Other State Durand third-grader's father sues school over right to wear hat depicting AR-15 rifle

[RX-79G]

We were trying to discuss this before RX started gaslighting the conversation.

I see that you want it explained to you again:

BLM is a fine cause, but they became political when they campaigned for defunding the police

"They" implies that BLM, each and every person, agrees with and called for defunding the police. Did that happen, or is there no consensus "they"? Is BLM a huge membership organization, or a movement that just requires you for you to support the idea and maybe hold up a sign?

Blue Lives Matter movement, was never about racism regardless of what the racists use it for Blue Lives Matter has never been a racist movement.

Here you're speaking for each and every member of the Blue Lives, and you are claiming to know that absolutely none of the people involved saw their efforts as anti-black, and that the actual racists who use Blue Lives symbols to represent their racism can't possibly be members of Blue Lives. Even though the only way to tell a member of Blue Lives Matter is to see what signs they are holding.


So let's try it this way:

Black Lives Matter movement, was never about defunding polic regardless of what the a small minority use it for Black Lives Matter has never been a defunding movement.

See the contrast in your words? You're welcome.

 

[RX-79G]

BLM is not an anti-white movement. It is against police brutality by police of any race. They make a stink about that regardless of the officer's race. That's why 2 out of 4 officers prosecuted for George Floyd weren't white and no one made cared.

Anyone who thinks otherwise must be white man who feels paranoid about being white.

 

[ma96782]

I don't know of anyone banning support for 2A. A gun is not a right, it is an object and objects have no rights. People do.

BLM is a slogan supporting the seemingly trampled rights of a particular US minority group. Thin blue line could be viewed as support of police, but it was coopted by the Unite the Right rallyists as yet another white supremacist symbol and is often used as a rejoinder to BLM. As if black lives mattering is a concept incompatible with supporting policing. And it isn't.

So, the obvious solution is to allow kids to wear slogans and phrases that support what they say, rather than use symbols like pictures of guns or defaced flags. "I support my local PD". "Black lives matter". "I believe in Jesus".

Everyone KNOWS.......that not all memebers (or supporters) of a particular group will agree 100 percent with EVERYTHING ABSOLUTELY ALL OF THE TIME.

It's my standard disclaimer. Yeah.....why do I need that? Because, there are many who like to argue about.......

"BUT, But, but......I'm a menber of that group and I don't think that."

Yeah......there are exceptions.....
It could happen.

So then.......did you/do you even know what the BLM folks are about?
If not.....
Well, let me help you a bit.

BLM Policy.



The six platform demands are:

1. End the war on black people.

2. Reparations for past and continuing harms.

3. Divestment from the institutions that criminalize, cage and harm black people; and investment in the education, health and safety of black people.

4. Economic justice for all and a reconstruction of the economy to ensure our communities have collective ownership, not merely access.

5. Community control of the laws, institutions and policies that most impact us.

6. Independent black political power and black self-determination in all areas of society.

To achieve those demands the group offered a set of solutions that include the demilitarization of police and an end to systemic attacks on black youth, including black members of the LGBTQ community. They call for the passing of state and federal laws that acknowledge and address the impacts of slavery and the passage of H.R. 40 to form a commission to study reparations proposals. Another of the recommendations calls for the "retroactive decriminalization and immediate release of all people convicted of drug offenses, sex work-related offenses and youth offenses."



Taken from: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-lives-matter-releases-policy-agenda-n620966

So being that it's a DEMAND.......
Yeah......
It's ALL or NONE. This slogan comes to mind.....

"No justice. No peace."

BTW.....speaking of groups. Have you also seen the Ds stance on Guns? If not.......spend a minute.

Ending the Epidemic of Gun Violence



Gun violence is a public health crisis in the United States. Over 100,000 people are shot and nearly 40,000 people die annually from guns—devastating countless families, friends, and communities. We can and will make gun violence a thing of the past. Addressing the gun violence crisis requires supporting evidence-based programs that prevent gun deaths from occurring in the first place, including by making mental health care more accessible and supporting suicide reduction initiatives, funding interventions to reduce homicides and gun violence in neighborhoods, and strengthening protections against domestic violence. Democrats will also ensure the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have sufficient resources to study gun violence as a public health issue, including the ongoing health care, mental health, economic, and social costs that can affect survivors and their families for years. Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition, close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers, abusive partners, and some individuals convicted of assault or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal 47 background check system. We will close the "Charleston loophole" and prevent individuals who have been convicted of hate crimes from possessing firearms. Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing requirements for owning firearms and extreme risk protection order laws that allow courts to temporarily remove guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others. We will pass legislation requiring that guns be safely stored in homes. And Democrats believe that gun companies should be held responsible for their products, just like any other business, and will prioritize repealing the law that shields gun manufacturers from civil liability.



Taken from: 2020 Democratic Party Platform PDF​

AND.......no one is saying that you can't BELONG to any one of those groups. BUT, maybe you might just be better able to understand what/where the leaders of those groups (and many of their followers)......believe in and where they are coming from.

Yeah.....conversation can move along much quicker. IF, I (and some people) didn't have to acknowledge at every turn......that not everyone shares/might share the EXACT SAME view(s) as the group's statements/policies. Even though they might belong to the group.

Note: my signature line below.


Aloha, Mark

 

[American123]

"Black people" are not killing "black people" BECAUSE they are black, and there are other organizations run by POC that focus on so called Black On Black crime.

Agreeing with them or disagreeing with them that POC being killed BECAUSE they are POC is something worth their time doesn't change what THEY are focused on

Racially motivated killings in this country are insignificant in number. They do exist, but are not the source of BLM rage, which is primarily police incidents where black people die by a white cop. It's like complaining about a droplet of water splashing you from one side while a tidal wave crushes you from the opposite direction.

 

[American123]

BLM is not an anti-white movement. It is against police brutality by police of any race. They make a stink about that regardless of the officer's race. That's why 2 out of 4 officers prosecuted for George Floyd weren't white and no one made cared.

Anyone who thinks otherwise must be white man who feels paranoid about being white.

You can't claim BLM is any type of specific individual meaning movement because it has different connotations to different people. You've already stated that the movement has no leadership structure, hierarchy, or official membership, therefore it is entirely organic at an individual level and each individual adds their own connotations to those three words and what they imply.

Put simply, you're generalizing and you are wrong.

Furthermore:

Better scurry over to tell these gentlemen how white they are, which ironically is a very "Biden" thing to say.

 

[Koda]

I see that you want it explained to you again:


"They" implies that BLM, each and every person, agrees with and called for defunding the police. Did that happen, or is there no consensus "they"? Is BLM a huge membership organization, or a movement that just requires you for you to support the idea and maybe hold up a sign?


Here you're speaking for each and every member of the Blue Lives, and you are claiming to know that absolutely none of the people involved saw their efforts as anti-black, and that the actual racists who use Blue Lives symbols to represent their racism can't possibly be members of Blue Lives. Even though the only way to tell a member of Blue Lives Matter is to see what signs they are holding.


So let's try it this way:


See the contrast in your words? You're welcome.

I never spoke for each and every member of any group,

and to clarify, I never stated what you quoted me you changed those words then added my name to that.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Racially motivated killings in this country are insignificant in number. They do exist, but are not the source of BLM rage, which is primarily police incidents where black people die by a white cop. It's like complaining about a droplet of water splashing you from one side while a tidal wave crushes you from the opposite direction.

I have several questions, but mostly (and forgive me if I should know this already):

What are your qualifications to gatekeep what the 'correct' amount of outrage that another individual or group should have when you (AFAK) are not part of that group and have no personal experiences that match theirs?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I never spoke for each and every member of any group,

and to clarify, I never stated what you quoted me you changed those words then added my name to that.

View attachment 1201955

To me fair, I think most of us saw what he did there and understood that he was admitting to changing your words to make a point.

 

[American123]

I have several questions, but mostly (and forgive me if I should know this already):

What are your qualifications to gatekeep what the 'correct' amount of outrage that another individual or group should have when you (AFAK) are not part of that group and have no personal experiences that match theirs?

That's a good question. It's kinda along the lines of "what is a reasonable response to a stimulus?" And of course it will always be subjective to who you ask.

Like for example, what is a reasonable response to someone mugging you?

Some people might say, "give them the stuff, it's just stuff and you can probably buy it again."

Some people might say, "shoot them, their life is forfeit when they they attempted their mugging."

Two very different responses to the same stimulus, and depending on who you ask you will get different answers on which response is reasonable.

I need you to clarify to help me respond better. What group are you referring to when you say that I "don't belong to that group as far as you know."

 

[Koda]

To me fair, I think most of us saw what he did there and understood that he was admitting to changing your words to make a point.

except his point wasn't taken by me because I never spoke for each and every member like he suggested, among everything else he takes out of context to gaslight me as if my way of wording things is whats wrong.
Sorry, its dishonest what hes doing to people here in these discussions.

 

[The B]

You can't claim BLM is any type of specific individual meaning movement because it has different connotations to different people. You've already stated that the movement has no leadership structure, hierarchy, or official membership, therefore it is entirely organic at an individual level and each individual adds their own connotations to those three words and what they imply.

A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or politicalone.[1][2] This may be to carry out, resist or undo a social change. It is a type of group action and may involve individuals, organizations or both. Definitions of the term are slightly varied.[3] Social movements have been described as "organizational structures and strategies that may empower oppressed populations to mount effective challenges and resist the more powerful and advantaged elites".[4] They represent a method of social change from the bottom within nations.[4]

the overarching theme of a movement is all that 95% of the supporters of that movement have any interest in. fringe groups latching onto those movements can and will do whatever they want/can get away with, attempting to tide the tide of the movement across the proverbial bar. those fringe organizations dont speak for the movement, they typically dont even have any influence over the movement. because the movement is, by definition, a shared idea - that overarching theme. during the "civil rights movement" there were plenty of fringe groups that did stupid bubblegum in the name of the movement, and even had a not insignificant list of members who would identify as being supporters of the movement. you could argue it hurt the movement, some would argue it actually helped further the movement. but did NOT lead the movement. black panthers are a great example.

various organizations attached to the BLM movement are riders. they dont speak for the network of minds of normal rational average productive people all across the globe that are the movement. any more than black panthers spoke for a majority decent white folks who wanted integration.

 

[American123]

A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or politicalone.[1][2] This may be to carry out, resist or undo a social change. It is a type of group action and may involve individuals, organizations or both. Definitions of the term are slightly varied.[3] Social movements have been described as "organizational structures and strategies that may empower oppressed populations to mount effective challenges and resist the more powerful and advantaged elites".[4] They represent a method of social change from the bottom within nations.[4]

the overarching theme of a movement is all that 95% of the supporters of that movement have any interest in. fringe groups latching onto those movements can and will do whatever they want/can get away with, attempting to tide the tide of the movement across the proverbial bar. those fringe organizations dont speak for the movement, they typically dont even have any influence over the movement. because the movement is, by definition, a shared idea - that overarching theme. during the "civil rights movement" there were plenty of fringe groups that did stupid bubblegum in the name of the movement, and even had a not insignificant list of members who would identify as being supporters of the movement. you could argue it hurt the movement, some would argue it actually helped further the movement. but did NOT lead the movement. black panthers are a great example.

various organizations attached to the BLM movement are riders. they dont speak for the network of minds of normal rational average productive people all across the globe that are the movement. any more than black panthers spoke for a majority decent white folks who wanted integration.

Thanks, so whose done a poll to determine what 95% of self proclaimed "black lives matter" supporters have in terms of movement goals, or desired outcomes and how those will be accomplished?

 

[The B]

as said, a movement is a shared idea and the bajillions of micro actions from its supports... voting, volunteering, petitioning, putting signs in windows with a statement of support of the movement, bumper stickers, discussions with friends, debating with the opposition, making facebook posts, changing spending habits, donating to organizations in support of the cause, etcetcetc. when people say they support BLM, this is what theyre saying, this is what they mean. you can try to redefine the definition of "movement" to mean "supporting the agenda of an organization" all you want, but thats just making crap up. all these people out there with BLM signs and stickers and hats mean they support the overarching idea that black people are unfairly subject to police brutality, and thats fūckin it. they dont give any craps about or even know that Black Lives Matter Global Organization even exists, and while they MIGHT coincidentally agree with some of the bullet points on that org's website, thats not what theyre saying when they say they support BLM.

and my qualification for knowing all this? i lean left, almost everyone i know lean left, almost everyone i know supports BLM, we all follow each other and share content and ideas via social media, most of the people i consort with possess higher degrees and read intellectual articles on our current issues and we all pass information and opinions around and mixed in there occasionally are links to various organizations doing work within the movement... i follow some on facebook.. i read tweets.. etcetcetc

you wanna know how i found out that the above referenced BLM org exists and what they stood for? my conservative christian uncle, upon hearing that support black lives matter, said "what?? dont throw in with, with, terrorists, practically! they want to tear down our whole democracy!" and i said, shocked, "wtf??" and he said hes heard all about it (on fox news), has even "been to the website and read it for myself!"

thats how relevant to the movement that organization is. nobody even knows it exists.

 

[The B]

well.. except for conservatives. apparently. great job spinning the narrative, conservative media.

 

[The B]

its like looking at a group of 100 people who all believe the same thing and only two of them are wearing pink shirts but you for some reason conclude wearing pink shirts is what the idea is and cant figure out why the other 98 people dont know it.

 

[mhayd93]

In other news…I see no reason why anyone would find a hat with an AR-15 on it objectionable. It is just a tool, one which the Constitution expressly allows us to have.

Until that picture starts jumping out of the hat and shooting people at random, it is no more harmful/offensive/distracting than a student wearing something like a Hello Kitty shirt, Yankees hat, Kobe Bryant jersey, Gay Pride pin, etc…

 

[American123]

as said, a movement is a shared idea and the bajillions of micro actions from its supports... voting, volunteering, petitioning, putting signs in windows with a statement of support of the movement, bumper stickers, discussions with friends, debating with the opposition, making facebook posts, changing spending habits, donating to organizations in support of the cause, etcetcetc. when people say they support BLM, this is what theyre saying, this is what they mean. you can try to redefine the definition of "movement" to mean "supporting the agenda of an organization" all you want, but thats just making crap up. all these people out there with BLM signs and stickers and hats mean they support the overarching idea that black people are unfairly subject to police brutality, and thats fūckin it. they dont give any craps about or even know that Black Lives Matter Global Organization even exists, and while they MIGHT coincidentally agree with some of the bullet points on that org's website, thats not what theyre saying when they say they support BLM.

and my qualification for knowing all this? i lean left, almost everyone i know lean left, almost everyone i know supports BLM, we all follow each other and share content and ideas via social media, most of the people i consort with possess higher degrees and read intellectual articles on our current issues and we all pass information and opinions around and mixed in there occasionally are links to various organizations doing work within the movement... i follow some on facebook.. i read tweets.. etcetcetc

you wanna know how i found out that the above referenced BLM org exists and what they stood for? my conservative christian uncle, upon hearing that support black lives matter, said "what?? dont throw in with, with, terrorists, practically! they want to tear down our whole democracy!" and i said, shocked, "wtf??" and he said hes heard all about it (on fox news), has even "been to the website and read it for myself!"

thats how relevant to the movement that organization is. nobody even knows it exists.

See that's interesting, because you're applying an extremely vague interpretation of a social movement that can literally mean anything to anyone and if you polled 100 different people who claim they are part of the movement they would likely give you lots of reasons centered around how black people's lives literally matter but it would then range immensely after that as to what that statement implies.

For example, black baby lives matter to plan parenthood as a "cash cow" in the abortion industry but somehow I don't think that is what they are implying.

Black American lives matter to the democrat party when they are voting democrat, and they tend to matter a lot more around election cycle but after that it gets a bit hazy. If they don't vote democrat how much their life matters seems to wain as well, but I don't think that is what they are implying.

Black American lives matter to the white leftists as a virtue signaling "I'm a good person" front yard sign, bumper sticker, and t-shirt while they send their children to private schools with extremely small if any black student populations and live in neighborhoods that are extremely low in black neighbors, if any, but I don't think that is what they are implying.

Black lives matter when they are killed by police, they REALLY matter when they are killed by white policeman, but the typical weekend murders all year in Chicago don't really seem to matter because 100 people can be shot in a weekend, 20 of them can die and it won't make the national news cycle like 1 dead black drug addict killed by a white cop.

Then we can see pictures of marches and 50 different slogans implying 50 different actions to be taken can be seen in the same "movement" with the title "black lives matter."

You'll have to excuse me for not seeing a clearly defined social movement here with the title "black lives matter."

Because very few Americans likely disagree with that statement as long as it is included under the umbrella of "life matters"

It's a bit tribalistic to specifically reference one skin tone, which is where I believe the message loses a lot of otherwise very rational people. Life matters, as a society we should be more respectful of life, our own lives, other people's lives, regardless of skin tone.

Where this rhetoric loses a lot of people is in the numbers. If we are talking about saving lives. Yelling at the police for the nominal number of people they kill every year (which most often are considered "clean shoots") is nothing in comparison to the annual death toll from other sources.

If it's only about police intervention resulting in death, teaching people to not fight with cops will save more lives than telling cops to stop shooting people who are fighting with them. It also doesn't help that black Americans per capita kill a disproportionate amount of police ever year so statically there is a higher chance of police being killed in their interactions with black Americans than other Americans and that might lead police to be a bit "jumpy" as a result.

 

[RX-79G]

So then.......did you/do you even know what the BLM folks are about?
If not.....
Well, let me help you a bit.

So this is a national movement without a central organization. How does your quoted stuff speak for 180 million+ Americans that never attended a meeting, voted for a representative and certainly didn't write that? (It doesn't.)

Why is it that you, like so many people, feel that they can summarize huge populations by quoting one or two of them? It doesn't seem like you prefer stereotypes, but seem actually unable to deal with the subtle nature of reality and have to resort to stereotypes to make any sense of things.

The Black Lives Matters Global Network does not speak for everyone that feels that Black lives need to matter more than they currently seem to by police. Period. That's because the enormous swath of people that feel that way are not connected by anything more than their reaction to seeing Floyd asphyxiated, hearing about Castile shot and a host of other crap that should make any normal human being wonder WTF is going on?

 

[RX-79G]

except his point wasn't taken by me because I never spoke for each and every member like he suggested, among everything else he takes out of context to gaslight me as if my way of wording things is whats wrong.
Sorry, its dishonest what hes doing to people here in these discussions.

No, you're just unfamiliar with using this kind of example to demonstrate how language is used. When I discuss writing with folks we use a similar method all the time.

What you're doing is just switching from gaslighting to "he changed my post" in a willy-nilly effort to distract from the what I pointed out in what you wrote, and how ma96782 did the same: Created a stereotype by asserting a fictional group exists in the real world by your sentence structure.

 

[RX-79G]

In other news…I see no reason why anyone would find a hat with an AR-15 on it objectionable. It is just a tool, one which the Constitution expressly allows us to have.

Until that picture starts jumping out of the hat and shooting people at random, it is no more harmful/offensive/distracting than a student wearing something like a Hello Kitty shirt, Yankees hat, Kobe Bryant jersey, Gay Pride pin, etc…

How about a hat with a picture of my penis? Also a tool. Plenty of Constitutionally protected activities attached to it. Symbolic of my gender and a point of pride.

Until my penis jumps off the hat and starts making love to ladies at random, it is no more harmful than an elementary student wearing a low cut halter top and a g-string.