often than they are.

 

The second was my personal friends who happen to be close family members of LOEs and happen to be scared for their significant other in the aftermath of the unjustified murder of a cop (sometimes a person they knew personally).

 

I personally do not push either Blue Lives Matter or any other such slogan.  I was just answering the question of why some people feel it's OK to use that.  What I said was that I'm seeing it mainly among people very close to LOEs who go out and risk being shot at every day.  I didn't say I encourage, promote, or agree with it.

 

So you figured out a way to twist that into "you really don't care about the murder of black people."

 

Goodbye to this hopeless conversation.

 

Again, there is no indication that anyone is actually looking for common ground.  With that attitude we will never find it.

Edited May 1, 2016 by SKL

[Farrar]

And my problem with Black lives matter is that they seem to assume every black person killed by the police was unarmed and innocent. That's clearly not true. Some of them are, but not all of them.

 

The victim *should* have a presumption of innocence. That's how our system is supposed to work. Factually speaking, most (or maybe even all) of the cases that BLM has championed were people who were unarmed. Most of them were over crimes that were extremely minor - traffic violations, jaywalking, etc. or nonexistent - they were stopped just because, just because the officer had a hunch. And yet, even with that knowledge, the victims are still blamed, the officers' weak defense is treated as word. There usually aren't even trials because grand juries refuse to prosecute. It's a mockery.

[poppy]

Just realized why I'm probably seeing Blue Lives Matter more this week.  Tamir Rice's family recently had a settlement regarding his death.  

 

No matter how you feel about Black Lives Matter, that case is just terrible. Emotionally unstable officer shots a child with a fake gun. No medical help called in a timely manner. Dead 12 year old.  Poor child.

[Carol in Cal.]

How many unarmed black people killed by the police were clearly resisting arrest, being threatening, or doing something else that might make a police officer feel that force was necessary? 

This is a good point; however, there is considerable evidence (*video evidence!*) of instances where officers would falsely claim probable cause that did not in fact exist for lethal force.  And it's not always even lethal force.  Sometimes it's negligent injurious treatment *in custody*.

 

For instance, the death of Freddie Gray while restrained and during transport, after he was 'arrested without incident', subsequently ruled a homicide.

 

For instance, the death of Eric Garner, who slowly suffocated on video, gasping, "I can't breathe" 11 times and receiving no assistance.

 

For instance, the death of Laquan McDonald, who was shot 16 times, the video of which was suppressed while his family was paid off.  According to the Huffington Post, "Police dashcam video released last month — the day Officer Jason Van Dyke was charged with first-degree murder in the killing — doesn’t match the police department’s initial narrative of the shooting. The footage, which a judge ordered city officials to release, shows Van Dyke shooting the teen repeatedly, even after he fell to the ground. "

[LucyStoner]

Just realized why I'm probably seeing Blue Lives Matter more this week. Tamir Rice's family recently had a settlement regarding his death.

 

No matter how you feel about Black Lives Matter, that case is just terrible. Emotionally unstable officer shots a child with a fake gun. No medical help called in a timely manner. Dead 12 year old. Poor child.

And the dispatcher was told that it was most likely an air soft/toy gun.

 

Most shockingly, the department hired this officer after he was dismissed from another department for emotional and judgment problems.

 

Anyone who tries to twist that in the officer's or the department's favor is, IMO, extraordinarily heartless and essentially beyond reason. Some people are not fit to be police officers and once fired for the stuff he was fired for SHOULD NEVER be rehired as a cop anywhere in the country.

Edited May 1, 2016 by LucyStoner

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

And my problem with Black lives matter is that they seem to assume every black person killed by the police was unarmed and innocent. That's clearly not true. Some of them are, but not all of them.[/quote

 

I think you would agree that any time a citizen is killed by the police it should be fully and honestly investigated, correct?

The point BLM makes is that this currently does not happen, and that by and large police can, at the minimum, act negligently with few repercussions.

[Katy]

The Freddie Gray thing...  a homicide by a medical examiner is not the same thing as criminal homicide.  The definitions are different.

 

The National Review (conservative) quoted an extensive study by the Washington Post (conservative) that determined killings by police are not out of line.  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429094/black-lives-matter-wrong-police-shootings

 

I don't know that there are vastly more police killed execution style as much as there have been what, 4 in the past year or so?  And all directly after inflammatory rhetoric on the news about how evil police are. 

 

There is a page here that keeps an index of officers killed in the line of duty, and it does differentiate between auto accidents, accidental shootings, gunfire, and other deadly incidents.  https://www.odmp.org/

[Tanaqui]

How many unarmed black people killed by the police were clearly resisting arrest, being threatening, or doing something else that might make a police officer feel that force was necessary?

 

Exactly how much force is required for somebody without a gun? Why the heck are our cops so heavily armed anyway? Do they really need military castoffs? Are we living in a civilized country or in a warzone?

 

Edited May 1, 2016 by Tanaqui

[Carol in Cal.]

The Freddie Gray thing...  a homicide by a medical examiner is not the same thing as criminal homicide.  The definitions are different.

 

 

The treatment of Freddie Gray that killed him is so common that there is a slang name for it locally.  

It's called a rough ride.

The very existence of that nomenclature is indicative that it is deliberate and meant to be harmful.

How many rough rides were there last year?

They are illegal, you know.

How many Americans were subjected to this illegal, harmful, potentially fatal treatment?

One is too many.

So many that there is actually a common usage term for it is unthinkable.

[Janeway]

I keep seeing this popping up.   For the life of me, I do not understand why people who want to show support of police would select such a mocking motto.    Every time I see it I picture police thumbing their noses and blowing raspberries at "Black Lives Matter" activist.   

 

Even if you don't care for "Black Lives Matter", I think it's nasty. 

 

It would be like ... Like co-opting the Autism Awareness symbol and changing it into a "Normal Kids Matter too".

 

Or I guess it's like the people who take the Jesus fish symbol, put feet on it and put the word "Darwin" inside.  Except, the stakes seem lower there.  A Darwin fish is a bit of humor (some may say mean humor).  "Blue Lives Matter" is earnest.

 

Am I oversensitive?

I think the slogan "Black Lives Matter" is rude. I think it says only black lives matter. And it was in response to a situation where it appears the police officer was defending himself. Blue Lives Matter too seems to me to be a very appropriate response. I do not think a police officer should have to allow himself to be killed just because the assailant is black. I agree that police officers make mistakes, but usually, they are doing the right thing. And it is way way more common for an officer to end up dead than for him/her to make a mistake and kill someone else. The police put their lives on the line every day to protect us. Yes, some do the wrong thing. Most do not. Most criminals do the wrong thing. No one is more important based on their race alone. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think the slogan "Black Lives Matter" is rude. I think it says only black lives matter. And it was in response to a situation where it appears the police officer was defending himself. Blue Lives Matter too seems to me to be a very appropriate response. I do not think a police officer should have to allow himself to be killed just because the assailant is black. I agree that police officers make mistakes, but usually, they are doing the right thing. And it is way way more common for an officer to end up dead than for him/her to make a mistake and kill someone else. The police put their lives on the line every day to protect us. Yes, some do the wrong thing. Most do not. Most criminals do the wrong thing. No one is more important based on their race alone.

When police shoot and kill over 900 people a year compared to 40-ish officers being killed, how can you even think the claim that an officer is more likely to be killed than make a mistake makes any sense?

[Tanaqui]

Yes, some do the wrong thing. Most do not. Most criminals do the wrong thing. No one is more important based on their race alone.

 

Are you intending to imply that most of those shot by the cop are actually criminals?

[Janeway]

This is what confuses me most. How is saying "Black lives matter" elevating anyone over another when it's a perfectly clear (to me) statement that black lives shouldn't be treated as trash?

 

There seems to be this idea that giving darker skin equal weight takes away from lighter skin somehow, and that's just... well, I can't think of board approved words for that.

it doesn't sound to me like they are saying give equal weight. They qualify the lives that matter with the term black. They did not say black lives matter too. They just said black lives matter, as if other lives don't. If I am looking at all my children but then point only one out and say that one is so smart, it sounds as if I am saying the others are not or at least are less intelligent. It does not sound like equality at all.