Police Chief taking the non-PC route when explaining Police corruption vs crime rates

[Falsedawn]

That still doesn't change the redundancy of the group.

What?

 

[panamaican]

I have to agree with Thames and the police chief.

Too many people ignore the local violence but will fixate on the much smaller numbers of police malfeasance. And too many people disregard the local violence except to deflect conversations about larger systemic issues, which include the police malfeasance. Neither group is taking the subject seriously in it's entirety.

I also agree with Falsedawn.

The conversations should be kept separate. The rules and regulations that govern police action aren't the same rules and regulations that govern community action. Bad actors in the community and bad actors in the police aren't operating from similar positions of authority or responsibility and so addressing them requires focusing on different behaviors.

Is there overlap? Sure and people should remember that it cuts both ways. Inner city violence did not develop independent of police and government practices and police malfeasance doesn't develop independent of the actions within the communities they're policing.

Good video.

 

[Rod1]

Come on son. Should we start railroading the NRA for lobbying for all firearm rights instead of just rifles (Because they are the National RIFLE Association)? What about the Heritage Foundation advocating shit that's not part of our heritage?

That criticism is shallow. You know what the name means, address their issues. If you think another issue is more valid, create a group and protest it. Don't try and co-opt something else and attack them for not going after shit the group wasn' t created to go after. That's a deflection.

I actually dont understand what the group is about. To my understanding its about people dont giving a fuck about black lives.

And that includes near zero coverage of black victims of crime.

 

[panamaican]

I actually dont understand what the group is about. To my understanding its about people dont giving a fuck about black lives.

And that includes near zero coverage of black victims of crime.

The group is about police violence in black community. The name suggests that it has broader causes and it might at this point. But it's original goal was specifically police violence.

 

[Rod1]

The group is about police violence in black community. The name suggests that it has broader causes and it might at this point. But it's original goal was specifically police violence.

I dont think thats as much as a serious issue as the bias against black people by white juries, and that wont be solved until people stop seeing blacks as thugs, and for that to change people need to be made aware of the victimization of black people.

Such course of action (focusing on police violence alone) seems to me that it will lead to the police simply dont caring about policing black communities at all.

 

[panamaican]

I dont think thats as much as a serious issue as the bias against black people by white juries, and that wont be solved until people stop seeing blacks as thugs, and for that to change people need to be made aware of the victimization of black people.

Such course of action (focusing on police violence alone) seems to me that it will lead to the police simply dont caring about policing black communities at all.

I disagree but you asked about the group. And the issue with police violence goes back decades, so do the complaints.

We're were we are because the opinion within black communities is that police don't really care about policing them already. The only difference with BLM is that this particular anti-police violence movement has the strength of the internet fueling discussion. The movements from the past simply went unheard.

Now, that doesn't mean you have to agree with them but they're not inventing this issue and they're not the first to address it.

 

[jefferz]

 

[Rod1]

I disagree but you asked about the group. And the issue with police violence goes back decades, so do the complaints.

We're were we are because the opinion within black communities is that police don't really care about policing them already. The only difference with BLM is that this particular anti-police violence movement has the strength of the internet fueling discussion. The movements from the past simply went unheard.

Now, that doesn't mean you have to agree with them but they're not inventing this issue and they're not the first to address it.

But the cops are not the problem, the problem is the justice system at large, and in a country like America, which has juries, i think the issue itself is the perception that black lives matter less than white lives.

And until that perception changes, we will only see a withdrawal of police forces from the basics of policing due to fear or reprisal, like what happened in the LA riots.

And while they can certainly create a group that deals with police brutality against blacks, calling it BLMs when ignoring the core issue affecting black lives, its hypocritical.

As if black lives only mattered when killed by a white cop, its a disservice.

 

[nixkid]

I actually dont understand what the group is about. To my understanding its about people dont giving a fuck about black lives.

And that includes near zero coverage of black victims of crime.

You should learn something about the thing you're criticizing before you start criticizing it.

Start here:
http://www.joincampaignzero.org/#vision

 

[nixkid]

But the cops are not the problem, the problem is the justice system at large, and in a country like America, which has juries, i think the issue itself is the perception that black lives matter less than white lives.

And until that perception changes, we will only see a withdrawal of police forces from the basics of policing due to fear or reprisal, like what happened in the LA riots.

And while they can certainly create a group that deals with police brutality against blacks, calling it BLMs when ignoring the core issue affecting black lives, its hypocritical.

As if black lives only mattered when killed by a white cop, its a disservice.

Seems like narrow minded thinking to me. For one, the scope of an organization's mission can (and usually does) expand over time. Once the organization has built a groundswell of support at the grassroots level, the backing of politicians, and financial backing then it only makes sense that for that organization to use those resources to tackle other issues instead of trying to rebuild all of that in some other newly formed, narrowly focused organization. Its just more efficient this way. I don't think BLM will be focused on police brutality forever.

You can get a peek in where BLM might be going by reading their guiding principles:
http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

 

[panamaican]

But the cops are not the problem, the problem is the justice system at large, and in a country like America, which has juries, i think the issue itself is the perception that black lives matter less than white lives.

And until that perception changes, we will only see a withdrawal of police forces from the basics of policing due to fear or reprisal, like what happened in the LA riots.

And while they can certainly create a group that deals with police brutality against blacks, calling it BLMs when ignoring the core issue affecting black lives, its hypocritical.

As if black lives only mattered when killed by a white cop, its a disservice.

The cops are part of the problem. The cops decide where and how they will police. They decide if they're going to issue a warning or an arrest. They are initial point of contact for the entire judicial system so addressing issues there does make a difference.

And we won't see a withdrawal of police forces because the economics of policing require that their paychecks are justified by their actions. And the economics of politics requires that being tough on crime needs to have some results to show those people who lay awake at night worried about the evil criminals.

And there's nothing hypocritical in the name. Best Buy isn't always the best buy. Since when did the name of an organization have to be the literal definition of what the organization stands for. That doesn't make any sense and I've never seen it required elsewhere.

This constant need to redirect conversations about police violence in the black community to a conversation about black on black violence is so disingenuous whenever it shows up. Before BLM, no one but black people cared about black on black violence or police violence. But the moment BLM gained public traction, the people who ignored both types violence are suddenly concerned about the lack of attention paid to black on black violence.

The real disservice to black lives is that only black people gave a fuck until this "movement" gained traction. And once it did, the response was finger wagging to the black community about the very violence the finger waggers were also ignoring. That's hypocrisy if ever there was any.

 

[nixkid]

This constant need to redirect conversations about police violence in the black community to a conversation about black on black violence is so disingenuous whenever it shows up. Before BLM, no one but black people cared about black on black violence or police violence. But the moment BLM gained public traction, the people who ignored both types violence are suddenly concerned about the lack of attention paid to black on black violence.

The real disservice to black lives is that only black people gave a fuck until this "movement" gained traction. And once it did, the response was finger wagging to the black community about the very violence the finger waggers were also ignoring. That's hypocrisy if ever there was any.

They also ignore any evidence of black people protesting/marching against black-on-black violence because it didn't happen if CNN didn't report on it.

They also ignore the 20+ year decline in violent crime rates.

 

[Rod1]

You should learn something about the thing you're criticizing before you start criticizing it.

Start here:
http://www.joincampaignzero.org/#vision

Again absolutely nothing about fixing the main issue of crime among their communities.

 

[Rod1]

Seems like narrow minded thinking to me. For one, the scope of an organization's mission can (and usually does) expand over time. Once the organization has built a groundswell of support at the grassroots level, the backing of politicians, and financial backing then it only makes sense that for that organization to use those resources to tackle other issues instead of trying to rebuild all of that in some other newly formed, narrowly focused organization. Its just more efficient this way. I don't think BLM will be focused on police brutality forever.

You can get a peek in where BLM might be going by reading their guiding principles:
http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

Its not that simple because you cant isolate problems, if you are trying to stop police brutality you need to at the same time to stop violent crime or having people police their own communities, otherwise you get Baltimore.

http://time.com/3905876/baltimore-murders-homicide-rate-record/

 

[panamaican]

Again absolutely nothing about fixing the main issue of crime among their communities.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...lack_on_black_crime_suggesting_otherwise.html

This is worth reading since it speaks to primary point that just because no one paid attention to the black-on-black violence protests, it doesn't mean they weren't happening.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national...eople-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/

That lists numerous protests.

 

[Thunderflash500]

He points out the problem with the black lives movement. Yes, the police are the enforcers. They are the ones actually harassing you. And you have a right to defend yourself. But at the end of the day the BLM shouldn't focus on police. They need to focus on the actual source of the problem. Police kill around 1000 people a year. This is completely insignificant to the damage of the over all drug war. This officer sums it up, he just states facts rather than what they mean.

So conservatives shouldn't take this and say yea, everything is great, fuck black people. It's should be fuck BLM movement for being so god damn obnoxious and not trying to solve real issues. BLM is a movement to turn whites against blacks even more. The focus should be on the drug war, allowing police to go back to actually focusing on the community, the focus should be on lowering crime. Not "Random black kid dressed as gangster committing crime in crime filled area gets shot lets protest and shut down the highway in Iowa when it happened in L.A."

Police corruption is for sure real. But there are ways to fight corruption without actually trying to cure every corrupt cop. Just take away the reason to be corrupt to begin with. End the war.

 

[Rod1]

The cops are part of the problem. The cops decide where and how they will police. They decide if they're going to issue a warning or an arrest. They are initial point of contact for the entire judicial system so addressing issues there does make a difference.

And we won't see a withdrawal of police forces because the economics of policing require that their paychecks are justified by their actions. And the economics of politics requires that being tough on crime needs to have some results to show those people who lay awake at night worried about the evil criminals.

And there's nothing hypocritical in the name. Best Buy isn't always the best buy. Since when did the name of an organization have to be the literal definition of what the organization stands for. That doesn't make any sense and I've never seen it required elsewhere.

This constant need to redirect conversations about police violence in the black community to a conversation about black on black violence is so disingenuous whenever it shows up. Before BLM, no one but black people cared about black on black violence or police violence. But the moment BLM gained public traction, the people who ignored both types violence are suddenly concerned about the lack of attention paid to black on black violence.

The real disservice to black lives is that only black people gave a fuck until this "movement" gained traction. And once it did, the response was finger wagging to the black community about the very violence the finger waggers were also ignoring. That's hypocrisy if ever there was any.

1.- Yes, cops are a problem, but they are not the cause of said problem. They are a symptom.

2.- Actually yes, we have seen it happen, we saw it after Rodney King and we are seeing it in Baltimore.

http://time.com/3905876/baltimore-murders-homicide-rate-record/

Police can justify their actions by only focusing on active crime and on calls as opposed to proactive policing.

3.- Exactly nobody cares about black on black violence, thats the main issue of the woes of black people including their problems with the police.

4.- The issue is that black people get defensive when pointing out black being victims of other blacks, because it seems they care more about their perception as a community than their actual victims. As if being black gave you a free pass to victimize black people.

 

[Rod1]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...lack_on_black_crime_suggesting_otherwise.html

This is worth reading since it speaks to primary point that just because no one paid attention to the black-on-black violence protests, it doesn't mean they weren't happening.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national...eople-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/

That lists numerous protests.

I dont disagree that black on black crime is used as a deflection, it shouldnt be about who is commiting the crime it should be about the victims.

Why are criminals being grouped with victims in this case? Its only a deflection because of stupid race politics in this case, there is only victims and criminals, independently of the group.

 

[Rod1]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...lack_on_black_crime_suggesting_otherwise.html

This is worth reading since it speaks to primary point that just because no one paid attention to the black-on-black violence protests, it doesn't mean they weren't happening.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national...eople-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/

That lists numerous protests.

A good start would be for people to organize and police their own communities, and not depend too much on the government to do so.

 

[nixkid]

Again absolutely nothing about fixing the main issue of crime among their communities.

Black homicide rates are at 40 year low.

There are organizations on the ground that are trying to deal with black on black crime including the Urban League, Obama's My Brother's Keeper, 300 Men March, etc.

Must every black issues oriented organization be focused on black crime?