Does Randolph Holder's life matter to "Black Lives Matter"?

bramzzoinks said:
At least "Violence Against Women is Wrong" refers to ALL women. "Black lives matter" only refers to a small subset of black lives. The "movement" does not give a damn about most black lives lost. Only the small number that fits their political agenda.

It's funny, I'd have thought holding our police up to the standards of professionalism and respect for those they serve is a political agenda everyone could support.

what a dumb premise.

Black Lives Matter is a movement that started because killings of black people by police officers, except in the most outrageously egregious circumstances, go unpunished. And the perception by the many citizens is that the killings are only given cursory investigations.

Killings of police officers of any race however, are fully and aggressively investigated, and then prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Apples and oranges, as I'm sure the OP knows.

And there -- I've responded to the troll bait.

bramzzoinks said:
Nope GL2. It is only African Americans killed by police. A small subset. All the other much more and way too numerous the "movement" does not care one whit about.

Confusing - intentionally - two issues and two groups. Should we compare cops to gangbangers?

And gang/drug-related crimes are committed against people in the same vicinity. Unfortunately, they're overwhelmingly Af Am.

I'm guessing there's little black-on-black crime in Millburn. And few white on white crimes in Newark's sketchy areas.

maresleg said:
So GL if I'm reading you correctly, if an individual does not want to see a film because it may have an Af /Am as the lead actor or so they are wrong and should be labeled?

I do not understand this comment, I thought this thread was about the killing of a policeman.

But if the question is about labeling a person whose sole reason for not seeing a movie is because of the lead actor's race I would label that person a racist.

And the Martian-on-Martian crime on the red planet is terrible.

LOST said:

maresleg said:
So GL if I'm reading you correctly, if an individual does not want to see a film because it may have an Af /Am as the lead actor or so they are wrong and should be labeled?

I do not understand this comment, I thought this thread was about the killing of a policeman.
But if the question is about labeling a person whose sole reason for not seeing a movie is because of the lead actor's race I would label that person a racist.

See the recent outcry from cretins online boycotting Star Wars for their Af Am characters.

Apparently, some Americans want their sci-fi universe back also.

bramzzoinks said:
At least "Violence Against Women is Wrong" refers to ALL women. "Black lives matter" only refers to a small subset of black lives. The "movement" does not give a damn about most black lives lost. Only the small number that fits their political agenda.

But women are a subset of humans.

ml1 said:
what a dumb premise.
Black Lives Matter is a movement that started because killings of black people by police officers, except in the most outrageously egregious circumstances, go unpunished. And the perception by the many citizens is that the killings are only given cursory investigations.

Not only unpunished, but unknown (or at least unacknowledged). Thanks to the ubiquity of smartphones and some diligent media strategy, it started getting attention. Then the con backlash began.

GL2 said:

LOST said:

maresleg said:
So GL if I'm reading you correctly, if an individual does not want to see a film because it may have an Af /Am as the lead actor or so they are wrong and should be labeled?

I do not understand this comment, I thought this thread was about the killing of a policeman.
But if the question is about labeling a person whose sole reason for not seeing a movie is because of the lead actor's race I would label that person a racist.

See the recent outcry from cretins online boycotting Star Wars for their Af Am characters.

Like a dozen cretins. I'll bet you 10,000 RomneyBucks I could round up a twelve dummies to boycott literally anything. Flush toilets. Dental floss. Tomatoes. You name it.

GL2 said:

LOST said:

maresleg said:
So GL if I'm reading you correctly, if an individual does not want to see a film because it may have an Af /Am as the lead actor or so they are wrong and should be labeled?

I do not understand this comment, I thought this thread was about the killing of a policeman.
But if the question is about labeling a person whose sole reason for not seeing a movie is because of the lead actor's race I would label that person a racist.

See the recent outcry from cretins online boycotting Star Wars for their Af Am characters.

A long time ago in a galaxy far far away there was a similar outcry in the media ( no internet then) when an evil alien forced Capt. Kirk to kiss Lt. Uhuru. The cretins are always there. Now they have a new tool.

RobB said:

Like a dozen cretins. I'll bet you 10,000 RomneyBucks I could round up a twelve dummies to boycott literally anything. Flush toilets. Dental floss. Tomatoes. You name it.

Certainly a remake of "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" with an African American lead.

RobB said:

GL2 said:

LOST said:

maresleg said:
So GL if I'm reading you correctly, if an individual does not want to see a film because it may have an Af /Am as the lead actor or so they are wrong and should be labeled?

I do not understand this comment, I thought this thread was about the killing of a policeman.
But if the question is about labeling a person whose sole reason for not seeing a movie is because of the lead actor's race I would label that person a racist.

See the recent outcry from cretins online boycotting Star Wars for their Af Am characters.

Like a dozen cretins.

How do you arrive at that number?

My eyes told me.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/BoycottStarWarsVII

RobB said:
My eyes told me.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/BoycottStarWarsVII

Hard to tell since it's been overtaken by others.

GL2 said:
And gang/drug-related crimes are committed against people in the same vicinity. Unfortunately, they're overwhelmingly Af Am.

So it seems like you are agreeing with "Black Lives Matter" that those live do not matter.

So I know zz is just a troll, but there does seem to be something of a talking point among conservatives that BLM is somehow anti-cop. Doesn't this get it fundamentally wrong, though? I mean, if you had two people criticizing my work (I'm not a cop - just making a general point about professionalism here), and one said "I believe you to be a professional and expect you to act like one" and the other just made a lot of excuses for why I was bad at my job, there'd no question in my mind which one really respected me and my work.

dave23 said:

RobB said:
My eyes told me.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/BoycottStarWarsVII

Hard to tell since it's been overtaken by others.

Go all the way to the bottom. It's the same few people yapping back and forth. If it hadn't been noted and retweeted by everyone in the damn country, it would have died with those same few people.

You mean I've been hiding this stash for nothing?

PVW said:
(I'm not a cop

No PVW that is not a correct analogy because BLM is saying all cops are worthless pieces of sh*t and they should all be gotten rid of because no good will come from their activities. It is a leftist attitude going back to cops as pigs outside the 1968 Democratic Convention that is now making a virulent return in the rethoric of the left.

bramzzoinks said:
No PVW that is not a correct analogy because BLM is saying all cops are worthless pieces of sh*t and they should all be gotten rid of because no good will come from their activities.

Link?

bramzzoinks said:
No PVW that is not a correct analogy because BLM is saying all cops are worthless pieces of sh*t and they should all be gotten rid of because no good will come from their activities. It is a leftist attitude going back to cops as pigs outside the 1968 Democratic Convention that is now making a virulent return in the rethoric of the left.

bull****

bramzzoinks said:
No PVW that is not a correct analogy because BLM is saying all cops are worthless pieces of sh*t and they should all be gotten rid of because no good will come from their activities. It is a leftist attitude going back to cops as pigs outside the 1968 Democratic Convention that is now making a virulent return in the rethoric of the left.

this is a joke right? no, what it is, is zz's white privilege talking.

Scary place inside his imagination!

hoops said:

bramzzoinks said:
No PVW that is not a correct analogy because BLM is saying all cops are worthless pieces of sh*t and they should all be gotten rid of because no good will come from their activities. It is a leftist attitude going back to cops as pigs outside the 1968 Democratic Convention that is now making a virulent return in the rethoric of the left.

this is a joke right? no, what it is, is zz's white privilege talking.

No, you still need to give that to me.

ridski said:
You mean I've been hiding this stash for nothing?

PVW said:
(I'm not a cop

"white privilege" is the left's new in phrase for when it wants to be dismissive. But like everything the left spouts it is absurd and harmful to a prosperous society for all.

bramzzoinks said:
"white privilege" is the left's new in phrase for when it wants to be polite about folks not realizing that they are receiving the benefit of being the dominant race under an institutionalized system. And like everything the left spouts it is an observation of the current status quo of a broken society.

ftfy

Okay, but you might not want it when I tell you where I've been hiding it.

PVW said:
No, you still need to give that to me.

ridski said:
You mean I've been hiding this stash for nothing?

PVW said:
(I'm not a cop