Why doesn't BLM talk about black on black violence?

There is a middle ground we are not seeing.

Now, I don't think cops go around looking for black people--innocent or otherwise--to shoot. But what they are often told to do is patrol certain areas, specifically neighborhoods with high crime.

This now leads us to why is there a lot of crime. I don't know, that's another discussion, but off the top of my head:

• socioeconomic level
• single-parent households (studies show that black children are significantly more likely to lead to teen pregnancy's, drug use, poor mental health, and so on).
• presence of drugs
• presence of organized crime.
• poor educational opportunities
• and so on and so forth

Which is why we have BLM. Sure, cops killing black people might have triggered the movement, but it's not the sole reason for why it exists.

There is a whole tangled web of shit that has led us here, and it is because of systemic/institutional racism.

I like people! I don't think your average person is racist, and I don't think your average racist person is half as racist as we think they are. And addressing system racism does not mean you need to start labeling people--cops, teachers, whatever--as racist people, but it does mean addressing the racist systems in your society.

Yeah, it's a shame this is such a far-out and preposterous concept for people. The earth has so many resources, so many smart people, there is no need for people to want for anything.

People planning for a world beyond their grandchildren, and working together with everyone, are two things I hope to see society adopt before I die.

As it is now, people are too worried about not having enough that they generally amass too much, and they can't think beyond two generations.

@mrbojangles25: Yeah there's probably a lot we could discuss but I'm really not the person to discuss it with. I don't see the whole racism thing being a huge issue nowadays. Back in the 50's, sure. It was plain as day. I'm not saying there aren't racist, just that they make up a very small portion of the population. And when I say racists, I don't just mean white people. I guess I'm tired of seeing on tv "white cop kills black person"... sure it happened, but it's so rare. Now it's in sports... rich white owners pretending like they care. Getting back on topic about the original post, I think the point of this whole thread is why isn't BLM focusing on the main problem. Maybe all I'm seeing is protest about police brutality. Is this really a huge problem? Black on black crime seems like a much bigger problem. I'm just guessing but I think that's what the thread is about.

@joshrmeyer: I agree it gets blown out of proportion, I wish there was a way to address these problems without turning it into theater.

I apologize for the snarkiness of my response, I didn't mean it to be directed at you specifically. It was a generalized venting; I'm just at my wit's end with this logic.

BLM is a specific response, sure, but it's a specific generalized response that paints in very broad strokes across a variety of socio-economic and political factors that cannot simply be assigned to one singular cause. I know the Left love to paint it solely as a race issue. More whites are shot by cops. Per capita, more blacks are. Yet more blacks are responsible for crime. And on and on down we go. This is why I don't even bother posting in politics anymore, because there's always something else that can be brought forth to repudiate. It's endless, pointless, tribal bickering at its worst.

But I digress. Nobody is saying, or even implying, that black lives matter less when they say all lives matter, which is how it's always taken by the far Left and dismissed and attacked as racist or indifferent. On what grounds? You say "duh....of course all lives matter". Except they don't when people cannot come out and state such without being claimed ignorant, antagonistic, racist, etc.

A much better name for the movement would be "Black Lives Also Matter". It's even got a nice ring to it, BLAM, and then ALM would never have come up in response.

BLM doesn't talk about black on black violence because it completely dismantles their narrative and movement.

The biggest issues affecting the black community today aren't racism, but the dissolving of the nuclear family and of course black on black crime. In 1920 the black single motherhood rate was just 20% and today it is 75%, is America more racist in 2020 than it was in 1920?

Do you know what also dismantles the BLM narrative? Police shootings because police kill more white people per year, by a large margin, then they do blacks.

The question of why blacks seem to have such run-ins with the law (at a disproportionate level) should be addressed logically rather than a typical "racism" as the answer. A lot of people are terrified of the elephant in the room.

I'll take it a step further. BLM WANTS more black on black violence. What do you think will happen to black inner cities when the police are defunded and there's nothing to stop the gangs and drug dealers that regularly victimize innocent people?

Yeah. It's a simple fact there's a disproportionate amount of crime in those areas. More homicides, rapes, burglaries, assaults. Those crying it's because cops are racist are just so grossly misinformed. However, I do place a lot of blame on the leadership in those cities that have orchestrated a shift away from strong family units to the point of demonizing and slurring the concept, and media that's promoted and pushed on young blacks.

I blame the media, since they started overreporting race issues over general issues. Its like i believe general jerks are just as bad as racial jerks, When will people realize this?

The problem is whenever anyone tries to discuss that elephant in the room, the fact it's even an elephant at all is because people will scream racism at you if you so much as suggest they tend to make up the majority of violent criminals. Even though those who know this to be true believe it has a lot more to do with social and economic factors and very little to do with skin color. So, what do you think the causes of that elephant in the room are?

The media plays a very, very large role in the division.

yup.

money

• Poor Schooling in overwhelmingly black districts
• Poor Employment opportnities for those who grow up in these neighborhoods
• Gang Prescence
• Gangs pay and support them much better than any employer would.
• Because drugs are illegal, courts cant be used to solve disputes. Thus disputes are solved on the streets, with lead and violence.

BLM isnt just about police officers

People complaining about black-on-black violence are the same ones that ignore white supremacy and the violence they commit.

You get half an eye-roll for that one. That's the kind of divisive "blame white people" bullshit that fixes nothing.

oh boy. the dead sea has never gotten saltier

how is it divisive? while black-on-black violence is certainly problematic, it is rooted back into the current system that feeds into it.

and whenever a majority-black city or town does well, it certainly offends people like you. I'm guessing tulsa and rosewood were products of black-on-black violence in your eyes, right?

What racism?

I mean if you are going to say that racism is one of the biggest issues in America today, then show me the racists. Also, what is this even based on?

It's definitely not police shootings...

@Fairmonkey: CNN won’t cover those stories

Well, I think it is very relevant because the whole BLM narrative is that cops are racist and are killing more blacks than anyone else. The problem with this is that cops per year, kill more white people than other races and by a pretty big margin.

In 2019, 1,004 people were shot and killed by police and out of that total, 370 were white, 235 were black, and 158 were Hispanic.

Black on black violence eclipses these numbers by a huge margin also so again, what are we talking about?

Technically you can't look at the situation with total numbers. White people are the majority and it follows more total would be killed. But when you look at percentage you see it's disproportionate to population. Which is the correct way to handle statistics.

Today in 2020 according to the latest Census information, the white population is roughly 60.4% while the black population is around the same as it was in 2005 at just 13%. As mentioned previously, based on population information, individuals who declare that there is both systemic racism and racial bias in American law enforcement argue that there is a racial disparity since blacks only make up 13%. This leaves us with a simple question: why are blacks being arrested and killed by police in such large numbers? To find this answer, we will go through the FBI crime statistics from 2014-2018. According to FBI crime statistics for 2014, blacks represented 27.8% of all arrests for that year which is disproportionate to their population of only 13%. In this same year, blacks were arrested for 51.3% of the murder, 55.9% of all robberies, 40.7% of all weapon possessions, and 33.1% of all aggravated assaults. For 2015, blacks arrested represented 51.1% of the murder, 53.5% of all robberies, 40% of all weapon possessions, and 32.1% of all aggravated assaults. For 2016, blacks represented 52.6% of all murder, 54.5% of all robberies, 41.8% of all weapons possession crimes, and 33.3% of all aggravated assaults. In 2017, blacks represented 53.1% of all murder, 54.3% of all robberies, 43.9% of all weapon possession crimes, and 33.5% of all aggravated assault. Last we have the crime stats from 2018- In this year, blacks represented 53.3% of all murder, 54.2% of all robberies, 43.3% of all weapon possessions, and 33.7% of all aggravated assault.

And if the system is stacked against them you get the FBI results. Also economics play a huge role in crime, as does education.

How is the system stacked against them? Arrest records line up perfectly with convictions. These aren't people that are getting pulled into prisons for simply walking the street, they are committing violent crimes.

They are convicted of violent crimes. Two distinct different things. I'd recommend a more in depth study into this issue. Also I'm not finding the connection between crime and individuals being shot by police when stopped. They are not convicted of anything at that point.

It doesn't matter because white people are shot and killed more than black people, even unarmed white people are killed more than unarmed black people.

Really not understanding your argument...

Not by percentage.

At least as great the percentage of crimes committed and interactions with the police.

Except many of them were in the process of being arrested for one.

Yeah... Be it from Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, China, Cuba, there is something all those genocidal regimes had in common... They were all Socialist.

Arrested doesn't mean guilty and even if they are they shouldn't be shot.

watch a recent frontline special with cops of a city. 1 cop shown in the ep. failed to doc the policing he was doing. it got to a point he was fired. but this in itself is a issue. is their trying not to leave a paper trail for higher ups .

It means the police absolutely had the authority to detain them and prevent them from escaping, which meant it's absolutely up to the suspect to act like a grown ass man about it. It means the suspect doesn't have the authority to walk away from it or fight back. And it absolutely means the police can use deadly force when that suspect becomes a threat to the officer or someone else. This idea you people have that someone can be faced with arrest, and have the right to say "nah, not today, I'm going to go home" is ridiculous.

Walking away from police is not and should not be license for the police to kill. It's also not use of deadly force against cops.

Good people on both sides of this argument.

A peace officer can definitely use deadly force against someone walking away from them if the facts/circumstances align with policy and constitutional law, and I expect an officer to perform his duties should the issue arises. I will be more than happy to provide some examples if there's any confusion.

White people are more likely to be killed by other white people and black people are more likely to be killed by other black people. But to people on both sides of the political spectrum, that's ok. It's ok to kill someone as long as they're of your same race. God bless america.

its not about being killed, its about justice. About people abusing their power to shit on them. Yes, black on black killings do happen, alot of them also because of gang/drug violence.

Actually they can do it even if it the facts and circumstances don't align with policy and constitutional law. Kinda like this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott

I mean, if we are lucky enough to have a guy who happens to walk by and take a video, we can charge the officer, but the actual use of deadly force was a done deal.

And there's consequences for the conscious decision making which resulted in the unlawful use of force; such in that case, being convicted of murder and being sentenced to prison.

Yes, just like the enclaves in Chicago, where Black On Black killings occur in the dangerous neighborhoods daily, and not a damn Democratic politician has don't jack to stop it. Tell me more about "Justice" when it's only about Police and not about stopping the main problem?