Why "All Lives Matters" is wrong

[Timsup2nothin]

Around here we remove from duty police that chase when they aren't supposed to chase. That gets people killed over stupid stuff. Yea, the job is hard. You still don't get people killed over stupid stuff. If you can't be trusted not to do that with your split second decisions, well, then you don't get to keep making them. You don't get people killed over stupid stuff. You don't get people killed over stupid stuff.

Well, unless the "stupid stuff" is not being meek in the face of confrontation by authority, and the person killed was "just a suspect." Then we call killing people over stupid stuff "heroism."

 

[SkeleTony]

How many domestic abuse charges did Trayvon have again? How many physical altercations had he gotten into with the cops?



More racist lies to justify murder. Again, congratulations.

I don't think 17 year old Travon had any arrests but this is not at all unusual. I know at least a half dozen people in prison right now who had no arrests before they turned 18. His only real "altercations" with police were related to his vandalism of his school (and possessing a burglary tool) for which he was suspended (again). According to many who knew him he was quick to fight people for any reason at all and was considered by most to be a bully.
Before you go to the 'racism card' keep in mind who you are talking to. Not only is almost my entire family black but my brother went to prison for shooting a guy (to protect me at a party) and I did not claim he was an innocent kid either. I love my brother and he has since he got out of prison been one of the most trustworthy, honest and hard working people you could ever meet. He and I don't speak anymore because of this very issue (and before you go making your assumptions let me warn you how wrong they will be) in a weird way. When you just groundlessly presuppose "racism" to explain away disagreement/dissent you do no one any good.

EDIT: Also keep in mind that the reason Travon was living with his dad instead of his mom was that his mom kicked him out because of his egregious behavior.

 

[SkeleTony]

See you keep saying things like this but then you just go ahead and support the status quo.

Spoken like a true Trump-eteer (Trumpist? trump-humper? What do we call those guys now?).. Just invoke some nebulous "status quo" or "establishment" and accuse dissenters of adhering to such rather than address points or arguments.

 

[Lexicus]

Spoken like a true Trump-eteer (Trumpist? trump-humper? What do we call those guys now?).. Just invoke some nebulous "status quo" or "establishment" and accuse dissenters of adhering to such rather than address points or arguments.

Yes, the status quo where the police routinely murder people with impunity. All the arguments you've made in this thread have been in support of that status quo.

I already addressed your arguments by pointing out they are largely based on falsehoods. You simply ignored that. And for you to compare me to Trump supporters when your position on this issue is identical to Trump's position is highly amusing.

According to many who knew him he was quick to fight people for any reason at all and was considered by most to be a bully.

Where are you reading this kind of nonsense? Breitbart or AmRen? Or Stormfront?

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, unless the "stupid stuff" is not being meek in the face of confrontation by authority, and the person killed was "just a suspect." Then we call killing people over stupid stuff "heroism."

Nope.

 

[Senethro]

Bringing up "he weren't no angel" just looks like an attempt to justify killings after the fact.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Nope.

That "we" didn't actually include you individually...but as a general statement on "we as a society" it seems pretty accurate.

 

[SkeleTony]

See, here's the core of the problem. You recognize that if the fleeing teenager jumps in a car and a high speed chase ensues that endangers the public it is a bad outcome. This is obvious because catching the shoplifter right this second isn't that important. Get enough information, look for a better opportunity, enforce the law. The shoplifter isn't going to slip out of the country with his ill gotten gains. He isn't going to go home and let admiration for his criminal exploits turn him into a mass murderer. There's really no rush here.

For the most part I see the sense of what you are saying. However you are ignoring something very important which Liberals (on my side of the political fence) seem prone to ignore: Justice. Sure this is not typically of mass importance when dealing with shoplifters and stores (as they usually won't see their entire business collapse under the weight of shoplifting). But what about when something invaluable is stolen by someone? What about when a woman is raped and killed and the worthless sociopath is allowed to get away with it because of Liberal sensibilities? What good is opposing capital punishment when we have a case like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wichita_Massacre ? That Wikipedia page does not even begin to really capture the horror of what those two men did to those people. It was acts too sick to depict in any legal movie.

I know you were not talking about capital punishment here but I think this is all relevant because when we start down the path of ignoring justice (for thieves, speeding drivers, etc.) and end up denying justice for the victims of crimes (and their families/friends) so sick and violent that G.G. Allin would have vomited a little in his mouth hearing about them, we have real problems. Overpopulation and an inability to put the Hitlers/Bundys, Carrs and Dahmers to death results in bad things.

But you don't seem to recognize that confronting the teenager in a threatening manner and triggering a fight or flight response and ending up shooting them dead is just as bad an outcome, if not worse.

False. There were definitely times when I should have ended up dead because of my own decisions when I was young and I am very glad I am not dead yet but I also got smart about these things. Part of that 'smartness' is not prejudging cops irrationally and then treating them as if they are like the jackbooted thugs I imagined when I was younger. Similarly I do not walk into biker bars and start jabbering "Old rock and roll sucks!" or "Trump and his supporters are morons!" because why try to provoke likely armed men to violence?

Things like this are what cops should be trained to make decisions on.

They ARE trained to make decisions on these matters, far better than you or I ever could be. They just do not get credit for such because 'MAH CONSPURAHSEES!'


Things like this are what everyone should demand something be done to prevent. Instead half the public just shrugs and says "well, he probably had it coming" or "well, that only happens to black kids not my kids so it's okay I guess."

True situation and outcome:

Guy crashes his car and is disoriented. Cops help him out of his car and put him in the back of a patrol car, suspecting he's a DUI. Cops find a gun in his wrecked car and run his info finding he has a felony record. Now he is a felon in possession of a firearm. They want to get him out of the car, cuff him, and arrest him. They open the door and he refuses to get out. A cop "goes in to pull him out" and in the struggle he "grabs for the cops gun" and gets "justifiably" shot dead by multiple cops.

Do you say "well a felon in possession of a firearm was surely about to commit some heinous crime so great." Or do you recognize that the guy was locked in the back of a squad car. This wasn't exactly a hostage situation requiring an immediate 'breach and kill' response.

I cannot believe YOU went with that?! Of course the guy deserved to be shot dead three times over! He tried to grab a cops gun!! Of course he intended to use it on those cops because what other possible reason could there be?!

 

[SkeleTony]

Bringing up "he weren't no angel" just looks like an attempt to justify killings after the fact.

That is not what I (or anyone else that I know of) am doing. I am merely pointing out that when an already violent kid, in the habit of taking and sending cell phone pictures of guns he apparently had access to and beating people up, goes and assaults a random stranger and gets shot who should we blame?

 

[Lexicus]

Overpopulation and an inability to put the Hitlers/Bundys, Carrs and Dahmers to death results in bad things.

Like what? We did hang the Hitlers, by the way - but it was after the fact. It did zero to deter or prevent their crimes. Same with Dahmer etc.

The death penalty accomplishes nothing. It doesn't even accomplish justice for the victims, it can't bring back the dead or undo trauma that someone has experienced. The only real reason for it is emotional gratification of the victims or their friends and families and that simply isn't how a society with rule of law should work. It is certainly not a good reason for the state to execute people.

That is not what I (or anyone else that I know of) am doing.

That's just exactly what you're doing. In fact, you go on to do exactly what you say you aren't doing in the rest of this post. So the only question is, did you think the rest of us would be too dumb to tell?

 

[Senethro]

That is not what I (or anyone else that I know of) am doing. I am merely pointing out that when an already violent kid, in the habit of taking and sending cell phone pictures of guns he apparently had access to and beating people up, goes and assaults a random stranger and gets shot who should we blame?

I don't think you thought this post through.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I cannot believe YOU went with that?! Of course the guy deserved to be shot dead three times over! He tried to grab a cops gun!! Of course he intended to use it on those cops because what other possible reason could there be?!

I wish I could say that I'm surprised, but I'm not. You failing to recognize that there was never a reason for a cop's gun to be within his reach is no surprise at all. The guy was already locked in the back of a squad car. What danger did he present to the public, or anyone else? How did the inconvenience of waiting him out outweigh the risk inherent in a physical altercation inside the car? If he had gotten hold of the gun, which there is no actual reason to believe that he even tried to do, and killed a cop there would be a whole lot of people asking why they didn't just wait him out, likely you among them.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

For the most part I see the sense of what you are saying. However you are ignoring something very important which Liberals (on my side of the political fence) seem prone to ignore: Justice.

Here's the point you are missing here..."justice" is an adult concept. It doesn't actually rely on or fulfill the toddler's demand for instant gratification.

 

[Farm Boy]

That "we" didn't actually include you individually...but as a general statement on "we as a society" it seems pretty accurate.

Nope.

 

[Lexicus]

Nope.

It is. As 2pac put it, "cops give a damn about a negro, pull the trigger kill a n***a he's a hero," or in a less popular song, "see it's cool to shoot a n***a but they hate it when we pop the cops!"

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Nope.

Okay, how about "there are certainly a fair number of vocal sycophants who believe it"?

 

[Sommerswerd]

I don't know. I've never actually watched anything with Dave Chappelle that I remember. You'll have to explain that one for me if you want me to catch the nuance, I'm not googling it from here. I don't really think it's to do with drunken brawls. I think it has everything to do with the fact that the county fair concentrates into a large crowd both the need for policing and the people who are most likely to have had negative interactions with the police.

Here ya go:

Spoiler NSFW :

Spoiler Seriously... bad words :

The TL;DR is that women who wear sexy clothes should not be offended that guys assume they are available/looking for sex... just like a person who wears a policeman's uniform should not be offended when people come up to them asking for help. The point is I thought you were saying that a uniformed cop is going to be expected to engage in effective crowd control.

The other criminal in the same van said this before he realized he was messing up the BLM narrative. A few days after he said this he tried to change his story to be in concert with the 'cops are all bad' narrative.

This doesn't answer my question at all. I asked you...

where the ... story comes from?

Telling me another version of the story isn't what I was looking for... I get the gist of the story... "some people said... yada yada yada", got it... I'm looking for where you saw/read it, so I can check it out myself. As a reminder... again... just met you buddy.

 

[Lexicus]

Telling me another version of the story isn't what I was looking for... I get the gist of the story... "some people said... yada yada yada", got it... I'm looking for where you saw/read it, so I can check it out myself. As a reminder... again... just met you buddy.

Hmm, another layer of irony that he accused me of being like a Trump supporter. Trump routinely "substantiates" assertions in this same vague way. You notice that Skele also ignored my request to provide a link to the specific police shooting case he was talking about a couple of pages ago.

 

[Berzerker]

No he didn't.

The police recording is proof he did follow the dispatcher's instructions, where's your proof he didn't? That goes for you too, Tim...

Really? Your defense of Zimmerman now is “He wasn’t watching”? Cause when I commented about not having to worry about neighborhood watch stalking me, your response was: So first you defend Zimmerman by saying “watching is what neighbors do, that’s what Zimmerman was doing”… then minutes later you say “Zimmerman wasn’t watching”… This is like talking to two different people posting as one person. Because it seems like when I was making the point that neighborhood watch shouldn’t be stalking people, you claim that Zimmerman was just watching not stalking. But when I refute that by pointing out that he was in-fact following Trayvon with a gun, you switch to claiming that he wasn’t watching, he was innocently going back to his car. Or maybe you did this unintentionally? Can you at least acknowledge that you’ve taken contradictory positions based on what supported the argument you were trying to make at the time? Full stop… “headed back to his truck”? OK… so why was he out of his truck? What was his purpose in leaving his truck in the first place? The watching (which you claimed he wasn’t doing) or the stalking (that you claimed he wasn’t doing)? Or are you claiming that he got out of his truck to innocently head back to his truck?

I know you were going for a clever play on the phrase, but the irony is pretty thick here, given the above.

My defense of Zimmerman is and always has been he acted in self defense.

You said: Zimmerman wasn't "watching", he was stalking with a gun. And I said:

Zimmerman wasn't watching or 'stalking' anything, he didn't know where Martin was and thought he ran off in the direction of a rear entrance and even told the cops that before Martin attacked him. So he headed back to his truck and was intercepted by Martin. He got attacked, knocked to the ground, and Martin was on top beating him before the gun entered the picture. All facts matter...

Now you can take the first 3 words of that and ignore the rest, but it sure looks like a straw man to me. Zimmerman lost sight of Martin and started talking to the police dispatcher. At that point he was neither watching Martin or 'stalking' him... He lost him, Martin was hiding and it was Martin who began stalking Zimmerman. Obviously this incident began with Zimmerman watching Martin, that doesn't mean he was watching him the entire time. In "fact" Zimmerman lost sight of Martin at about the same time he left his truck.

And I reject your characterization of 'stalking', that term was advanced by partisan media to demonize Zimmerman as a murderer. Neighborhood watch people do just that, they watch. Cops are not stalkers either, even when they do more than watch. But Martin was stalking Zimmerman, he hid and waited and then beat him up. Now if you want to argue Martin 'felt' like he was being stalked, the facts dont help your argument, Martin didn't run home. He didn't stay hidden. He got in his face to physically express his outrage at the cracker watching him. I think Martin called him a cracker, apparently Zimmerman's a Peruvian Jew.

 

[Lexicus]

The police recording is proof he did follow the dispatcher's instructions, where's your proof he didn't? That goes for you too, Tim...

The police dispatcher tells him not to follow Trayvon. The possibilities are that you haven't listened to the recording in question (I did) or you failed to comprehend what you were hearing. Or, I guess, the third possibility is that you're just lying about it, but why you would do that I can't imagine.