No Justice, No Peace

I'm not arguing.
Some of the fear is inculcated, not that I remember what that word means exactly, but a word that sort of clicks. I'll just say insidious.

My ex, the writer, considers fear the key motivation for - if not everything - much. Haven't talked with him in a while: I bet he's full of opinions on all this.
He's the one who was playing baseball in Watts that day.. a white boy.

That may be part of why I liked him when I met him - he had a lit degree (scholarships) and street sense. I still listen.

Often the recruiters/trainers have the same mindset. In some places it is rotten to the core.

This is an interesting comment about Mexicans and Mexican Americans. I remember, when I was in law school, for some reason I became interested in stats concerning traffic violations by Mexican/ Mexican Americans in Texas. I don't remember why I became interested, but one thing for sure, the stats clearly suggest that either the only drivers on Texas highways are Mexican/Americans, or they are being targeted by Highway patrolmen for traffic violations ( which may not be real).

So, one may ask, why were these Mexican-American drivers being targeted on Texas highways? Hopefully, discrimination against these drivers is no longer an issue in the State of Texas.

Reading this thread has just been an appalling experience. I hope you've learned your lesson, Snood. There are still a lot of white folks who don't want to hear about racism. I said years ago here something which is, in my experience, still true. When there are only white people around, whites continue to be casually and all too predictably racist.

True, but there maybe something in the law about having to surrender it to police if demanded.

Regardless, there is a motivating narrative in Charlotte that Mr. Scott didn't have a gun and that he was murdered in cold blood, so whether he actually had a gun does make a difference.

That he had a gun should not permit the police to shoot and kill him.

If he raised it in a menacing way, the cops can shoot him.

Now, none of us know what actually happened, and we are basing our opinions on what we've heard and seen so far, and upon our bias.

If someone believes that cops are murdering black Americans without cause, then that person is likely to interpret what's known as confirmation of their bias.

Similarly, if someone believes that cops don't go out every morning looking to shoot and kill black Americans, that person is likely to interpret what's known as confirmation of their bias.

This is all well and good and we can argue back and forth on what we think the evidence shows.

What is not at all well and good is for any of us, at this point in time, to act on the conclusions we've drawn.

In this case, the rioters chose to act on their conclusions only hours after the event happened. (Assuming any of them were truly motivated by the incident)

Calling people a racist is, in most cases, essentially harmless. Obnoxious to be sure, but harmless.

Looting, destroying property and harming citizens is, obviously, not harmless.

From the standpoint of the rioting, it shouldn't matter whether or not Mr. Scott was murdered or dispatched with. Nothing justifies rioting.

Nothing.

Anyone suggesting that the belief that rioting is never justified is racist, is a hopeless fool (at best).

Every fool is entitled to his or her opinion.

Declaring the presence of racism in a thread is quite easy, and, I imagine, quite satisfying to the person making the declaration.

Unspoken in the declaration (by a white person) is too often "I'm not a racist! I'm the furthest thing from a racist because I'm more than happy to call out racism when I see it...or when you see it"

Unspoken in the declaration (by a black person) is too often "End of discussion! I'm black and therefore I get to decide who is and who isn't a racist. I won't communicate with racists unless it is to insult them!"

It certainly doesn't lead to the Holy Grail of honest dialogue.

I have repeatedly learned that, in any matter involving disputed viewpoints among those involved, a real resolution almost always requires that the various parties take personal ownership or at least acceptance of the others' view of the problem. Absent that no lasting resolution is possible.. The passage of time might well cause the symptoms of the problem to fade away, but, without mutual/reciprocal "ownership" of ther problem, no resolution will occur.

That's easy to say but often hard to do. I've enjoyed successful resolutions of conflicts between individual managers and divisions in large organizations when each of the contending parties was persuaded to take responsibility for delivering what the other wanted. That agreement subtly created a dynamic of mutual positive reinforcement that made a real solution possible as long as it continued. Without it no solution occurred. I've also found that extended discussions about whose or which parties grievances, were greater, to be both non productive and irrelevant to success.

The cup of human emotions is small and quickly filled. A white person bullied by a cop probably perceives it just as intensely as a black or brown person (or at least as intensely as they imagine the other experiences it). We're all inclined to imagine that whatever suffering we experience is as bad as things get.

I believe that, mutual acceptance of responsibility, is what is needed on this matter today.

Cops are inexorably involved both in the incidences of wrongful bullying or violence by ploice that do occur, and in dealing with the sometimes criminal and violent acts perpetrated by others (not cops) that occur with far greater frequency. Therefore the notion that we can deal with one aspect of this issue without also dealing with the other is at very best highly unrealistic.

Human nature is such that we all (regardless of skin color, or other group factors) tend to take a larger view of our own misfortunes than those of others; minimize our own responsibilities and faults, compared to those of others; and look for solutions to our problems originating from outside ourselves, rather than from within. In the venerable words of the cartoon character Pogo, "We have met the enemy and he is us". In this case I mean all of us, black and white.

Bullying and violence by police does occur and it is a problem. Is it necessarily a racial problem? Sometimes it likely is. Even there complications exist. Is it a racial problem when both cop and supposed victim are of the same race? It's a possibility, in that cops of any color may find their judgements influenced by the race of the supposed perpetrator. If so, whose fault is that?? The essence of good police work is the making of informed judgements about the likely significance of observed events based on their associations with known crimes. Does that necessarily involve racial profiling, and is that necessarily wrong ? The frequency of criminal activity does indeed observably vary, by time, place and many externally observable characteristics of people, including, dress, apparent age and even race. We all make such judgments, often without thinking much about it. We do not make such judgments because they are fair (because they are not) rather because they are often accurate and useful to us. That is not likely to change much among any of us, black or white.

All human lives do indeed matter, and it is right and proper for us all to consdider the factors that wrongfully harm them, and to focus on the apparent cause factors that appear to have the greatest impact, and which we can change. I believe unwarranted police violence to people, black and white, but likely more to non whites, is indeed a problem we can and should correct. I don't think we can correct it effectively if we don't at the same time address other probably far more significant threats to human lives (black and otherwise) that also afflict the victims here. Among them is the level of crimes committed within various groups and the familial, social and cultural factors that may be associated with them. Even independently of this and considering human behavior (all humans), l I don't think that we can selectively address one aspect of this without also addressing the othewrs and have any realistic expectation of success.

Some good first steps would be to remove bad cops from among the good and actually convict the cops who shoot without justification. Then outlaw prison for profit enterprises and halt the war on drugs. Allow black folk to vote. For starters. There are many others steps after these baby steps.

Why stop at commercially operated prisions? Why not also close those operated by government. Would that make a contribution ot solving the problem? I think not.

Would you allow the unlimited manufacture, sale (for profit) of all drugs? Chrystal Meth for example? How about natural and synthetic opiates? Just where would you draw the line? How might that improve race relations?

Blacks already vote and they are indeed a potent political force in elections.

Not a good ghoice of starting points in my view. Instead you are reaching out to extremes in an effort that, intended or not, has the effect of rationalizing no mutual action at all. That's a proven way to perpetuate the problem.

I mentioned a few baby steps. Not an all inclusive solution, as was noted.

I assume you think that no effort is being made to remove bad cops from the good.

If so, why?

Similarly, assume you believe bad cops are never convicted.

Which guilty ones were let go free?

Black folk are not allowed to vote? That's beyond comment from me.

Halt the war on drugs? Agreed.

See, Ed? **** like the above just lets you know this dude operates in his own reality. A reality where hordes of people are not enraged and taking to the streets because of an endless string of unjust treatment, brutality and murder of black and brown people at the hands of law enforcement.

Bad cops weren't convicted? Where? Where? Guilty cops went free? Where? Where?
I mean, give me a ******* break.

So tell us which ones got off scott free

Oh, I'm sorry snood is black and therefore we should all just believe whatever he writes.

That's because it doesn't fit the lame stream media's narrative.

Apparently you know nothing about armed encounters and have never had to make a life and death decision in the midst of one... You don't shoot to kill you don't shoot to wound you shoot to stop the threat to save your life or someone else's it's as simple as that. It ain't like it is on TV which is where most of y'all get your information.

How come you use that argument of the percentage of the population when it comes to how many blacks are shot by cops but you don't use that same formula when we talk about the amount of blacks committing violent crimes in this country... Seems you selectively apply the math depending on the situation

So why do you get to pontificate on the subject and CJ doesn't...you ain't black.

Of course you would think that when someone disagrees with you... But then your sense of smell is colored by your bias.



A very enlightening response as is the title of this thread... your knee-jerk reaction is to immediately assume because the little white lady couldn't possibly understand the plight of the black man even though the same exact thing happened to her. That's because it doesn't fit your narrative that the police are indiscriminately hunting down and killing black men.

Now I'd like to ask a question: in your perfect America as a black man I'd like to know what your detailed solution to this problem is... And please be concise, no soapbox political rambling. And remember, uour solution has to be inclusive of the entire population of this country.

I await your reply.