Quote:You're wrong about BLM not being a terrorist group. Extremists have seized on the name and use it. The more active a violent elements use it. That is FACT.
I do believe that certain people that commonly refer to police officers as "pigs" as well as many members of the BLM movement probably think that these police officers "got what they deserved".
One poster commonly calls police "pigs" and was triggered because he thought that my comment was directed to him specifically. It wasn't and I've shown that.
I'm not so sure what you want me to "own". The fact of the matter is people are losing their lives in this country due to terrorist activity. Terrorism isn't all Islamic terrorism. When you have shooters specifically targeting police officers, it's a problem and it is terrorist activity. When you have a group that openly supports this activity, there is a problem. When there are people that openly and publicly call police officers "pigs" or some other derogatory reference, there is a problem.
Just because some people do violence in the name of an organization that condemns the violence doesn't make the organization a terrorist group. Not sure how your supposed "logic" even remotely helps you come to the opposite conclusion. If anyone here is triggered, it's you pal.
Quote:You're wrong about BLM not being a terrorist group. Extremists have seized on the name and use it. The more active a violent elements use it. That is FACT.
I do believe that certain people that commonly refer to police officers as "pigs" as well as many members of the BLM movement probably think that these police officers "got what they deserved".
One poster commonly calls police "pigs" and was triggered because he thought that my comment was directed to him specifically. It wasn't and I've shown that.
I'm not so sure what you want me to "own". The fact of the matter is people are losing their lives in this country due to terrorist activity. Terrorism isn't all Islamic terrorism. When you have shooters specifically targeting police officers, it's a problem and it is terrorist activity. When you have a group that openly supports this activity, there is a problem. When there are people that openly and publicly call police officers "pigs" or some other derogatory reference, there is a problem.
You did well there in stopping just short of naming all parties that present a problem...
Quote:Whatever...
Let me ask you this. How many police officers involved in the latest cases of a cop killing a suspect have been suspended, jailed or fired? Why do you think that is? Heck, the highest ranking officer in the Freddie Gray case has been found not guilty. Perhaps it's because the evidence proved his innocence, yet some people fail to accept it.
Regarding the part in bold and specifically in red. I think that you meant condemned, but I can't be sure.
I rest my case.
To answer your question, its a mixed bag. Some officers are suspended, then back on duty, others are fired or sued. In regards to the Gray case all the facts will never come to life whenever some dies while in policy custody. Just look at what happened with Bland, and the kid in GA.
Yes, I meant condemned. Thank You
I brought this up earlier in another thread. You should read up on Thabo Sefolosha and him suing the NYPD and their corrupt actions and just how sophisticated some police departments will go to cover up their misconduct.
Quote:You're wrong about BLM not being a terrorist group. Extremists have seized on the name and use it. The more active a violent elements use it. That is FACT.
You made my point while still missing it entirely.
Those extremists are a vast minority. They use it, they don't own it.
Quote:That is where you are wrong.
BLM started as a result of the Zimmerman verdict.
It's not about what you mentioned, it's about the perceived injustice to black people.
A direct quote from their website.
The problem is the movement has been taken over by extremists.
Alright, I am going to give you credit. Technically you are correct the movement started after the Martin and Brown incidents.
The BLM movement is not just about police brutality, its about addressing the failing public school system, affordable housing, affordable heath care, reformation of the justice system, etc.
The problem is you are squarly focused on the FEW individuals inciting violence.
Quote:I beg to differ.
Don't beg, just name your subjects so they may defend themselves.
Quote:I'm absolutely in favor of breaking the vicious cycle, but acknowledging the cause is the first step.
Does police brutality happen and exist? Yes. Are there rouge cops? Yes. However, that really isn't the problem that we are facing here.
Alright, so since you acknowledge police brutality and corrupt cops/police departments exist, how do you think the review & discipline process should be revised?
Quote:You're wrong about BLM not being a terrorist group. Extremists have seized on the name and use it. The more active a violent elements use it. That is FACT.
I do believe that certain people that commonly refer to police officers as "pigs" as well as many members of the BLM movement probably think that these police officers "got what they deserved".
One poster commonly calls police "pigs" and was triggered because he thought that my comment was directed to him specifically. It wasn't and I've shown that.
I'm not so sure what you want me to "own". The fact of the matter is people are losing their lives in this country due to terrorist activity. Terrorism isn't all Islamic terrorism. When you have shooters specifically targeting police officers, it's a problem and it is terrorist activity. When you have a group that openly supports this activity, there is a problem. When there are people that openly and publicly call police officers "pigs" or some other derogatory reference, there is a problem.
Listen, until the FBI decides to investigate BLM on suspicion of terrorism, there is really no need to characterize people who participate as "terrorist".
Ill ask this questions again (and no im not defending the reason to refer to them as such) who would you refer to crooked, unethical, cops as?
The murders who targeted the cops in Dallas and Louisiana are evil and terrorist plain and simple. Is it unfortunate they used BLM as a cover? Yes
I feel like you are intentionally missing the point that has been made on this many times.
Quote:There is nothing about the current discussion that disrespects the memory of the slain officers. It's a political discussion forum, we are discussing the politics of the incident and situation.
A blanket accusation was thrown at the board community as a whole. Had anyone actually posted joy over the deaths of the the police officers they would have been rightfully eviscerated. The accusation had no merit and received the scorn it deserved.
Fine. I admit when I read JIB's initial comment that started this all, I immediately thought he was was talking about TJ. I've got no dog in that fight so I have no opinion on it other than to say it seemed crass. TJ has called cops 'pigs' and I actually called him on it in another thread IIRC, but he has not celebrated slain officers. Not once that I can remember. He's said things I disagree with but not that.
As for the BLM stuff, it's too late and I'm too tired for that conversation.
Quote:I think it's pretty clear what his motivation was. He pretty much spelled it out on social media.
Stupid is as stupid does if people can't figure that out and need POTUS or some other 'official' to spoon feed it to them.
I'm pretty sure I understand the nature of your reply but I am just angry that this stuff is going on and people want to bury their damn heads in the sand and not call it what it is. In this instance it's a guy who clearly had it out for cops and meant to kill some and succeeded. It's a hate crime. Too bad he was killed because as much as I would hate taxpayer dollars going toward housing, feeding and prosecuting this jack hole, I would love to have seen how his attorney was going to spin it all with everything he put out about how he feels about cops and how they should be dealt with.
Oh, the motivation seems crystal clear. At least to you and me. However, using the Obama lens to review this incident, it's still not completely clear.
Your anger is shared by many, but I urge you to take a step back and recognize that being angry is precisely what the elements in our society
want from you based on their actions. It seems that, while the overall movement may be focused on injustices (and in many cases, rightfully so), and protesting these in a peaceful manner, there is an extreme element that is using this movement to promote a more violent response. My concern is that this element is looking to trigger something bigger than just an angry response. They want an outright conflict to be ignited.
Quote:Oh, the motivation seems crystal clear. At least to you and me. However, using the Obama lens to review this incident, it's still not completely clear.
Your anger is shared by many, but I urge you to take a step back and recognize that being angry is precisely what the elements in our society
want from you based on their actions. It seems that, while the overall movement may be focused on injustices (and in many cases, rightfully so), and protesting these in a peaceful manner, there is an extreme element that is using this movement to promote a more violent response. My concern is that this element is looking to trigger something bigger than just an angry response. They want an outright conflict to be ignited.
I'm not one that is going to go out and do something stupid out of anger. If someone tried to do me harm that's another story, but I will not knowingly put myself in a position like a protest rally where negative interaction could lead to negative results for myself. I'll write about it and talk about it but I'm not going to go off on someone. That's just stupid. I will defend myself if someone forces me to.
Quote:I'm not one that is going to go out and do something stupid out of anger. If someone tried to do me harm that's another story, but I will not knowingly put myself in a position like a protest rally where negative interaction could lead to negative results for myself. I'll write about it and talk about it but I'm not going to go off on someone. That's just stupid. I will defend myself if someone forces me to.
I wasn't really suggesting that you individually would fall into this trap. I was thinking about on a broader scale. I really do believe that there's a faction here that is determined to push this to the next level, and the sooner they can do so, the better in their minds. Just as there is a faction on the left pushing for a violent outcome, there's a similar faction on the far right that would almost welcome the opportunity to respond. In the end, we may all get dragged down into this thing whether we want to or not.
Quote:I wasn't really suggesting that you individually would fall into this trap. I was thinking about on a broader scale. I really do believe that there's a faction here that is determined to push this to the next level, and the sooner they can do so, the better in their minds. Just as there is a faction on the left pushing for a violent outcome, there's a similar faction on the far right that would almost welcome the opportunity to respond. In the end, we may all get dragged down into this thing whether we want to or not.
I still think there are too many good people out there with their heads screwed on straight for an armed racial conflict to catch on. I'm far more concerned about the government, regardless of who wins in November, using this as an excuse to suspend the Second Amendment--much like the police union boss already wants to do in Cleveland--and start stripping other rights away once the right to bear arms is no longer a stumbling block against totalitarianism.
Quote:Oh, the motivation seems crystal clear. At least to you and me. However, using the Obama lens to review this incident, it's still not completely clear.
Your anger is shared by many, but I urge you to take a step back and recognize that being angry is precisely what the elements in our society
want from you based on their actions. It seems that, while the overall movement may be focused on injustices (and in many cases, rightfully so), and protesting these in a peaceful manner, there is an extreme element that is using this movement to promote a more violent response. My concern is that this element is looking to trigger something bigger than just an angry response. They want an outright conflict to be ignited.
Have actually spoken to anyone involved in the movement extremist or otherwise? Just trying to see what evidence you have that brought you to this conclusion. Who are the elements in society you referred to up above?
Quote:Have actually spoken to anyone involved in the movement extremist or otherwise? Just trying to see what evidence you have that brought you to this conclusion. Who are the elements in society you referred to up above?
Yes, I actually have a couple of friends who are active in the movement. Neither of them supports violence targeting law enforcement or anyone else for that matter. What's your point?
Are you paying attention to what's happening in this country today? Start with Ferguson and look at every incident and you can see for yourself who the fringe element is that is trying to instigate violence and destructive behavior.
Quote:Yes, I actually have a couple of friends who are active in the movement. Neither of them supports violence targeting law enforcement or anyone else for that matter. What's your point?
Are you paying attention to what's happening in this country today? Start with Ferguson and look at every incident and you can see for yourself who the fringe element is that is trying to instigate violence and destructive behavior.
My point is to be less defensive and listen to your friends in the movement. History dictates extremists of every variety attempt to co-op off every movement to suit their agenda. Most ppl don't want anymore senseless violence. Pretending the fringe are gaining ground in some way only helps them.
Sorry, I missed your last paragraph when replying. You've accused me a twisting your words in the past so I'm asking you to say plainly who the element you speak of is.
Quote:You said something that you knew was very directly pointed at a single, specific member of the board and very untrue, then hid behind a technicality to cleanse yourself of all responsibility for saying it. It really shouldnt surprise me anymore, but it does continue to disappoint me.
Agreed... I'm hoping he comes back around, he was actually a good poster up till a few months ago...
Again, the element in pain language please.