Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

By wearing the shirt any student who is not black can now argue any negative grade they receive is because of his bias. As a lawyer he should know that. but its ok because...reasons.

 Frazzled wrote:
By wearing the shirt any student who is not black can now argue any negative grade they receive is because of his bias. As a lawyer he should know that. but its ok because...reasons.

They could argue it. I doubt they could argue it any more successfully than the countless other times "clever" students have tried to claim bias when they got bad grades.

I can understand BLM protest especially now, but some of their locations are questionable at best, like why a protest in Dallas? which is very progressive and then this recent rally at Taste of Chicago:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-police-protests-0710-20160709-story.html# which to my understanding is a very diverse event, so why have a protest there along with a die in? are they even having protests in the cities where the latest individuals were shot?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
By wearing the shirt any student who is not black can now argue any negative grade they receive is because of his bias. As a lawyer he should know that. but its ok because...reasons.

They could argue it.

To who? Surely a disciplinary board would conclude in the first five minutes that no code of conduct was breached and the dismiss the sore loser. And then dismiss all following similar complaints.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
To who? Surely a disciplinary board would conclude in the first five minutes that no code of conduct was breached and the dismiss the sore loser. And then dismiss all following similar complaints.

Yes, that's why the second sentence in my post (the one you cut out) says that such an argument wouldn't go any better than any of the countless similar ones tried by "clever" students in the past.

Asterios wrote:
I can understand BLM protest especially now, but some of their locations are questionable at best, like why a protest in Dallas? which is very progressive and then this recent rally at Taste of Chicago:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-police-protests-0710-20160709-story.html# which to my understanding is a very diverse event, so why have a protest there along with a die in? are they even having protests in the cities where the latest individuals were shot?

Do you expect the protestors to fly to distant locations just to satisfy some arbitrary requirements that they protest in locations with the most violent cops? You do understand that not everyone can afford to leave their job for a few days and blow several hundred dollars for the trip. Or are only middle class people allowed to protest police violence that happens against largely disadvantaged citizens?

 TheCustomLime wrote:

Asterios wrote:
I can understand BLM protest especially now, but some of their locations are questionable at best, like why a protest in Dallas? which is very progressive and then this recent rally at Taste of Chicago:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-police-protests-0710-20160709-story.html# which to my understanding is a very diverse event, so why have a protest there along with a die in? are they even having protests in the cities where the latest individuals were shot?

Do you expect the protestors to fly to distant locations just to satisfy some arbitrary requirements that they protest in locations with the most violent cops? You do understand that not everyone can afford to leave their job for a few days and blow several hundred dollars for the trip. Or are only middle class people allowed to protest police violence that happens against largely disadvantaged citizens?

no its about why protest where there is no problem? in fact all the protest in Dallas did was manage to get several officers killed and/or wounded, and it was for a protest in a place that did not have issues, so why? if you want to protest change you do it where the problems exist, put it this way if your arm is cut should I put a bandage on your leg to prevent the bleeding?

also Dallas to Lousiana is less then 400 miles, thats only a few hours drive.

Asterios wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

Asterios wrote:
I can understand BLM protest especially now, but some of their locations are questionable at best, like why a protest in Dallas? which is very progressive and then this recent rally at Taste of Chicago:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-police-protests-0710-20160709-story.html# which to my understanding is a very diverse event, so why have a protest there along with a die in? are they even having protests in the cities where the latest individuals were shot?

Do you expect the protestors to fly to distant locations just to satisfy some arbitrary requirements that they protest in locations with the most violent cops? You do understand that not everyone can afford to leave their job for a few days and blow several hundred dollars for the trip. Or are only middle class people allowed to protest police violence that happens against largely disadvantaged citizens?

no its about why protest where there is no problem? in fact all the protest in Dallas did was manage to get several officers killed and/or wounded, and it was for a protest in a place that did not have issues, so why? if you want to protest change you do it where the problems exist, put it this way if your arm is cut should I put a bandage on your leg to prevent the bleeding?

Because there is a problem. Just because the Dallas cops are better than the national standard doesn't make those deaths go away. I mean, to extrapolate on your example if you were riddled with lacerations would it be right for the doctor to tell you to stop complaining because he put a band-aid on just one of them?

And frankly, this dismissive attitude towards the BLM movement is exactly the problem in America. People dismiss the grievances of the black community jut because some minor progress was made somewhere, they don't satisfy the public desire in some way or some kind of fringe violence was associated with it.

Asterios wrote:
no its about why protest where there is no problem?

Because that's where people are. I suspect that a lot of those protestors were local residents, not some weird BLM army that descends upon a target location and ruins everything.

also Dallas to Lousiana is less then 400 miles, thats only a few hours drive.

You do realize that this a significant and expensive trip unless you're pretty well off, right?

 Peregrine wrote:

Asterios wrote:
no its about why protest where there is no problem?

Because that's where people are. I suspect that a lot of those protestors were local residents, not some weird BLM army that descends upon a target location and ruins everything.

also Dallas to Lousiana is less then 400 miles, thats only a few hours drive.

You do realize that this a significant and expensive trip unless you're pretty well off, right?

not really I used to do that kind of trip several times a week when working, but then again I was in the same state doing it and i'm not rich, but if it was something I believed in 400 miles is nothing.

All I know is protesting in such an area is redundant when nothing is wrong there, it shows the wrong thing and ended up costing several good cops their lives.

Asterios wrote:
not really I used to do that kind of trip several times a week when working, but then again I was in the same state doing it and i'm not rich, but if it was something I believed in 400 miles is nothing.

Yeah, I don't really know what to say here. A 400 mile trip would be a big deal for me and anyone I know, and none of us are poor. If you think people should just do that to go protest because it's such a small trip then you're really not understanding things.

All I know is protesting in such an area is redundant when nothing is wrong there

It still gets media attention, and attention for people who do live in places where there are more serious problems. That's the wonderful thing about how connected the world is in 2016, events in one place can be broadcast all over the country and people can participate in the discussion no matter where they live.

and ended up costing several good cops their lives.

The protest did not cost cops their lives. A murderer cost cops their lives. Without the protest the murderer probably would have just picked another event with a heavy police presence to murder people.

 Peregrine wrote:

Asterios wrote:
not really I used to do that kind of trip several times a week when working, but then again I was in the same state doing it and i'm not rich, but if it was something I believed in 400 miles is nothing.

Yeah, I don't really know what to say here. A 400 mile trip would be a big deal for me and anyone I know, and none of us are poor. If you think people should just do that to go protest because it's such a small trip then you're really not understanding things.

if you believed in the reason its not that far.

 Peregrine wrote:

All I know is protesting in such an area is redundant when nothing is wrong there

It still gets media attention, and attention for people who do live in places where there are more serious problems.

and it would have brought negative attention on a city trying to do good, but in this case it hurt the BLM movement more then anything.

 Peregrine wrote:

and ended up costing several good cops their lives.

The protest did not cost cops their lives. A murderer cost cops their lives. Without the protest the murderer probably would have just picked another event with a heavy police presence to murder people.

we do not know that, or can you see the future? problem with events and protests like this it brings out the radicals. look what happened to Fergusen, something that should never have happened and yet several people and businesses were destroyed because of lies believed on social media.

Dallas was a utobia for police relations in the minority community, but even though there were no problem a thousand people decide to march just so that somebody could shoot the cops that they didn't have a problem with because race relations are fine in Dallas.

I'm glad we got that straightened out.

 d-usa wrote:
Dallas was a utobia for police relations in the minority community, but even though there were no problem a thousand people decide to march just so that somebody could shoot the cops that they didn't have a problem with because race relations are fine in Dallas.

I'm glad we got that straightened out.

Gosh, those unreasonable BLM protestors. How dare they be so ungrateful that the cops in one city won't immediately shoot their young men for acting funny?

Asterios wrote:
if you believed in the reason its not that far.

Belief in the reason doesn't magically make money for gas/hotel rooms/etc appear in your bank account.

and it would have brought negative attention on a city trying to do good, but in this case it hurt the BLM movement more then anything.

It "hurt the BLM movement" because a murderer decided to murder some people. Unless you're going to claim that the BLM leaders knew that someone was going to murder people at their protest then I don't think you can blame this one on them.

we do not know that, or can you see the future? problem with events and protests like this it brings out the radicals. look what happened to Fergusen, something that should never have happened and yet several people and businesses were destroyed because of lies believed on social media.

No, of course I can't prove beyond any doubt that he would have shot people somewhere else. But if someone is at the point of deciding to get a gun and start shooting as many cops as they can before dying then it's probably a safe bet that they're going to find an opportunity to shoot at cops. Stop blaming BLM for having a legitimate protest just because someone else took advantage of it.

 Peregrine wrote:

It "hurt the BLM movement" because a murderer decided to murder some people. Unless you're going to claim that the BLM leaders knew that someone was going to murder people at their protest then I don't think you can blame this one on them..

no I doubt the BLM movement even knew about the guy, and while I don't agree with the BLM movement since I believe all lives matter and not just Black lives, and yeah I heard that there is no invisible "only" in front of it, but if that was the case why not just say all lives matter? but I digress, the animosity such protests bring about by some only provokes them to do more damage, the BLM movement while many trying to keep it peaceful and civil has been marred by radicals in the group who want to hurt and destroy, so yes, because of that protest it brought out anger in that sniper to the point he wanted to kill people and white people at that. to think otherwise is a fools errand.

Asterios wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

It "hurt the BLM movement" because a murderer decided to murder some people. Unless you're going to claim that the BLM leaders knew that someone was going to murder people at their protest then I don't think you can blame this one on them..

no I doubt the BLM movement even knew about the guy, and while I don't agree with the BLM movement since I believe all lives matter and not just Black lives, and yeah I heard that there is no invisible "only" in front of it, but if that was the case why not just say all lives matter?

Because all evidence points to the fact that to American society black lives don't matter? I mean, since when were whites disproportionately the victims of systematic persecution including police brutality?

 TheCustomLime wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

It "hurt the BLM movement" because a murderer decided to murder some people. Unless you're going to claim that the BLM leaders knew that someone was going to murder people at their protest then I don't think you can blame this one on them..

no I doubt the BLM movement even knew about the guy, and while I don't agree with the BLM movement since I believe all lives matter and not just Black lives, and yeah I heard that there is no invisible "only" in front of it, but if that was the case why not just say all lives matter?

Because all evidence points to the fact that to American society black lives don't matter? I mean, since when were whites disproportionately the victims of systematic persecution including police brutality?

the Dallas shooting.

Asterios wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

It "hurt the BLM movement" because a murderer decided to murder some people. Unless you're going to claim that the BLM leaders knew that someone was going to murder people at their protest then I don't think you can blame this one on them..

no I doubt the BLM movement even knew about the guy, and while I don't agree with the BLM movement since I believe all lives matter and not just Black lives, and yeah I heard that there is no invisible "only" in front of it, but if that was the case why not just say all lives matter?

Because all evidence points to the fact that to American society black lives don't matter? I mean, since when were whites disproportionately the victims of systematic persecution including police brutality?

the Dallas shooting.

You mean the national tragedy? That's your counter-point? I mean, using that same logic I could argue that skyscrapers are incredibly unsafe to live in because of 9/11.

Asterios wrote:
but if that was the case why not just say all lives matter?

Because we're talking about an issue that disproportionately affects black people. To borrow an analogy from a friend, if someone is standing on my foot and I say "get off my foot" replying with "get off all feet" doesn't make any sense. It's my foot that someone is standing on, and you're just ignoring the practical problem in favor of some theoretical point.

the animosity such protests bring about by some only provokes them to do more damage

IOW, "STOP COMPLAINING OR DEMANDING CHANGE, BE CONTENT WITH EVERYTHING THE WAY IT IS NOW OR WE'LL BLAME YOU FOR MAKING PEOPLE ANGRY". I think it should be obvious why this is a bad thing to say.

the BLM movement while many trying to keep it peaceful and civil has been marred by radicals in the group who want to hurt and destroy,

So, BLM is peaceful and civil except for some people taking advantage of the group, but it's still all BLM's fault. Do you apply a similar chain of reasoning to the republican party and their responsibility for angry white guys with AR-15s? I don't think you do.

so yes, because of that protest it brought out anger in that sniper to the point he wanted to kill people and white people at that. to think otherwise is a fools errand.

Yes, clearly it was that particular protest that did it. He was a peaceful law-abiding citizen with no intent to murder until that horrible day, when BLM told him that the police are bad. And so, without a moment of hesitation, he grabbed his rifle and started shooting. This is clearly the most plausible explanation for what happened.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asterios wrote:
the Dallas shooting.

Do you understand what "systematic" means?

 Peregrine wrote:

Asterios wrote:
but if that was the case why not just say all lives matter?

Because we're talking about an issue that disproportionately affects black people. To borrow an analogy from a friend, if someone is standing on my foot and I say "get off my foot" replying with "get off all feet" doesn't make any sense. It's my foot that someone is standing on, and you're just ignoring the practical problem in favor of some theoretical point.

so you are saying the police are not killing any other race?

 Peregrine wrote:

the animosity such protests bring about by some only provokes them to do more damage

IOW, "STOP COMPLAINING OR DEMANDING CHANGE, BE CONTENT WITH EVERYTHING THE WAY IT IS NOW OR WE'LL BLAME YOU FOR MAKING PEOPLE ANGRY". I think it should be obvious why this is a bad thing to say.

or try demanding change where it is needed not where it is not.

 Peregrine wrote:

the BLM movement while many trying to keep it peaceful and civil has been marred by radicals in the group who want to hurt and destroy,

So, BLM is peaceful and civil except for some people taking advantage of the group, but it's still all BLM's fault. Do you apply a similar chain of reasoning to the republican party and their responsibility for angry white guys with AR-15s? I don't think you do.

was the Republican party and or the NRA having protests where such things occured? no, has the BLM? yes on several occasions.

 Peregrine wrote:

so yes, because of that protest it brought out anger in that sniper to the point he wanted to kill people and white people at that. to think otherwise is a fools errand.

Yes, clearly it was that particular protest that did it. He was a peaceful law-abiding citizen with no intent to murder until that horrible day, when BLM told him that the police are bad. And so, without a moment of hesitation, he grabbed his rifle and started shooting. This is clearly the most plausible explanation for what happened.

Did the sniper have a record? had he done anything before this? had he shown any indication of doing something like this before the Protest? think the answers are all no, so the common denominator is?

 Peregrine wrote:


Do you understand what "systematic" means?

well lets see how many Black people have shot cops lately? would you call that systematic?

Asterios wrote:


so you are saying the police are not killing any other race?

Disproportionately=/=exclusively. More black people are killed in proportion to their overall population than whites by a significant margin by the police.

or try demanding change where it is needed not where it is not.

I wasn't aware Dallas was a sovereign, isolated island with no means of communications with the outside world. What an interesting development!

Did the sniper have a record? had he done anything before this? had he shown any indication of doing something like this before the Protest? think the answers are all no, so the common denominator is?

Not all spree-killers were repeat offenders. You should know this by now since you seem to frequent the OT thread which features a lot of threads about mass shootings.

well lets see how many Black people have shot cops lately? would you call that systematic?

Do you understand that there is no system by which black people shoot cops?

Asterios wrote:
so you are saying the police are not killing any other race?

Thank you for this demonstration of what a straw man fallacy is.

or try demanding change where it is needed not where it is not.

Aaaand now we're back to where we started, as if I never said any of that stuff about how people protest where they live even when they're talking about national-interest events.

was the Republican party and or the NRA having protests where such things occured? no, has the BLM? yes on several occasions.

Why does it matter if BLM was having the protest? The murderer was not part of BLM and certainly was not invited to be there by BLM. By your "BLM made him angry" argument conservatives have responsibility for those angry white guys with AR-15s threatening violence against the government.

Did the sniper have a record? had he done anything before this? had he shown any indication of doing something like this before the Protest? think the answers are all no, so the common denominator is?

...

Do you actually believe that, because of one protest, he went from being a peaceful law-abiding citizen with no intent to hurt anyone to mass murder-suicide? That he just woke up one day and said "you know, this BLM protest is right, I'm going to go die murdering as many cops as I can"? This is such utter lunacy that I don't even know what to say if you really believe that it's true.

well lets see how many Black people have shot cops lately? would you call that systematic?

I don't know, how many? You seem to believe that it's a significant number, and I'm sure you have facts to back up your belief. I'm sure you're reasonable enough not to believe random stuff without any evidence, so it must be there.

This thread is done, without civil discussion there's no need to keep it open. If you are finding yourself unable to ignore a certain user you're better off just putting their posts on ignore and discussing the topic with people who don't get threads locked