Erica Garner dies at 27

[Devout Centrist]

You are deliberately framing this issue in the wrong way. BLM has no stated goal to make it “okay” to resist lawful detention. The fact that you see no issue with how Eric Garner was detained is absolutely appalling. It’s perhaps no coincidence that you have repeatedly mentioned Mr. Garner’s previous criminal convictions in an attempt to muddy the waters. But despite what you may believe, no, choking a man to death is no okay simply because he is a criminal. There was absolutely no need to resort to using an illegal tactic in order to restrain him. The officers reacted in a completely unprofessional manner, period.

You repeatedly, albeit without any proof, assert that Black Lives Matter isn’t, “serious”, which is utterly false. Activists have elected prosecutors, worked to reform issues like probation, cash bail, poverty, and other issues in communities across this country. In Phoenix, for example, activists have helped fund several community centers and engage in a dialogue with Mayor Stanton. The fact that you have utterly dismissed them without so much as listing their accomplishments simply shows that you have no interest in addressing their complaints.

And let’s talk about race, shall we. Why do black people commit crime at a higher rate than white people? Well, first off, if we’re going down this rabbit hole, let’s reframe this question: why do men (of all races) commit crimes at a hugely disproportionate rate compared to women. Is this not a valid question our society should ask then?

Regardless, let’s address race. If you believe that this is an inherent flaw with black people or a cultural problem or some sort of moral failing on a mass scale, there are only two real options: ethnic cleansing or outright genocide. There’s no middle ground here. You cannot seriously argue that this is a widespread moral failing on the part of black people and then argue for compassion.

If, however, this is a problem rooted in history, in inequality, and in the treatment of black people in today’s society, there are concrete actions we can take to address the problem. Concrete actions that are already being taken by black communities and organizations. In Chicago, advocacy groups are working overtime to reduce homicide rates, in Richmond, California, a new program gives at-risk youth the means to connect with other men emotionally and talk about their emotions. Across this country, communities are fighting this issue.

Should I, perhaps uncharitably, chastise white communities for the opioid epidemic? Or how the murder rate in recent years has increased at a higher rate among white people when compared with black people? And the answer is an unequivocal NO. Absolutely none of this would justify police brutality or systemic racism. The issue of crime does not have to be answered in the same conversation on police brutality. There is no reason that it needs to be included in the debate.

You may now ask, “well what the hell have you done, DC? Seems like you’re all talk and no action”. Well, I have contributed, albeit not as much as I possibly could, towards the movement for police reform and for black communities. I have worked with a local charity (Wellspring’s Women’s Center in Oak Park, if you’re curious) in my hometown of Sacramento to provide a durable library for the children of impoverished mothers, I have marched with demonstrators. I can always do more, of course, and I feel as though I haven’t done enough. Simply put, I don’t say this out of self aggrandizement. But I say this to show that I actually give a damn about the issue. I’m not arguing in bad faith.

You have broached this issue not out of interest of combating crime in black communities. Rather, you sit at home and use it to bludgeon political opponents on a decades old forum. You are arguing in bad faith, and for that, I cannot respect you in any meaningful way.

[dead0man]

Have you tried making it legal to sell single cigarettes?  If that was legal, the dead girl's dad would (maybe, he clearly wasn't healthy) still be alive and we would have never heard about any of them.  Police need to do better, of course, but so do we in electing ass clowns that pass all these laws that put poor people and the police in sh**tty situations neither group wants to be in.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Have you tried making it legal to sell single cigarettes?  If that was legal, the dead girl's dad would (maybe, he clearly wasn't healthy) still be alive and we would have never heard about any of them.  Police need to do better, of course, but so do we in electing ass clowns that pass all these laws that put poor people and the police in sh**tty situations neither group wants to be in.

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here. Can you post in a thread about someones death without evangelizing about a pet issue?

[dead0man]

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here.

I don't know about the biggest, but it's certainly an important issue.  Unless you want poor people and cops to have more negative run ins with each other, you might, I don't know.  Perhaps you think it furthers a narrative you want furthered?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanks for being a fan and for the comment, but no, I'll keep posting how I want to.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Guys, guys...

Police brutality is an important topic and problem.

Racism is an important topic and problem.

Concentrated poverty in urban areas is an important topic and problem.

The War on Drugs is an important topic and problem (and a good band FTR).

Dumb "nanny-state" laws and regulations is an important topic and problem.

These things are not mutually exclusive. Can't well just get along?

[All Along The Watchtower]

PS: Sorry for my dickish behavior to certain posters in this thread, past and present (Fuzzy Bear, dead0man). I'll try to do better.

[DrScholl]

Don't apologize to FuzzyBear and dear0man. The moralizer and the supreme libertarian give as good as they get.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Don't apologize to FuzzyBear and dear0man. The moralizer and the supreme libertarian give as good as they get.

That's as opposed to the folks that can dish it out, but can't take it.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here.

I don't know about the biggest, but it's certainly an important issue.  Unless you want poor people and cops to have more negative run ins with each other, you might, I don't know.  Perhaps you think it furthers a narrative you want furthered?

Bringing up a pet issue in a thread about someones death that's tangentially related at best(which you seem to care about for entirely unrelated reasons) is really freaking insensitive dude.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here.

I don't know about the biggest, but it's certainly an important issue.  Unless you want poor people and cops to have more negative run ins with each other, you might, I don't know.  Perhaps you think it furthers a narrative you want furthered?

Bringing up a pet issue in a thread about someones death that's tangentially related at best(which you seem to care about for entirely unrelated reasons) is really freaking insensitive dude.

What are you going to post when Donald Trump passes away?  "RIP, Mr. President."?

Without her public advocacy stemming from her father's death and the circumstances surrounding it, Erica Garner would be no more a public figure than you or I.  She chose to become a public figure, and it's far from improper to discuss the legacy (good or ill) of a public figure when they die.

[OneJ]

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here.

I don't know about the biggest, but it's certainly an important issue.  Unless you want poor people and cops to have more negative run ins with each other, you might, I don't know.  Perhaps you think it furthers a narrative you want furthered?

Bringing up a pet issue in a thread about someones death that's tangentially related at best(which you seem to care about for entirely unrelated reasons) is really freaking insensitive dude.

What are you going to post when Donald Trump passes away?  "RIP, Mr. President."?

Without her public advocacy stemming from her father's death and the circumstances surrounding it, Erica Garner would be no more a public figure than you or I.  She chose to become a public figure, and it's far from improper to discuss the legacy (good or ill) of a public figure when they die.

But what did Erica do to hurt or offend you? If she didn't do any of that to you, why did you respond the way you did? Just saying.

[Devout Centrist]

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here.

I don't know about the biggest, but it's certainly an important issue.  Unless you want poor people and cops to have more negative run ins with each other, you might, I don't know.  Perhaps you think it furthers a narrative you want furthered?

Bringing up a pet issue in a thread about someones death that's tangentially related at best(which you seem to care about for entirely unrelated reasons) is really freaking insensitive dude.

What are you going to post when Donald Trump passes away?  "RIP, Mr. President."?

Without her public advocacy stemming from her father's death and the circumstances surrounding it, Erica Garner would be no more a public figure than you or I.  She chose to become a public figure, and it's far from improper to discuss the legacy (good or ill) of a public figure when they die.

If Tiffany or Ivanka dies of a coronary, I’m not going to come on here and pontificate about how bad their daddy is.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Because thats clearly the biggest problem here.

I don't know about the biggest, but it's certainly an important issue.  Unless you want poor people and cops to have more negative run ins with each other, you might, I don't know.  Perhaps you think it furthers a narrative you want furthered?

Bringing up a pet issue in a thread about someones death that's tangentially related at best(which you seem to care about for entirely unrelated reasons) is really freaking insensitive dude.

What are you going to post when Donald Trump passes away?  "RIP, Mr. President."?

Without her public advocacy stemming from her father's death and the circumstances surrounding it, Erica Garner would be no more a public figure than you or I.  She chose to become a public figure, and it's far from improper to discuss the legacy (good or ill) of a public figure when they die.

Donald trump is a sociopathic kleptocratic serial rapist who has spent the majority of his time in politics promoting bigotry and attacking fact itself. He is an affront to all that is good and a symbol of all that is wrong in America. No rational human being would put an activist like Erica Garner on that level.

[Shadows]

Well it's a damn good thing we can always count on an old white guy to 'well actually' police thuggery.

Thanks, Fuzz!

Erica Garner is a perpetrator of a false narrative; the narrative that the thing blacks have to fear most is the police.  It's just not the case.

There are issues in criminal justice that are the province of serious people (of which Erica Garner was not).  Those issues include:

***Racial disparities in sentencing
***Overall concept of anti-drug laws
***The impact and fairness/unfairness of a PERMANENT criminal record
***Systems of fines and financial penalties for civil infractions that penalize the poor (e. g. Ferguson,m MO)
***Overcriminalization (making civil matters crimes, upgrading misdemeanors to felonies, etc.)
***Minimum Mandatory Sentencings
***The Death Penalty (which, btw, I personally oppose)
***Restoration of voting rights to former offenders
***The ramifications of a growing system of Private Prisons
***An honest discussion of crime statistics, and why they are what they are
***Sentencing Juveniles as Adults (all aspects)

There are more issues I can think of.  There's no shortage of serious topics to talk about by serious people.

BLM are not serious people.  They are people who perpetuate the narrative that the real enemy of black folks is the police, and refuse to discuss the fact that blacks (according to statistics) commit a greater share of violent crimes than any other group per capita, as if that fact has nothing to do with the well-being of black folks (particularly in lower income neighborhoods).  Serious people in this area have open minds, and who wish to see the issue from all sides.  That includes the side of Law Enforcement.  And it ought to include folks who, at a minimum, concede that no person has the right to resist a lawful detention or arrest.  

Do Whites face racism in any amount equivalent to African Americans?

Why are African Americans 4 times more in jails for marijuana possession when Whites & Blacks do marijuana at the same rate ?

And your idea of nothing happening to Eric Garner if he didn't resist is ridiculous given so many African Americans have not resisted & have complied & have ended in Jail & then ultimately dead for no violent criminal offense. Do we need to go through the list of these people ?

Also it is absolutely crazy that in 2017 people will apply choke holds on people when some people can have medical condition or otherwise. Also the idea of applying Choke Hold on an unarmed man who was not even running from the situation is absolutely crazy.

You are right in that poor people have many of these problems & African Americans being more economically backward face all these problems even more. However, the idea of it having nothing to do with racism is totally illogical.