What's the biggest reason for Blacks not advancing

[Junior]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/08/12/ferguson_tear_gas_video_angry_but_apparently_unarmed_residents_face_attack.html

 

 

 

Here is footage from Monday night, posted by reporter Ray Downs of the St. Louis publication Riverfront Times, of Ferguson, Missouri, police firing tear gas at angry residents despite the fact that they're standing behind a fence on private property and are apparently unarmed:

[StPaulHusker]

 

. . . the media is portraying law enforcement as a domestic military force.

They won't have to work too hard with pictures like this:

 

Typical media photo taken out of context

[BigRedBuster]

Here is something funny and frustrating at the same time.

 

When some ultra conservative like an idiot on a ranch in Nevada is being handled with federal agents, conservative groups go crazy and scream that the gubment is tyrannical and taking over our lives and stealing our property. Liberals then roll their eyes and look at the conservatives as a bunch of wackos.

 

When minorities are rioting and looting innocent businesses and hurting people and the police force come in to try to keep the peace, liberals scream that these racist over powering military type forces are a force of oppression and keeping down black people. Conservatives then roll their eyes at liberals as a bunch of wackos.

 

I guess the good of military force is in the eye of the beholder.

[BigRedBuster]

 

. . . the media is portraying law enforcement as a domestic military force.

They won't have to work too hard with pictures like this:

 

Hey, he can't be too bad of a guy, he does have a Cabelas hat on.

[carlfense]

Here is something funny and frustrating at the same time.

 

When some ultra conservative like an idiot on a ranch in Nevada is being handled with federal agents, conservative groups go crazy and scream that the gubment is tyrannical and taking over our lives and stealing our property. Liberals then roll their eyes and look at the conservatives as a bunch of wackos.

 

When minorities are rioting and looting innocent businesses and hurting people and the police force come in to try to keep the peace, liberals scream that these racist over powering military type forces are a force of oppression and keeping down black people. Conservatives then roll their eyes at liberals as a bunch of wackos.

 

I guess the good of military force is in the eye of the beholder.

I suppose the Tea Party would be supporting the riots if those black folks were carrying AR-15s?

 

 

(Edit: It'd almost be worth the unrest to see the conservative media hysteria if blacks from around the country were pouring into Franklin carrying ARs and wearing tactical gear. Somehow I don't think that they'd make the connection. I mean . . . Bundy was a deadbeat tenant being evicted . . . and this is just an unarmed black kid gunned down by the police. Clearly that first one is worth the outrage.)

[Junior]

Here is something funny and frustrating at the same time.

 

When some ultra conservative like an idiot on a ranch in Nevada is being handled with federal agents, conservative groups go crazy and scream that the gubment is tyrannical and taking over our lives and stealing our property. Liberals then roll their eyes and look at the conservatives as a bunch of wackos.

 

When minorities are rioting and looting innocent businesses and hurting people and the police force come in to try to keep the peace, liberals scream that these racist over powering military type forces are a force of oppression and keeping down black people. Conservatives then roll their eyes at liberals as a bunch of wackos.

 

I guess the good of military force is in the eye of the beholder.

 

There's a slight distinction between the two cases that you seem to be leaving out. Namely that unarmed black folks are being shot, tear gassed, and detained; while armed white people were left alone to do as they please.

[carlfense]

There's a slight distinction between the two cases that you seem to be leaving out. Namely that unarmed black folks are being shot, tear gassed, and detained; while armed white people were left alone to do as they please.

That's a fact.

[tschu]

 

Here is something funny and frustrating at the same time.

 

When some ultra conservative like an idiot on a ranch in Nevada is being handled with federal agents, conservative groups go crazy and scream that the gubment is tyrannical and taking over our lives and stealing our property. Liberals then roll their eyes and look at the conservatives as a bunch of wackos.

 

When minorities are rioting and looting innocent businesses and hurting people and the police force come in to try to keep the peace, liberals scream that these racist over powering military type forces are a force of oppression and keeping down black people. Conservatives then roll their eyes at liberals as a bunch of wackos.

 

I guess the good of military force is in the eye of the beholder.

I suppose the Tea Party would be supporting the riots if those black folks were carrying AR-15s?

 

 

(Edit: It'd almost be worth the unrest to see the conservative media hysteria if blacks from around the country were pouring into Franklin carrying ARs and wearing tactical gear. Somehow I don't think that they'd make the connection. I mean . . . Bundy was a deadbeat tenant being evicted . . . and this is just an unarmed black kid gunned down by the police. Clearly that first one is worth the outrage.)

 

Heh. I suppose if 8 black guys walked into a Chipotle carrying AR-15s, we know what the reaction would be like.

[LukeinNE]

 

Which, in itself, hits exactly on the well-being of the black community as well. Amazing huh.

 

Not really. It's rarely a major story if a non-black person is killed unless they're important. It's never a major story that over 90% of the obscenely large number of black homicide victims comes at the hands of black offenders. It's only a major story when the Al Sharptons of the world can use an incident to paint a broad narrative of whites oppressing blacks. If you're an aging radical who yearns to refight the battles of the 1960s, that approach makes sense. If you actually care about saving the lives of young black men, not so much.

 

And here's the sad part: there's potential for common ground on the concern of an increasingly militarized police. Unfortunately, the progressive left, with thin circumstantial evidence at best, rushed to make this a story about race, about whites oppressing blacks. You yourself absurdly claimed that only black people are subject to unjust killings on the part of the police. The responses are predictable: blacks believe more and more that white America is out to get them, and whites get defensive and, seeing the anger and destruction on tv, decide that suburban living and militarized police are necessary for their safety.

[Junior]

 

 

Which, in itself, hits exactly on the well-being of the black community as well. Amazing huh.

 

Not really. It's rarely a major story if a non-black person is killed unless they're important.

 

You serious? I mean, you can't be.... right?

[tschu]

 

 

Which, in itself, hits exactly on the well-being of the black community as well. Amazing huh.

 

Not really. It's rarely a major story if a non-black person is killed unless they're important. It's never a major story that over 90% of the obscenely large number of black homicide victims comes at the hands of black offenders. It's only a major story when the Al Sharptons of the world can use an incident to paint a broad narrative of whites oppressing blacks. If you're an aging radical who yearns to refight the battles of the 1960s, that approach makes sense. If you actually care about saving the lives of young black men, not so much.

 

Exactly. You're making my point for me. A very large chunk of the black demographic is subject to poverty and inner-city troubles, and we all look the other direction and don't care and don't see it as an issue. That in itself is a huge problem. But since there's not a direct (i stress direct) cause for this cycle of poverty that these people can see, the frustration gets let out onto each other. But it's still the cause of oppression - deep poverty that is still left over from the days of slavery, lack of educational opportunities, biases show by others, there are a million reasons. It's ridiculously hard to get out of this cycle. But when a white cop shoots an unarmed black guy, that's the lightning rod that ignites the fire - in this case, the black community knows exactly where to aim their frustrations. Both are an indictment on the fact that African-Americans are still not close to being on equal standing with whites in this country, some 50 years after the Civil Rights Act. It may take another century.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Here is something funny and frustrating at the same time.

 

When some ultra conservative like an idiot on a ranch in Nevada is being handled with federal agents, conservative groups go crazy and scream that the gubment is tyrannical and taking over our lives and stealing our property. Liberals then roll their eyes and look at the conservatives as a bunch of wackos.

 

When minorities are rioting and looting innocent businesses and hurting people and the police force come in to try to keep the peace, liberals scream that these racist over powering military type forces are a force of oppression and keeping down black people. Conservatives then roll their eyes at liberals as a bunch of wackos.

 

I guess the good of military force is in the eye of the beholder.

 

There's a slight distinction between the two cases that you seem to be leaving out. Namely that unarmed black folks are being shot, tear gassed, and detained; while armed white people were left alone to do as they please.

 

I'm not defending either the wacko tea partiers or the liberals who claim the military crack down in St. Louis.

 

However, are you claiming to KNOW that the looters and vandals involved in the riots are unarmed?

 

One major difference is that I don't remember the tea party whack jobs in Nevada looting and vandalizing the local town while there.

 

Let me ask this, let's say you are a police officer in the area and you are given the task of going in and stopping the rioting, looting, vandalizing...etc. How are you going to do it? Are you going to go in with a baseball cap on, no guns with a big smiley face on your chest wanting to shake their hands and give them a hug? Or, are you going to go in as a group with force to protect yourselves from anything you might encounter?

 

Let's put this in perspective.

 

The first and worst part of this whole thing is what happened to start it. An unarmed kid was shot by a police officer.

 

The second bad thing that has happened is the looting and vandalizing.

 

Now, the police have the job of somehow trying to stop that and do an investigation into what happened. How do you propose they stop the looting and vandalizing?

[tschu]

 

 

 

Which, in itself, hits exactly on the well-being of the black community as well. Amazing huh.

 

Not really. It's rarely a major story if a non-black person is killed unless they're important.

 

You serious? I mean, you can't be.... right?

 

He is absolutely serious, he's spend much of the last two pages on this, lol

[Junior]

 

 

Here is something funny and frustrating at the same time.

 

When some ultra conservative like an idiot on a ranch in Nevada is being handled with federal agents, conservative groups go crazy and scream that the gubment is tyrannical and taking over our lives and stealing our property. Liberals then roll their eyes and look at the conservatives as a bunch of wackos.

 

When minorities are rioting and looting innocent businesses and hurting people and the police force come in to try to keep the peace, liberals scream that these racist over powering military type forces are a force of oppression and keeping down black people. Conservatives then roll their eyes at liberals as a bunch of wackos.

 

I guess the good of military force is in the eye of the beholder.

 

There's a slight distinction between the two cases that you seem to be leaving out. Namely that unarmed black folks are being shot, tear gassed, and detained; while armed white people were left alone to do as they please.

 

I'm not defending either the wacko tea partiers or the liberals who claim the military crack down in St. Louis.

 

However, are you claiming to KNOW that the looters and vandals involved in the riots are unarmed?

 

One major difference is that I don't remember the tea party whack jobs in Nevada looting and vandalizing the local town while there.

 

Let me ask this, let's say you are a police officer in the area and you are given the task of going in and stopping the rioting, looting, vandalizing...etc. How are you going to do it? Are you going to go in with a baseball cap on, no guns with a big smiley face on your chest wanting to shake their hands and give them a hug? Or, are you going to go in as a group with force to protect yourselves from anything you might encounter?

 

Let's put this in perspective.

 

The first and worst part of this whole thing is what happened to start it. An unarmed kid was shot by a police officer.

 

The second bad thing that has happened is the looting and vandalizing.

 

Now, the police have the job of somehow trying to stop that and do an investigation into what happened. How do you propose they stop the looting and vandalizing?

 

 

Ah, so here you are assuming that the police are only cracking down on looters. Where the media reports would indicate that people walking on the street are getting tear gassed.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/08/12/police-use-tear-gas-on-crowd/

 

 

 

“I’ve got my family in here,” Harry said, pointing back to his home as a tear gas canister landed in his yard, ignited and sent him and this reporter ducking behind shrubbery.

 

 

 

As police moved up West Florissant, many residents said they were trapped. The neighborhood consists of a series of cul-de-sacs with one main road — West Florissant, now blocked by police — stretching between them.

“I was just trying to get to my sister’s house,” cried one 23-year-old, who lay sobbing on a lawn.

He said he was walking home when officers approached him and sprayed tear gas in his face and peppered him with rubber bullets.

[Abdullah the Butcher]

 

 

Which, in itself, hits exactly on the well-being of the black community as well. Amazing huh.

 

Not really. It's rarely a major story if a non-black person is killed unless they're important. It's never a major story that over 90% of the obscenely large number of black homicide victims comes at the hands of black offenders. It's only a major story when the Al Sharptons of the world can use an incident to paint a broad narrative of whites oppressing blacks. If you're an aging radical who yearns to refight the battles of the 1960s, that approach makes sense. If you actually care about saving the lives of young black men, not so much.

Exactly. You're making my point for me. A very large chunk of the black demographic is subject to poverty and inner-city troubles, and we all look the other direction and don't care and don't see it as an issue. That in itself is a huge problem. But since there's not a direct (i stress direct) cause for this cycle of poverty that these people can see, the frustration gets let out onto each other. But it's still the cause of oppression - deep poverty that is still left over from the days of slavery, lack of educational opportunities, biases show by others, there are a million reasons. It's ridiculously hard to get out of this cycle. But when a white cop shoots an unarmed black guy, that's the lightning rod that ignites the fire - in this case, the black community knows exactly where to aim their frustrations. Both are an indictment on the fact that African-Americans are still not close to being on equal standing with whites in this country, some 50 years after the Civil Rights Act. It may take another century.

And it's in mostly liberal cities where these problems exist the most, Detroit, Chicago, St Louis, New York etc etc. Is it because liberal policies are keeping the black community from exceeding or coincidence since the black community is mostly democrat thus the city leans liberal.