Baltimore (AKA, civil unrest continues in USA)

[formerly33]

Might I add that just taking into consideration that most white people are okay with the rioting is ample evidence against the statements about the violence being necessary? Also, there are plenty of white people rioting as well as blacks.

 

I'll repeat once and for all, there are good African Americans and there are bad. There are good Caucasians and there are bad. There are good cops and there are bad. Might I stereotype them all and say -

 

There are good people and there are bad people.

[TheLeviathan]

 

 And then, would it come to light that Ferguson is 66% black, but the Ferguson police department is 90% white? 

 

Baltimore has a long history of reports of cop violence and their police force, mayor, and many city council spots are occupied by black men and women.  I really think that point is flimsy to irrelevant.

 

The issues with abusive cops aren't racially driven IMO.  

[TheLeviathan]

Also, I think we're having a hard time with blurring the lines between confrontational and violent.  These protests should be (and probably need to be) confrontational.  But violent?  No.  That focuses the camera lense in the wrong direction.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Player A:  17 year old black teenager in Baltimore who riots out of anger.

 

Player B:   55 year old Wall Street billionaire who made hundreds of millions of dollars through fraud and helped crash our economy.

 

Which player is worse?

Both deserve justice. The real problem is that only player will get it.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I didn't phrase my example very well. I wasn't trying to score a political point against you, so I apologize. I was only trying to point out an interesting paradox about how it took violent protests to bring this issue into the public consciousness.

 

Even though very, very few of the protesters were prone to violence, and those that were, were mostly youth, about the same age as the typical hockey rioter, probably.

 

Anyway, the violence will reinforce bigoted beliefs in some people watching on television, but the issue at hand is finally being addressed. Even though it should never get to this point.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Baltimore has a long history of reports of cop violence and their police force, mayor, and many city council spots are occupied by black men and women.  I really think that point is flimsy to irrelevant.

 

When police departments across the country start reflecting the community they are policing, then get back to me.

[gunnarthor]

  https://gm1.ggpht.com/b--oySLPMITq2u6d2BplMtsRUBs1yCn4RX9_FLq7JSMY3FE6EXGWhG-lyJChqKg9Xfp0j092n9PZn2IC_cmrYDbwQB5ybJ7Hh3AgaLP90LeEH15APdfQ6x2caySK5dd82bdsSFOVrfGTV9Glz1zPe7LyXp2Ou3vza09qceJMNPe2gkNQBwiONBTM0pA-BaZxPC2OhnTOFWvF3RLVua-snDgDzCoIDj9DV_mIog675OKNecLTIoyov1c645pQxd5wC6WGCBVibG4ajmS58BlJgEcE4UZ-ofsZdcphGFFzIfywm2o4rxIRB6HNUI4Fx5ewpU43fppVMdKmajD8AWO5JCRVf24-wRQ0CF3lHQaXu8YCyIcEa67jQ-C1eeOaJAf2vaa_ZgerKIEZGBYswaZzBAPaKuzZUcv83zIgIObYyiiLB1M5kMT4XYsxlr33GrKk4vZlBcWJMf_qMmDz7gbjTqWeX12cZ2osiVHxkWifH9jAh_3Yj0WJT9-IB1nZnUO21eoBjRfnii6GfgM_sqstfdliOqRkW_6ieIsRyoC6Iz2PoBbIaAJ6OpQ6jagr7Vzz5qaUOn0I=w1538-h1272-l75-ft

[formerly33]

 

I didn't phrase my example very well. I wasn't trying to score a political point against you, so I apologize. I was only trying to point out an interesting paradox about how it took violent protests to bring this issue into the public consciousness.

Even though very, very few of the protesters were prone to violence, and those that were, were mostly youth, about the same age as the typical hockey rioter, probably.

Anyway, the violence will reinforce bigoted beliefs in some people watching on television, but the issue at hand is finally being addressed. Even though it should never get to this point.

No, it should never get to this point. And the kids should be controlled. I understand that some parents are upset, but I feel like the media is encouraging the kids in their immature behavior, at least to some extent. I feel sorry for their parents.

 

Now, these kids should be taught that if they want to drive a point home, they need to seek their audience's respect. Nobody became the President of the United States because they were a gun-slinging, home-burning, small-business-destroying liberal brat. I also believe that the same goes for cops. Personally, I have a very high regard for police since the department in my area is truly phenomenal. I could give some examples, but that's not for this thread. I wish that all police officers would behave in a mature, professional manner. Then instances like the Michael Brown case wouldn't escalate unnecessarily and police like Darren Wilson wouldn't have to go through what he had to. If everyone was like Darren, then there would only be a few police shootings in extreme and necessary circumstances. Once again, if people would behave, then their likelihood of being shot by a police officer would be very, very low, regardless of their color.

 

Now I know we don't live in a perfect world, but I think that people need to learn that they can't justify their bad behavior with another person's bad behavior. And I think that I (and other people) have every right to say what we think - on a mature level. Don't worry, I'm not accusing you of thinking that I don't have that right; you have been very polite to me. But I know that there are a lot of people who will be reading this thread, whether they are members or nonmembers, and I want them to know my opinion.

 

Well, I guess this is my form of peaceful protesting.

[TheLeviathan]

 

When police departments across the country start reflecting the community they are policing, then get back to me.

 

Maybe, but it seems odd to me if this is a central part of the problem that one of the cities that does not have this problem is one of the worst offenders.

 

Part of the issue, in my eyes, is the quality of the individuals working as police officers in the first place.  Trying to meet a demographic quota doesn't help that.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Nickel rides? What year is this? So it looks like those Baltimore cops are being charged individually and going on trial, as they should, in my opinion. Doesn't matter if they are men, women, white, black, hispanic, whatever, these are individuals, and not fit for duty. Absolutely.

[formerly33]

Wow. Just wow. Don't moms have the right to train up their kids in the way they should go anymore? She did that because she loved him. She wants to protect him. She used violence not as a way of "peacefully" protesting, but as an on-the-spot correction. And now this:

 

Child Protective Services Launch Investigation On Baltimore Mom Who Hit Son

[TheLeviathan]

What that mother did and the nation-wide reaction to it is one of the most depressing aspects of this whole thing.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Not trying to pick on you, but I respectfully disagree. Being polite and classy and protesting nonviolently didn't seem to raise awareness of the police brutality issue one bit.

For example, if the protests to the Michael Brown killing hadn't gotten violent, would the protests have gotten as much coverage? Doubt it. And then, would it come to light that Ferguson is 66% black, but the Ferguson police department is 90% white? Personally, I don't think I would have learned very much about the police brutality issue if the violent protests hadn't happened. I'm not advocating violence, I'm just throwing the whole idea out there.

To be perfectly frank, my first response to the Baltimore violence was "Good, it's about time and I hope it spreads to other cities".

 

Mainstream society doesn't respond to peaceful protest. Bad things need to happen before it gets better. I wish that wasn't the case but history has shown us that's the most direct way to enact change.

[formerly33]

 

To be perfectly frank, my first response to the Baltimore violence was "Good, it's about time and I hope it spreads to other cities".

 

Mainstream society doesn't respond to peaceful protest. Bad things need to happen before it gets better. I wish that wasn't the case but history has shown us that's the most direct way to enact change.

Goodness, where have you been?! My initial response was more like, "Again? What won't they do?"

 

Come on, if it gets so bad that they can't even allow fans to go to baseball games, I think that that's a pretty good sign that it's out of control. And don't forget why O.J. got off.

[Hrbowski]

 

Bad things need to happen before it gets better.

Bad things need to happen before it gets better? You have to be kidding me! Look at MLK, he was one of the best leaders the USA has ever had, and he was never violent. When things like this happen the people only hurt themselves, they destroy their community, and it doesn't do good. Look, the people who are out being violent could be shot, and then it will all be over for them; would that be good? I don't think it would really benefit them.

[biggentleben]

 

Bad things need to happen before it gets better? You have to be kidding me! Look at MLK, he was one of the best leaders the USA has ever had, and he was never violent. When things like this happen the people only hurt themselves, they destroy their community, and it doesn't do good. Look, the people who are out being violent could be shot, and then it will all be over for them; would that be good? I don't think it would really benefit them.

 

 MLK could have spoken until he was blue in the face, but protests that became violent (often due to police initiating the violence, but there was still violence) were what made the movement a national movement. People discussed the way those people were being abused, and MLK's famous DC speech never would have been given to the crowds that were there without the violence in the protests that really drove the nation's attention.

 

This movement is part of MLK's movement, This is the issue that was present then and was only partially completed by the 1960s movement.  People got to a point where they were comfortable with seeing some change and backed away from pushing the civil rights of all forward any further.  Now those who have been sitting in silence for 50 years are no longer quiet.  There are thousands of protesters in Cleveland, Ferguson, Baltimore, and elsewhere where this has happened that were more than peaceful in their protests, but yet they got nearly no attention until others around the protests took advantage of that emotionally charged time to be violent and destructive. The funny part is that you'll likely not be able to remember Cleveland's protests because they weren't violent, and therefore they got about as much media coverage as me stubbing my toe on the couch. Without the violence, it's not seen around the country, and without it being seen around the country, it's not a discussion point.  Use it as a way to divert from the actual conversation that needs to happen and focus only on the violence or address it as what it is - violence overflowing from real, horrible issues of civil rights that are still blatantly present in our society.

[formerly33]

 

 MLK could have spoken until he was blue in the face, but protests that became violent (often due to police initiating the violence, but there was still violence) were what made the movement a national movement. People discussed the way those people were being abused, and MLK's famous DC speech never would have been given to the crowds that were there without the violence in the protests that really drove the nation's attention.

 

This movement is part of MLK's movement, This is the issue that was present then and was only partially completed by the 1960s movement.  People got to a point where they were comfortable with seeing some change and backed away from pushing the civil rights of all forward any further.  Now those who have been sitting in silence for 50 years are no longer quiet.  There are thousands of protesters in Cleveland, Ferguson, Baltimore, and elsewhere where this has happened that were more than peaceful in their protests, but yet they got nearly no attention until others around the protests took advantage of that emotionally charged time to be violent and destructive. The funny part is that you'll likely not be able to remember Cleveland's protests because they weren't violent, and therefore they got about as much media coverage as me stubbing my toe on the couch. Without the violence, it's not seen around the country, and without it being seen around the country, it's not a discussion point.  Use it as a way to divert from the actual conversation that needs to happen and focus only on the violence or address it as what it is - violence overflowing from real, horrible issues of civil rights that are still blatantly present in our society.

MLK wanted people to protest peacefully to earn respect. Sure, they didn't follow the rules of the day (i.e. segregation laws), and I congratulate them. Had I had the opportunity, I would have protested alongside of them. I don't know how old you are, but you may or may not be old enough to remember that white people were the ones being violent during the protests of the '60's more than the blacks, and that wasn't a good thing. Unless you want to say that "bad things need to happen before it gets better," to quote Brock. The bus riders/boycotters, etc. were classy through it all and came through strong. I'm sure they wouldn't want this.

 

Now I don't think it was you, but someone was careful to point out to me earlier in this thread that it was mostly teenagers who were being violent. They're not the people who protested during MLK's time, and I'm sure he wouldn't have wanted it this way. I understand that they are upset, but I think they should behave in a more mature manner.

 

Also, while I understand that people are upset over what they consider to be a case of continued prejudice (and it certainly is an issue in some places still), I don't think that this was a case of discrimination. I think that the police were wrong, and yes, they should get in trouble just like any other citizen would. However, I believe that they would have done this to anyone, whether they were white, Hispanic, African American, oriental, Native American...you name it. You've got to remember that three of the cops were black. And I don't want to hear any "They weren't black enough" shenanigans, either.

 

And do blacks really have a disadvantage compared to whites? Maybe if you take the average black's income and compare it to the average white's income, yes. But that's not the right way to decide if somebody's being discriminated against. Look at the President, for pete's sake. Also, if you took an 18-year-old black boy and an 18-year-old white boy whose parents had the same income, the black boy would get more college grants. I'm not complaining. But if that 18-year-old black boy starts rioting and trying to hurt innocent police for another police officer's actions, that's unreasonable.

 

Now, I'm not having an attitude like "All blacks are wrong and all whites are right." Far from it. I know there's a sad percentage of prejudiced whites and a huge percentage of blacks who may be upset over this situation but are not reacting violently. I don't overlook this stuff when I see it:

 

 https://o.twimg.com/2/proxy.jpg?t=HBhXaHR0cHM6Ly9hbXAudHdpbWcuY29tL3Byb2QvZGVmYXVsdC8yMDE1LzA0LzI2LzAwLzJlMzliM2EzLXVwbG9hZGVkdmlkZW9fcG9zdGVyLTk5NDkuanBnFMAHFJwEABYAEgA&s=HXITWCmmVaOpnebxpnWevb9j68KErrz1YSIhEmgGIN0

 

http://conservativetribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Anthoni-L-Drakhan-470x836.jpg

 

That little brat asked for that. The violence that ensued was a spur of the moment reaction that he well deserved. But if he had been minding his own business, it would have been wrong, very, very wrong, regardless of whether there was a Freddie Grey incident and "bad things need to happen before it gets better."

 

You all seem to think that these riots are a good thing. I think that anyone with a brain knows that the police did a bad thing. If "bad things need to happen before it gets better," couldn't I be an idiot and argue that the cops had to kill Freddie for "things to get better"?

[Hrbowski]

 

 

 

 

http://conservativetribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Anthoni-L-Drakhan-470x836.jpg

 

 

 I wonder if that made the brat like protestors any better.

[ashbury]

 I wonder if that made the brat like protestors any better.

It's impossible to know how one would react in a real situation, but as I sit here thinking about what if I saw one of my sons in that photo, first I'd be heading to the hospital to check on his condition, and I'd seek to find out if the story held up, and then I'd be seeking out the person who posted it and offer a handshake as I apologized for the impossible language my son had been using. My son might not like the protesters any better, as a consequence of the injury, but he sure would get a refresher course from me that language like that isn't ever called for, and that hatred has a way of turning itself back on a person, sometimes out of proportion.  Maybe the missing tooth will be reminder for the rest of his life to do better.

 

Like I say, though, impossible to know.

 

More important than my reaction, though, is that it's not likely the "brat" has much in the way of guidance. That doesn't change that his opinion of the protesters isn't of much value either way. Sometimes you just omit the disrespect, out of self-interest.

[biggentleben]

 

MLK wanted people to protest peacefully to earn respect. Sure, they didn't follow the rules of the day (i.e. segregation laws), and I congratulate them. Had I had the opportunity, I would have protested alongside of them. I don't know how old you are, but you may or may not be old enough to remember that white people were the ones being violent during the protests of the '60's more than the blacks, and that wasn't a good thing. Unless you want to say that "bad things need to happen before it gets better," to quote Brock. The bus riders/boycotters, etc. were classy through it all and came through strong. I'm sure they wouldn't want this.

 

Now I don't think it was you, but someone was careful to point out to me earlier in this thread that it was mostly teenagers who were being violent. They're not the people who protested during MLK's time, and I'm sure he wouldn't have wanted it this way. I understand that they are upset, but I think they should behave in a more mature manner.

 

Also, while I understand that people are upset over what they consider to be a case of continued prejudice (and it certainly is an issue in some places still), I don't think that this was a case of discrimination. I think that the police were wrong, and yes, they should get in trouble just like any other citizen would. However, I believe that they would have done this to anyone, whether they were white, Hispanic, African American, oriental, Native American...you name it. You've got to remember that three of the cops were black. And I don't want to hear any "They weren't black enough" shenanigans, either.

 

And do blacks really have a disadvantage compared to whites? Maybe if you take the average black's income and compare it to the average white's income, yes. But that's not the right way to decide if somebody's being discriminated against. Look at the President, for pete's sake. Also, if you took an 18-year-old black boy and an 18-year-old white boy whose parents had the same income, the black boy would get more college grants. I'm not complaining. But if that 18-year-old black boy starts rioting and trying to hurt innocent police for another police officer's actions, that's unreasonable.

 

Now, I'm not having an attitude like "All blacks are wrong and all whites are right." Far from it. I know there's a sad percentage of prejudiced whites and a huge percentage of blacks who may be upset over this situation but are not reacting violently. I don't overlook this stuff when I see it:

 

 https://o.twimg.com/2/proxy.jpg?t=HBhXaHR0cHM6Ly9hbXAudHdpbWcuY29tL3Byb2QvZGVmYXVsdC8yMDE1LzA0LzI2LzAwLzJlMzliM2EzLXVwbG9hZGVkdmlkZW9fcG9zdGVyLTk5NDkuanBnFMAHFJwEABYAEgA&s=HXITWCmmVaOpnebxpnWevb9j68KErrz1YSIhEmgGIN0

 

http://conservativetribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Anthoni-L-Drakhan-470x836.jpg

 

That little brat asked for that. The violence that ensued was a spur of the moment reaction that he well deserved. But if he had been minding his own business, it would have been wrong, very, very wrong, regardless of whether there was a Freddie Grey incident and "bad things need to happen before it gets better."

 

You all seem to think that these riots are a good thing. I think that anyone with a brain knows that the police did a bad thing. If "bad things need to happen before it gets better," couldn't I be an idiot and argue that the cops had to kill Freddie for "things to get better"?

 

You've officially jumped the shark.  No one on here has once praised the violence involved, however, often it seems that is a needed progression for real change to happen.  It'd be lovely if real social change could happen without violent and/or over-the-top actions taken, but in this country, that's simply not the way it works.  The bit about the black vs. white? Just no.

 

I respect the rules of this forum too much to continue down this road as most likely my verbage will not be TD-worthy quite quickly.

[Hrbowski]

 

 MLK could have spoken until he was blue in the face, but protests that became violent (often due to police initiating the violence, but there was still violence) were what made the movement a national movement. People discussed the way those people were being abused, and MLK's famous DC speech never would have been given to the crowds that were there without the violence in the protests that really drove the nation's attention.

 

This movement is part of MLK's movement, This is the issue that was present then and was only partially completed by the 1960s movement.  People got to a point where they were comfortable with seeing some change and backed away from pushing the civil rights of all forward any further.  Now those who have been sitting in silence for 50 years are no longer quiet.  There are thousands of protesters in Cleveland, Ferguson, Baltimore, and elsewhere where this has happened that were more than peaceful in their protests, but yet they got nearly no attention until others around the protests took advantage of that emotionally charged time to be violent and destructive. The funny part is that you'll likely not be able to remember Cleveland's protests because they weren't violent, and therefore they got about as much media coverage as me stubbing my toe on the couch. Without the violence, it's not seen around the country, and without it being seen around the country, it's not a discussion point.  Use it as a way to divert from the actual conversation that needs to happen and focus only on the violence or address it as what it is - violence overflowing from real, horrible issues of civil rights that are still blatantly present in our society.

I still am not convinced. What would people think if finally the police united and started protesting because they were sick of seeing rape victims, victims of horrific murders, victims of robberies that ruined people's livelihoods, victims of drug and alcohol abuse; what if they started throwing rocks at people who they thought might commit these crimes, what if they started smashing cars and burning down apartment buildings because some people might do this. Would it get the media's attention? Of course! It would be heaven for the media, but can you imaging what CNN would do? If I can guess they would no doubt be saying, "Look at the dumb conservatives." And they would be being dumb. But would people stop committing crimes? NO, they probably wouldn't even slow down, in fact they would probably go up. Being violent won't help. And as for your comment about the Cleveland protests getting little coverage from the mainstream media is true, but I was well aware of them, and if Aaron Hernandez had just stubbed his toe on his couch it would not have gotten in the news, but he killed someone, and that got into the news, it was a bad thing, and I don't see how it brought about any good. To repeat myself violence won't help, and the ironic thing is that a lot of people who are saying it will are the same people who said that going to Iraq wouldn't help because it would just make people more violent, and this will do the same thing.

[Shane Wahl]

"Riot is the language of the unheard"--MLK

 

Pretty sick of the use of MLK Jr. to argue against these riots. 

 

I am also pretty sick of "a few bad apples" when it comes to talk of the police forces around this country. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

I am also pretty sick of "a few bad apples" when it comes to talk of the police forces around this country.

 

Curious...do you think the same of urban black youth? One could argue you are using the same logic that would be ok to say "yes" to that.

 

(And I'm not even saying "yes" is wrong, but rarely find anyone with the gumption to say it)

[TheLeviathan]

I also think people are falsely equating the attention riots bring to a cause and later solutions. Charismatic leaders are far more influential than riots, they are just short term blips on the radar, leadership drives the engine of change.

[Shane Wahl]

 

I also think people are falsely equating the attention riots bring to a cause and later solutions. Charismatic leaders are far more influential than riots, they are just short term blips on the radar, leadership drives the engine of change.

 

Those police officers in Baltimore very likely would have not been indicted without this kind of attention. Leaders didn't do that. 

 

As far as the "few bad apples" about black urban youth, no one could seriously maintain that there are only a few bad apples. There is widespread crime and drug use in that population. I am not a libertarian about freedom, however, I think people are mainly conditioned by both internal and external factors. The same would apply to police officers--I am not sure what compels so many to completely abuse their authority.

 

And that's a key difference. Urban youth are not here to protect and serve. There has to be a different standard for police.

 

Also, again, the rioting on Monday was provoked by police officers waiting for those teenage kids to get off of their buses. Teachers in Baltimore attest to this.

[Shane Wahl]

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/riot-language-unheard-9-mlk-quotes-mainstream-media-wont-cite

 

A more honest view of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s views on the matter. How his message is currently co-opted by conservatives is beyond my comprehension.

[formerly33]

 

You've officially jumped the shark.  No one on here has once praised the violence involved, however, often it seems that is a needed progression for real change to happen.  It'd be lovely if real social change could happen without violent and/or over-the-top actions taken, but in this country, that's simply not the way it works.  The bit about the black vs. white? Just no.

 

I respect the rules of this forum too much to continue down this road as most likely my verbage will not be TD-worthy quite quickly.

Good heavens, then what are you saying? You almost make it seem like you're on the same page as me now. The philosophical workings of my mind lead me to the conclusion that liberals and conservatives all think alike, they just have different ways of expressing themselves and therefore there are misunderstandings all around.

 

But I stick firm to everything I've said. These riots aren't going to accomplish anything good. And as Levi said, charismatic leaders are far more influential than riots. I'd be more than happy to be that charismatic leader for them if they'd take me, but the majority wouldn't respect me because I'm white. Therefore if I tried to get them to stop rioting, they'd just laugh me out of town.

 

It's okay if you don't want to write on this thread anymore. Feel free to PM me and we can settle it from there. Don't worry, I won't turn you into the moderators unless you get really awful, and I don't see that happening because I'm a very forgiving person, and I won't swear back if you start. It'd be hard for you to stay mad at me for long. You never know, this could lead to a very close friendship. The human nature can be remarkably strange at times.

 

And oh, yes, I belong to a totally different league of athletes, best known for its camel jumpers and kangaroo boxers, but not exclusive of shark jumpers...but that's not the point.

[Shane Wahl]

 

Good heavens, then what are you saying? You almost make it seem like you're on the same page as me now. The philosophical workings of my mind lead me to the conclusion that liberals and conservatives all think alike, they just have different ways of expressing themselves and therefore there are misunderstandings all around.

 

Actually, there is mounting evidence that liberals and conservatives are "wired" differently!

[Shane Wahl]

 

 

But I stick firm to everything I've said. These riots aren't going to accomplish anything good. And as Levi said, charismatic leaders are far more influential than riots. I'd be more than happy to be that charismatic leader for them if they'd take me, but the majority wouldn't respect me because I'm white. Therefore if I tried to get them to stop rioting, they'd just laugh me out of town.

 

White America wouldn't be paying a modicum of attention to this if there weren't such protests. 

[Shane Wahl]

 

Actually, there is mounting evidence that liberals and conservatives are "wired" differently!

 

That is *social* conservatism vs. *social* liberalism, mind you.

 

And the differences, predictably, have to do with the amygdala (sp?) and fear response (among other things).