President Obama to meet with Black Lives Matter leaders and other activist, including Al Sharpton, a
60 replies, posted
[QUOTE=wauterboi;49762990][url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org[/url]
[editline]17th February 2016[/editline]
As long as it ends with you never having to take anything or anyone seriously by judging a group by the worst offenders, you'll never have to challenge yourself with anything. Is #BLM the problem, or some of the loud ones? And at that point, is the loudness due to anything else? Is there a reason the volume has reached this level? Are you sure that all or even a majority of #BLM advocates are what you're describing?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions/#solutionsoverview[/url]
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/brokenwindows[/url]
Police increase patrols in areas where minor crimes are known to happen. These people want police patrols to be...arbitrary?
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/oversight[/url]
An oversight board comprised entirely of people who have no idea how the job works. Partial civilian oversight? Sure, but total? Are none of these guys engineers? Do none of them understand what it is like to have bosses that have never actually done the labor?
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/force[/url]
Most of this stuff is already in place. Other stuff varies by department and has merits and drawbacks. Choke holds are useful, generally non-lethal, methods of subduing someone before them hurt the officer or THEMSELVES. Hog tying is almost universally done to prevent the person from injuring themselves during transport. They aren't going to hurt the cruiser when they freak out in the back, but they may very well hurt themselves.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/investigations[/url]
Expensive and generally already exists in some capacity. Overall relatively reasonable though.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/representation[/url]
Departments generally try quite hard to achieve community representation. Being a member of the community that you protect is often attractive during the hiring process.
If the community lacks qualified individuals, or a sufficient number of minorities or women who wish to apply, that isn't the responsibility, or inside the authority, of the department to fix. Due to systemic racism, we often have poor communities comprised heavily of minorities, which in turn means low rates of high school and college educated graduates available to fill the ranks. Given the professionalization of police forces in the US, a college education is, and should be, a requirement for many departments. If your community lacks a sufficient number of qualified individuals, it only makes sense that you would seek applicants elsewhere.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/film-the-police[/url]
Allowing police to be recorded is fine, but body cameras present a problem.
The most important one is partially addressed here: The freedom of information act allows anyone to request the footage. A police department is going to have endless footage of victims on the worst possible day of their life. It simply isn't feasible to ask everyone if they want to be recorded. Imagine asking literally everyone you see if you can look at them. In many cases a victim isn't going to be in a place where they can make decisions. Once the footage is taken, it becomes evidence, and now is going to be very tricky to destroy. Which is how it should be. Evidence should be hard to destroy.
The other issue is storage. This wants a third party to store all the footage, which is fine, but the sheer volume of footage is going to be staggering. Imagine uncompressed footage of every officer in a department, for their entire shift, for six months, having to be stored. Even assuming you had the CPU power to compress the footage (which again is tricky because evidence), you'd still have a ridiculously massive archive of data. On top of that archive of data, you'd need redundancies out the ass to keep a data failure or natural disaster from sinking (possibly literally) your case.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/train[/url]
Officers are generally required to engage in considerable amounts of annual training every year. Training never stops in any decently funded department. Expanding verbal judo (hate that term, but it works) and deescalation training would help immensely in many departments, however.
LGBTQ training though? Seriously? English language learner training? Are they serious?
Good luck designing a test to determine racial bias though.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/end-policing-for-profit[/url]
This all seems good. Other nations do a lot of this stuff already, and we should really take note.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/demilitarization[/url]
1033 program provides Vietnam era gear to departments. It does so in relatively small volumes. It seriously isn't a concern. Way overblown.
Police use the best equipment for the situation generally. You deploy an armored vehicle to a situation with armed suspects, because they might shoot at you. It isn't a complicated concept.
I would support barring the use of camouflage for any situation that doesn't require it (Sharp shooters occasionally have need of it), but that isn't an issue of militarization, it is an issue of identification. SWAT teams should be clad in whatever the predominate colors of the department are. Police, even SWAT, should be recognizable as such.
[url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/contracts[/url]
I don't even know where to start with this. Most of this mess would make police work impossible for police with even the highest of standards. They clearly didn't even ask anyone in law enforcement about this shit.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;49763448]Why is it that people who think they're animals need help but people who think they're a non-existent gender don't?
I'm perfectly accepting of trans people, gay people, etc., but non-binary genders are just made up. There's male and female, and you can be either one regarless of your sex at birth.[/QUOTE]
What defines a non-existent gender? What about intersex people born with the genitalia of both people? Why do we only have two genders? Is that necessarily true? The examples I provided above show it isn't true at all - historically, many societies define several genders outside of the male/female binary.
Should intersex people be forced to choose male or female? Why can't they choose "indeterminate?" What's wrong with that? How does that affect you or your well-being?
Gender is made up - sex is not. Gender identities vary across cultures - it's a cultural definition. Thailand views kathoeys or ladyboys as a separate gender. It is based entirely on cultural norms and social behavior, not necessarily genitalia.
Al Sharpton is a piece of shit. Never liked the guy.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;49763475]What defines a non-existent gender? What about intersex people born with the genitalia of both people? Why do we only have two genders? Is that necessarily true? The examples I provided above show it isn't true at all - historically, many societies define several genders outside of the male/female binary.
Should intersex people be forced to choose male or female? Why can't they choose "indeterminate?" What's wrong with that? How does that affect you or your well-being?
Gender is made up - sex is not. Gender identities vary across cultures - it's a cultural definition. Thailand views kathoeys or ladyboys as a separate gender. It is based entirely on cultural norms and social behavior, not necessarily genitalia.[/QUOTE]
The way I see it, your sex is what you are biologically. Your gender is what sex you feel like. There are only two sexes, there are only two genders.
I think people born with both genitals are a very small portion of the population and on't really warrant we change our entire perception of each other because they have an odd genetic mutation. We don't really redefine who we are because of people born without legs do we? I think if a hermaphrodite wants to say "I don't know", then that's perfectly fine.
None of this affects me or my well being. It's just whenever someone tells me their gender is "fluid", I look down on them is all. They're silly to me and I might avoid dealing with them in the future.
[QUOTE=GunFox;49763464][url]http://www.joincampaignzero.org/demilitarization[/url][/QUOTE]
The worst part of this is where they want to ban police departments from using armoured vehicles. The way it's worded means they won't even be able to commander a Bank Van for support.
Gender is most certainly not binary, as there are three genders in several cultures.
Gender is, however, a conscious choice we make. You can't control your sex or your sexual orientation, but your gender is an identity determined by your actions, not some inherent biological process.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;49762954]Well that's a lot to extrapolate from what I said.
SJW has a specific connotation with it. I didn't say "I hope people voting for candidates who will represent them well ends soon", or "I hope people will soon stop becoming involved in local government and petitioning a list of grievances to their elected officials", or "I hope people will stop peacefully protesting what they perceive as injustices in a society built against them". I said "SJW".
Well he seems like the kind of person who should be advocating for social change, not SJWs
Not really the best thing IMO since I think that the protesters were wrong about Ferguson and Michael Brown
Wow that's fucked up
Right cause I said that, good eye there.
Well he seems like a good representative as well. But approval ratings mean nothing; Putin has like 80% approval and he's a terrible person
idk who that is
Yeah like holding a cop accountable when he shoots in self defense after being attacked.
I think black lives matter is a movement by young, politically uninformed college students who want to rage about something without having to think about what they're angry at. The end up doing that horseshoe thing where the radical leftists come back around and end up espousing the views or radical rightists, promoting racism, segregation, etc.[/QUOTE]
As one pretty major point, the protestors were [URL="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjJ6vfNvoDLAhWDSyYKHWT9BUsQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNHtJM3b5EsCu3dW2MALZqFpj0V0kg&sig2=ihjDiVC4ns2XReHLqtXXnQ"]NOT WRONG ABOUT FERGUSON[/URL].
Mike Brown was a catalyst, just the spark that finally blew the lid off decades of increasing racial tension here. The fact that the officer who shot Brown was found to have acted in a fairly clear case of self defense in that particular case does NOT disprove the wider concerns about policing in Saint Louis, or indeed about policing throughout the many other major cities in which reports of similar abuse have been rampant for decades.
The city of Ferguson is in Federal Court [I]right now[/I] for their numerous and blatant constitutional violations against black citizens.
Claiming that Mike Brown is all Ferguson was about or all that BLM is about or all that anybody calling for police oversight and accountability is about is deeply ignorant.
[QUOTE=GunFox;49763748]Gender is most certainly not binary, as there are three genders in several cultures.
Gender is, however, a conscious choice we make. You can't control your sex or your sexual orientation, but your gender is an identity determined by your actions, not some inherent biological process.[/QUOTE]
So males and females have different physical characteristics, but the exact same behavior?
that doesn't seem likely
Am I just misinterpreting what you mean by "gender is a conscious choice we make"?
[QUOTE] non binary genders are a real thing tho? Otherkin and headmates are either a neurotypical being a troll or someone with legitimate mental health issues who needs better, more affordable help than your country can provide, as well as an open forum without being afraid they'll be discriminated against because of their issues
[/QUOTE]
Non-binary genders is stupid, and a creation of special snowflake teenagers on tumblr.
How about, rather than inventing new genders and declaring every third person trans, we accept that there are such things as masculine women and feminine men and that rigid definitions of male and female don't work?
Otherkin/headmates/multiple systems is also stupid. 99% special snowflakes, 1% schizophrenics in serious need of mental help.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;49763431]Gender schema theory has been a field of psychology since the 80s, and gender roles have been under discussion since the 50s with intersex people, gender dysphoria is in the DSM...
This stuff has been the subject of research since the 1920s. Saying it's "made up by teenagers" is absurd. Ancient cultures have non-binary gender descriptors - Indian Vedic culture recognized three genders, the Middle Kingdom of Egypt had male, female, and sekhet, the Greeks had the "hermaphrodites..."
Israel had like 6. Male, female, androgynous (both), tumtum (unknown), aylonit (barren female), saris (male-to-female transgender/eunuch).
Saying that gender identities are just "made up" by teenagers is a joke. It's a big field of research in psychology and anthropology.[/QUOTE]
Okay, so gender identity is culturally related?
What precedent is there for >2 genders in American culture? Or British culture prior to American independence?
[editline]18th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=proboardslol;49763448]
Psychology and Anthropology aren't really the most well-respected fields, though, are they? They're on the border or humanities and science, which gives them ample room to make things up.[/QUOTE]
Psychology, yes. Anthropology, however, is more grounded in factual evidence such as literature, archaeological work, and so forth, though it does have some wiggle room for theories on 'why' of cultures, it does have a lot of focus on 'what' they are defined by.
Holy shit even I think the whole 'accept my gender and sexuality' thing is widely abused, but some of the posts in this thread are borderline monkey on keyboard tier retardation
[QUOTE=GunFox;49763464]-the big post-[/QUOTE]
Hey, if your argument is that they aren't perfect and have proposed stuff that has clear issues, that's fine. I wouldn't disagree with you. The problem is [I]they[/I] shouldn't be the ones coming up with the full plan. They are merely citizens. The fact that they have to put in this much work is disturbing.
Again, back to the rape analogy. Sure, the rape victim isn't going to come up with a clear concise way on how to stop rape. However, there's bits and pieces that can probably be taken from the plan and used as a starting point for the government. I think you would agree that it would be a bad idea to say, "Hey, your plan sucks. You obviously didn't consult anyone about this." I'm hoping that wasn't your intention for the #BLM movement.
I posted that as an example of the [B]reasonable[/B] effort that people are going through to get the situation solved. It isn't straight up "everyone is racist and imdabes", it's ideas they come up with as a result of their negative experiences and the negative experiences of others. If the means to get there aren't great, then that's totally fine. Constructive criticism is great. Separate efforts are great. Saying, "what is this shit" is not. That's dismissal. And even though you might not mean it like that or you're not saying that, other people will.
Fuck Al Sharpton, hope he lets slip some awful anti-semetic comment and get laughed out of the meeting so some [b]actual[/b] good can get done.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;49764134]I posted that as an example of the [B]reasonable[/B] effort that people are going through to get the situation solved.[/QUOTE]
That's the thing. A whole lot of that isn't reasonable in any way.
[QUOTE=sgman91;49764311]That's the thing. A whole lot of that isn't reasonable in any way.[/QUOTE]
The starting point of reasonable compromise isn't reasonable, but does take reasonable effort and conduct.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;49764373]The starting point of reasonable compromise isn't reasonable, but does take reasonable effort and conduct.[/QUOTE]
I don't even know what this means. This isn't a lawsuit where one side starts with a massive number in order to get a settlement.
Coming up with a bunch of unreasonable ideas tells everyone that you have no idea what you're talking about.
[QUOTE=sgman91;49764387]I don't even know what this means. This isn't a lawsuit where one side starts with a massive number in order to get a settlement.
Coming up with a bunch of unreasonable ideas tells everyone that you have no idea what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]
Sure, these people might not have an idea of what they're talking about, but they do want and need change that is being ultimately neglected by everyone else. There's a respectable commitment that should inspire people to join in and come up with ideas. Saying these people shouldn't say anything until they learn about law enforcement stagnates process. At the very least, you can say, "Well, here are their concerns, and while their plans to address it aren't the best, we can cut the worst ideas out and fill in the blanks." It doesn't have to be this all or nothing thing.
Let's not forget why these people are coming up with ideas - it's because other people aren't.
[QUOTE=sgman91;49764311]That's the thing. A whole lot of that isn't reasonable in any way.[/QUOTE]
It is an entirely reasonable first step, it is just their claims are disturbingly ignorant. Much of what they want would be desirable to departments as well, but the reality of departmental funding and the legal issues it raises are far beyond the scope of departments, and will never be feasible due to the simple fact that local law enforcement is locally funded.
There is a long road ahead.
[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;49764179]Fuck Al Sharpton, hope he lets slip some awful anti-semetic comment and get laughed out of the meeting so some [b]actual[/b] good can get done.[/QUOTE]
All he does is stir shit and make money from it. How is he taken seriously.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;49763076]I think that when you go from trying to do something constructive for your group, to trying to do something obstructive or even destructive to another, you've lost the proper goal. It's a growing trend among young leftists to try to exclude one's emancipatory movement from others (so-called "allies"). Saying "whites can't offer perspective on this issue", or "whites shouldn't talk about this issue" is fucked up. I know this isn't the majority, but BLM groups do say shit like this
this tweet was retweeted by @dmvblacklives
[media]https://twitter.com/ztsamudzi/status/699993243606364161[/media]
recently a former marine was mugged by people shouting about black lives matter. BLM and BLMDMV have yet to denounce the attack, when people are unsure about the involvement of the group.
I think there is a dangerous strain of leftism in today's college environment, left over from postmodern writers and philosophers from the 20th century who write on a load of "-isms" and it all boils down to trying to justify racism.
[editline]17th February 2016[/editline]
a.) I'm not sure where I'm supposed to get information if not from the news. The only other option is from twitter or facebook (neither of which I have), and I wouln't trust anybody there either. The only hope you have is to diversify your news sources and critically think about what's true and what's not.
b.) I don't interact with much of anyone. That aside, I think there's a huge difference between being a muslim, being a feminist, and being BLM. BLM is a group; feminism and islam are an ideology. Making claims about feminists or muslims on a broad scale is stupid because of the scope of those groups. BLM has its own website, twitter, etc.
c.) I think that "all lives matter" is a statement about a wish for egalitarianism, while "Black Lives Matter" is a statement about black separatism, if we accept that the two statements are in contradiction from one another.
I think the SJW craze in general is largely about a generation of entitled and narcissistic college kids who were given the "nobody loses" treatment. I think that an entire generation of kids has been told that they're special and that they matter on a grand scheme of things and are unhappy with the fact that that was a lie. I'll grant that on the race side of things, there are genuine complaints and grievances, but when you lump SJWs together with people who protest over neuro-atypicality, non-binary genders, otherkin, headmates, etc., then you really see that some people have come up with this postmodern narrative to try to make themselves feel special, when in reality they're just unimportant.
[editline]17th February 2016[/editline]
For real, why don't we donate for all kinds of cancer? Nobody donates to lung cancer because everyone thinks smokers deserve it.[/QUOTE]
I agree 100%. Great post dude.
"Lets invite everyone to the whitehouse for criminal justice system reform minus those who actually work in the criminal justice system"
[QUOTE=Alec W;49763037]well duh all lives matter but why aren't we allowed to focus on one specific group and the issues?
do you go to race for the cure breast cancer runs and go "why can't you donate to [I]every[/I] cancer?"
i'm sorry your exposure to BLM has been the worst parts of it.[/QUOTE]
Police brutality is proportional to crime rates across demographics, with the exclusion of Asians.
By singling out race we focus on racism rather than actual brutality. It's a red herring and ostracizes a huge portion of the population.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49766360]"Lets invite everyone to the whitehouse for criminal justice system reform minus those who actually work in the criminal justice system"[/QUOTE]
its more than likely just a feelgood measure
[QUOTE=GunFox;49763748]Gender is most certainly not binary, as there are three genders in several cultures.
Gender is, however, a conscious choice we make. You can't control your sex or your sexual orientation, but your gender is an identity determined by your actions, not some inherent biological process.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. You cannot and do not choose your gender.
[editline]18th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=.Isak.;49763475]
Gender is made up - sex is not. Gender identities vary across cultures - it's a cultural definition. Thailand views kathoeys or ladyboys as a separate gender. It is based entirely on cultural norms and social behavior, not necessarily genitalia.[/QUOTE]
Gender as it relates to social expectations is "made up". Gender as it relates to ones individual identity is still concrete and has some basis in that individuals biology (ex trans people having brains that have characteristics of the brain of someone from their identified gender). Be careful to not confuse the two.
I'm fully willing to believe there are members of the BLM movement that want to solve problems of racism in parts of the criminal justice system and reduce instances of police brutality but I really don't see those members in the media. At this point my exposure to BLM activists lies in exactly two realms: the presumably unemployed protesters that lock down bridges and highways, thereby denying black people, white people, and every person from getting to their job and putting bread on the table, and the super-privileged college social justice movement who has resorted to bullying and segregation to institute what they see as equality.
I'm not even going out of my way to find outlets that corroborate a narrative. I'm getting this shit from liberal and progressive outlets.
[QUOTE=GunFox;49763748]Gender is most certainly not binary, as there are three genders in several cultures.
Gender is, however, a conscious choice we make. You can't control your sex or your sexual orientation, but your gender is an identity determined by your actions, not some inherent biological process.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer[/url]
This entire case is explicit proof of the contrary.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49767929]e. I'm getting this shit from liberal and progressive outlets.[/QUOTE]
This should tell you more about labels like these, than anything else.
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;49768062][URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer[/URL]
This entire case is explicit proof of the contrary.[/QUOTE]
Single examples don't really prove anything, whether you're right or not. Like someone said previously, we don't say that humans have 2 states: having legs and not having legs because some people are born without legs. People have legs and those without legs have some issue that separates them from the normal human experience. If all we have are single anecdotal individuals that differ from the gender norm, then the same logic would apply. Those individual have an issue that separates them from the normal human experience.
That' wouldn't make those people any less human, bad people, etc. It just means they have an experience that falls outside what we accept as normal function, just like someone born without legs or someone born without a sense of empathy.
[QUOTE=sgman91;49768360]Single examples don't really prove anything, whether you're right or not. Like someone said previously, we don't say that humans have 2 states: having legs and not having legs because some people are born without legs. People have legs and those without legs have some issue that separates them from the normal human experience. If all we have are single anecdotal individuals that differ from the gender norm, then the same logic would apply. Those individual have an issue that separates them from the normal human experience.
That' wouldn't make those people any less human, bad people, etc. It just means they have an experience that falls outside what we accept as normal function, just like someone born without legs or someone born without a sense of empathy.[/QUOTE]
The thing with a third gender is that there is no biological basis for it. With MtF and FtM trans individuals there are some measurable differences in things like brain structure that at some level indicate that their conditions have some relation to biology. To my knowledge we have no such understanding in regards any hypothetical third gender
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49766360]"Lets invite everyone to the whitehouse for criminal justice system reform minus those who actually work in the criminal justice system"[/QUOTE]
If they cared enough they would have done something about it by now. I don't see a problem with passing the metaphorical torch along to people that just want something done.
[editline]18th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49767929]I'm fully willing to believe there are members of the BLM movement that want to solve problems of racism in parts of the criminal justice system and reduce instances of police brutality but I really don't see those members in the media. At this point my exposure to BLM activists lies in exactly two realms: the presumably unemployed protesters that lock down bridges and highways, thereby denying black people, white people, and every person from getting to their job and putting bread on the table, and the super-privileged college social justice movement who has resorted to bullying and segregation to institute what they see as equality.
I'm not even going out of my way to find outlets that corroborate a narrative. I'm getting this shit from liberal and progressive outlets.[/QUOTE]
Think about it: what attracts more views? Is it sensible, calm #BLM supporters or obnoxiousness?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.