Re: Black Lives Matter and Police Brutality
Not sure there is too much to add to this conversation at this point, but I'll throw my two cents in never-the-less. Most of this will be restatements of previously covered material.
Essentially I agree with everything Kal'Stang said.
While the shooting of an innocent black person is obviously something that is incredibly deplorable and should be avoided at all costs, the truth is that it mostly has been avoided.
All (or at least most) of the names you've heard in the news of black kids being shot have been cases that are justified. In some cases the kids had a gun and were not complying with police commands.
In other cases, the kids had a BB gun, or a toy that looked like a gun, but again, they were not complying with police commands; additionally, they were pointing their toy guns at the police. If you were confronted by someone at 150 meters and they had a "gun replica" that you were 80% sure was not a real firearm, would you not fear for your life? Statistically speaking 20% is pretty great odds to go against, but this isn't a poker table and you don't get second chances. If you win the bet: you get to live another day. If you lose: that's it, you're dead, game over, el fin. My point here is that if you have something that can be construed as a weapon, you can be construed as a threat. In that case, you need to put the object on the ground and distance yourself from it, making no sudden movements and complying with orders given to you. If you fail to do those things, you're only reinforcing the idea that you are a threat and escalating the situation.
In still other cases the kids were unarmed without any doubt,
and yet they were still the dangerous aggressors. There is a very real reason the phrase
unarmed hand-to-hand combat exists. It is very very possible to kill and/or do serious damage to another human being without having a weapon, and anyone who doesn't believe that to be the case needs to watch the martial arts tournaments coming up during these 2016 Summer Olympics. That being said, if you are actively attacking another individual, a person (cop or not) has every right to shoot you to defend the person you are attacking. That's what self defense means. Self defense is the action of incapacitating or deterring a threat that has a high probability of causing death or significant injury to you or others around you. Additionally, self defense
is specifically focused on incapacitation and deterrence. This means that all of your moves and actions
must be defensive, I.E. if you knock your opponent to the ground, you are not allowed to repeatedly kick him in the stomach, as he is not a threat to you any longer until he stands and demonstrates continued desire to inflict harm. As such, even in the Trayvon Martin case (assuming we believe the few eyewitnesses who said that Trayvon Martin was, at one point, punching Zimmerman despite Zimmerman being on the ground and not an effective threat), Trayvon Martin would be considered the aggressor, even if Zimmerman was following him and even if Zimmerman threw the first punch. The aggressor in a fight can change rapidly depending on who has the upper hand in the conflict, but if you have the upper hand it is your responsibility to disengage. If you fail to disengage and continue to inflict harm, then you are no longer acting in self defense, but instead are violently attacking. Furthermore, one person merely following another is not valid reason for violence, regardless of the circumstances. If you truly believe you're being followed to the point of being stalked, then call the authorities and let them sort it out.
So, in conclusion, I do not believe that the Black Lives Matter movement is justified or correct when it protests the actions of the police in contributing to the deaths of the kids in question. My reasoning for this is that I believe that the actions of the police were justified and correct in the situations in question.
This is not to say that I believe that there have never been any kids (or people) wrongfully killed by police officers, or that I believe that there has never been a race-motivated killing committed by a police officer. The
law of large numbers dictates that such things must have surely happened.
Instead, it is my belief that a
majority of killings done by police are justified and correct, that a
majority of black people killed by police are at fault for the result, and that a
majority of the actions by Black Lives Matter are unjustified and extreme.
The overall premise of Black Lives Matter, that being to raise awareness of racial violence with aims to prevent it, I support. However it's techniques, the examples that it points to, and it's routine promotion of violence against the police are things that I believe to be deplorable and uncivil.
