More Flag/Anthem Controversy
-
Yea like Obama care is killing it. Oh wait maybe it is?
-
The protest has always been about police violence against minorities. Kaepernick said that in the beginning, its been repeated many times over. A lot of people have tried to make it about the flag, but that has never been what it is about. It’s about police violence.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was brought up by @DoubleDD. I think MLK is actually an excellent example of what is going on right now, but for completely different reasons.
This fivethirtyeight.com article talks specifically about public opinion of MLK.
Most Americans didn’t approve of the Freedom Riders (mixed race groups that rode interstate buses into the south to challenge the lack of enforcement of the Federal ruling that discrimination in busing was illegal) in the 60’s. Most didn’t approve of the March on Washington in 1963 where King gave his now famous “I have a Dream” speech. I find it funny that @DoubleDD mentions this speech specifically as the “right way” to go about things, nevermind that it was HUGELY unpopular at the time.
And MLK himself, in a 1966 Gallup poll, was viewed negatively by 63% of all Americans.
Sixty three percent of all Americans viewed Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. negatively in 1966
In 2011, 4% of Americans viewed MLK negatively.
History is funny like that. When you stand on the side of equality, history will smile on you long after you are gone.
When you don’t, you end up like George Wallace. Many Americans applauded him for standing in the schoolhouse door to prevent integration. I doubt you can find more than a handful of people that would champion that now.
Wallace ended up on the wrong side of history. What he did was popular at the time, but looks absolutely ridiculous now because he was fighting to preserve inequality.
MLK was unpopular at the time, even up to his death and probably for some time afterwards, but he’s revered now by people all around the world, of every race, because he was fighting for equality.
Curt Flood was unpopular (vilified and blackballed - hmmm, where have we seen that) after challenging the reserve clause. Although he was an outstanding player, his legacy lives on as the man who had the courage to challenge the reserve clause.
Booing players that kneel may be popular now, but in 30 years, will those same fans be embarrassed to tell their children and grandchildren that they booed Colin Kaepernick and burned the jerseys of players that knelt in the same way that those who hosed down and attacked marchers on the Edmund Pettus bridge in 1965 are now ashamed of their actions? Will an explanation escape them, the same as it does for those who can’t explain why they opposed sit-ins at diner counters?
I don’t know. I honestly don’t. But I am a student of history, and history has taught me that if you are on the side of equality, history will tend to smile on you, while those who stand silently aside, or worse, fight for inequality, are always reflected in that light in the end.
-
A lot of fans at the Chiefs game-just saying!
️
-
DoubleDD said:
Again what do you gain by attacking a symbol (flag) …
at·tack əˈtak
verb: take aggressive action against (a place or enemy forces) with weapons or armed force, typically in a battle or war.
“in December, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor”Please tell me which athlete “attacked” the flag?
That’s some pretty strong rhetoric to start your post. To be honest, I stopped right there and didn’t read the rest. I will go back and read the rest because I care to hear what you have to say…,
My point is that the ‘voices’ that are being used in the debate aren’t voices that seek to bridge the divide. The voices are juiced with intent to forcibly persuade rather than to inform… on both sides
Sorry to single out one word in your post, but it serves as a good example of what I see as an epidemic of hyperbole.
-
Comparing the players of the NFL and their disrespect of the American Flag to what MLK did is like trying to compare an apple to a carrot.
Understand MLK was not disrespectful to others. Sure his movement and thoughts were unpopular at the time. Yet he was not disrespectful. In fact he made it a point not to be disrespectful to others. For he knew to realize his dream he needed others outside his base to make it happen. He needed to unite the people for his cause.
You’re not going to unite people disrespecting the American Flag and Anthem. Thereby meaning your not going to get people to join your cause. Meaning your not going to be remembered in a lighter view. I find it humorous that some keep arguing with me that it’s ok to disrespect the Flag and Anthem and their will be no backlash. Yet as each day goes by the NFL is losing more viewership. People are tuning out, not only the game but the cause of the protest all together. I too am a student of history. And if History has taught us anything? It would be that the method that one uses to bring the message is just important as the message it’s self.
So again tell me how disrespecting the flag and anthem is going to work? I’m being told I’m wrong. Yet all the stats, polls, and dollars signs indicate I somewhat know what I’m talking about.
I mean what is the message anyways? I’m watching Football players interview and they swear it’s all about Trump? Some say it’s about police brutality? Same say it’s about Black equality.
Somewhere in all this the true message is dying.
-
-
How do we feel about this 49 years later:
-
-
Your response is kind of reinforcing my point about disinterest in bridging the divide.
-
What divide do you want to bridge? And how are you going to win my interest to your cause when you go out of your way to call me out in your post? Not only calling me out but making your whole post about me. Not to mention the post had nothing to do with the topic, but was ATTACKING me for what you viewed as a miss use of the word. ATTACK. You were wrong. I used the word just as it should have been used. So now why should I trust you? Why would I want to build a bridge? You don’t care what I have to say?
I don’t know how many times I have to say it? I have no problem with the NFL Players protesting. I’m just pointing out the method with which is being used to protest is not winning them or the cause any support.
Yet all I keep hearing is it their right. It is their right. OK it’s their right, and then keep doing what your doing and lets see how far this protest goes and accomplishes?
If anybody has tried to bridge the gap. It’s been me. As I acknowledge the rights of persons to protest. Just speculating that disrespecting the Flag and Anthem may not be the best way to gain support for your message.
-
We may disagree, but I have to give you credit for engaging in the dialogue. Too many people refuse to engage in the dialogue. I hope that you have gained some perspective from the things that I have written. I have certainly gained some perspective from reading your posts.
The challenge is that the first issue is to raise awareness. Many people assume that police violence against minorities happens only because of actions on the part of minorities, and not due to policies and practices of law enforcement. Perhaps you are aware (perhaps not, as its a little known fact), that there is no central database cataloging all police stops, or even all police shootings in the US. No one could produce good statistics on this if they tried because the data doesn’t exist (the DOJ is currently blocking or undoing reforms put in place by the Obama administration that would have funded such statistical information gathering).
To raise awareness you have to do something that draws attention. You have to sit at lunch counters where you aren’t welcome. You have to call in the National Guard to go to class. You have to walk across a bridge in Selma. You have to March on Washington. You have to bow your head and raise your fist in Mexico City. You have to boycott buses in Montgomery. You have to Freedom Ride from the north to the south.
If no one challenges the status quo, inequality remains. Every time a young black or brown person was shot by police, there was an immediate chorus of people saying what they did wrong, or citing their record, etc. It was all about excuses. Cops make split second decisions, shouldn’t be second guessed, tough job… All of those things are absolutely true. The job is tough. Part of the reason it is tough is because we are hoping, no, we are depending on the good judgment of the men and women bestowed with that badge to protect us.
A few weeks ago an officer in St. Louis was acquitted in the shooting death of a black man. On the dashcam video he is clearly heard saying that he intended to kill the man when they caught him after the police chase. If there was evidence that any of us said we were going to kill someone and that person died at our hand within six months, there would be little chance that we could argue self defense. Any of us, black or white, would likely go to prison for murder. Yet somehow, this police officer was acquitted because he says that he believed the individual was reaching for a gun (the gun found on the scene did not have the victim’s DNA on it, but it did have the officer’s).
There are dozens of cases like this, but every time something like this happens, the refrain just plays again. split second decision…thought they were reaching for a weapon…feared for my life…ACQUITTAL.
Something had to be done to break that cycle. Not something violent. Not even marching in the streets, where the tensions between black protesters and police have become even more testy. So what to do. Take a knee. Raise a fist. Not in disrespect, but to raise awareness that something is not right.
It cannot be silenced now. A discussion must be had. Things must change.
-
Ironically, I agree with some of the points that you are making, just not with the way you are saying it.
You seem to protest that I should not have a qualm with the words you choose. You argue that the words you used are correct.
What again is your point about the displays of protest against the flag?
Is it that you don’t agree with the approach they chose to express themselves?
Hmmmm.
-
@justanotherfan I don’t take anything Kaepernick says serious. Scream racism and oppression while saluting Castro and Guevara. What I get outta that is don’t send your kids to Nevada for college. What’s next prasing Sadam or Hitler. I believe peaceful protest is fine, it’s a ton better than to hear democrats defend standing on building and shooting cops that had nothing to do with stuff several states away happening.
-
I don’t believe you. Somebody else threw out the word racism like giving out candy at a parade. Yet you had no problem with that. You had no problem with somebody calling another person a racist because they were against kneeling at the presence of the Flag or Anthem. Nope not even a beep.
Yet somehow me using the word Attack to describe the actions being taking by this latest protest, you find offensive?
You know if you really thought about It? You would see I’m trying to help to help the cause. I’m pointing out a very real threat to this cause. Going into deep detail how the PR that this protest is getting isn’t helping the cause.
I haven’t said one thing against the actual message? No I haven’t. Just pointing out that the method that is being used might not reap the rewards many so desire. By disrespecting the Flag/anthem you not creating unity. You’re creating division. This is never a good thing. Two wrongs never make a right.
You don’t even see it? We are looking past the obvious. If kneeling in protest of the Flag/Anthem is working? Then why aren’t we having the conversation on how to fix the problem? No were fighting about ones rights versus disrespecting the flag. As a society we have gained nothing but more division. There is no unity here.
No sir you don’t respect what I have to say, and you don’t like me. You’ve made that very clear with your basely accusations. You turned a blind eye to the use of a word so horrific, and evil. A word like Racism. Yet you went out your way to scold me for using word that can be used in many ways in the English language. (Attack)
No sir you showed your cards. I know where you stand.
-
You’re a strong poster. You’re thoughtful about what you post. So lets switch gears?
What would like to see done to fix the issue?
-
- Better data regarding all police stops/encounters with the public.
Right now, data is only collected for stops that result in tickets or written warnings. That means that if an officer stops me, but doesn’t give me a written warning or ticket, that stop is unrecorded.
We need to track this so that we can get statistical information on if officers are just randomly engaging people of color with no real probable cause or suspicion. The general public never hears about those encounters, but it creates the types of situations where tensions are heightened. We need to know how often this type of thing is happening.
- More use of body cameras and dash cameras that officers cannot disable at the scene.
How often have we seen questionable things happen, but there’s no video footage because the body cam or dash cam either was not working, or had been accidentally turned off during the chase/stop/encounter. That should not happen. We have technology that would allow the cameras to record to a separate location and would prevent them from being disabled by the officer when they are actively on duty. The cameras are there for a reason. They shouldn’t just be getting turned off.
- Any police involved shooting that may be prosecuted must be moved outside the jurisdiction for prosecution.
It is incredibly difficult to find an unbiased jury in cases that involve police shootings. Part of this is that because people naturally lend credibility to those in positions of power or authority, meaning that a police officer will tend to be more believable because of their position than the average person. You can’t do anything about that because that’s a natural human tendency.
What you can do something about is that people tend to not want to judge too harshly against the department that they have to call when there is something happening to them. Very simply, people in Lawrence don’t want to be too quick to judge the Lawrence PD, because if they are in trouble, they want the Lawrence PD to respond. The best way to handle this is that if there’s an officer involved shooting in Lawrence that may bring about criminal charges, it has to be prosecuted in Topeka, or in Kansas City, or Olathe, or Wichita, or Emporia - basically somewhere that isn’t Lawrence so that the people on the jury are more comfortable judging the case without worry.
- Community outreach
There’s been a history within the black community that the police are not on our side. This goes back as far as lynchings, when often police would stand aside as blacks accused (but not convicted) of crimes were drug from their cells and killed by mobs. Even through the 1950’s and 1960’s, there was a tendency to trump up charges against African Americans. Now that we have DNA evidence, we are discovering lots of convictions that have imprisoned the wrong people, often based on the testimony of one witness, without any physical evidence (sometimes even ignoring alibi witnesses).
This has led to a tendency by minorities to simply not trust the police. They aren’t generally there when we need them - unless its to arrest us. I remember calling a police officer to file a report of a theft. Once he determined I wasn’t the suspect, he lost interest, took down my name and what was taken, then left. No investigation. Nothing. He provided zero help. Just didn’t care about helping a young black kid. Once I wasn’t a suspect, he had no time to talk to me.
That’s not something that can be undone overnight. The justice system as a whole has a responsibility in this. People need to outright admit that some of the things that happened in the past were wrong - unequivocally wrong. No qualifiers. Just wrong. And then it has to be established that the practices that led to that - often times simply a desire to get a conviction on the books for a crime - need to be changed.
Part of that is also making jury service more open to poorer individuals. For an hourly worker, the $10 per day for jury service makes it an incredible hardship. By making jury service available only to those with the means to afford it (because hardship is a reason to be excused) the pool is tilted away from lower income individuals, meaning that if you are poor and a minority, the chances of being tried by a jury of your peers is actually fairly low.
- Improved access to justice
This goes to the point above, but let’s just be honest - the criminal justice system is underfunded. Grossly underfunded. Prosecutors offices are underfunded. Did you know that prosecutors offices actually have their own independent investigators (i.e. not the police). Except that many offices can’t fill those positions, so they simply use the police as their investigators - that means the prosecutors office has a significant conflict with law enforcement officers within their jurisdiction. How can they be expected to look into any of these issues without bias when they work hand in hand.
On top of that, indigent defense is even more poorly funded. In most cases, the indigent defense offices have no investigators on staff. Our constitution guarantees access to an adequate defense, but nobody wants to pay “to defend criminals.” Criminal defense isn’t about defending criminals, its about defending the constitution, requiring the prosecution to meet its burden on all elements and generally defending the process of justice.
If the very poorest in society can’t afford access to justice, because our legal framework is built on precedent, any bad precedent, even ones built on the basis of an individual simply not having access or the ability to mount a defense, are woven into the fabric of our legal system and affect the outcome of later cases. That means they could directly affect you or I if we are ever wrongly accused. That helps everyone, but particularly people of color because…
- Rethink the war on drugs.
We have an addiction problem in this country. Now that it is opiods and suburban housewives are addicted, there is a push to decriminalize addiction (i.e. usage). But how many young minorities are in prison now for usage? We need to significantly rethink how we handle this ‘war’ because to fight a war you need enemies and there are always casualties.
There are probably a ton more ideas, but that at least gives a start.
Edit: I should probably note that most of these ideas are not original to me. The vast majority are things that have been suggested in various studies, reports, and papers dating back to the 80’s and 90’s, and supported by research as recent as this year.
-
I am sorry you were offended; I meant no offense in my original post.
You don’t know me; I don’t know you.
I don’t think my comment deserved such a forceful and personal rebut. I am disappointed that you have attributed mistruths to me and brought a bunch of baggage into the discussion.
Your judgement of me feels contemptuous and disrespectful. And it is ill-informed and incorrect.
Happy to talk in the future about topics that aren’t so volatile…
-
No I don’t know you, but what am I supposed to think? You pass over somebody that used the term racist like it had no value? Yet you’re are offended that I used the word Attack. It makes a guy think?
You’re a person of power as you apart of making @KUbuckets. I’m just a poster. Somebody that most don’t agree with. LOL
A wise man once told me that we know each other but we don’t really know each other.
However please understand where I’m coming from?
Yet? No I don’t know you, but you will always have a place at my dinner table if you want or need it. If your nice and tell me I’m great I’ll let you into my beer cooler.
Peace.
-
It so refreshing to actually to hear ideas of solving the issues instead of the MSM painting an agenda.
To many times we call attention to an issue that plagues Americans, yet do nothing.
You have some strong and thought out ideas for a plan of action to right the wrong. It shows me you have giving it a lot of thought. I appreciate that.
I think that reforming the distribution of tax money in our schools system would also help. Having been on both sides of the track. It’s not a fair deal. Top notch schools have everything for kids to achieve greatness. Low income schools barely have enough school books to go around. I’ve learned in my life as I’m sure you have. That if a person believes the system is rigged, then they won’t even try. Yet if a person believes they can achieve anything. Then perception, prejudices, and so called lot in life will have no effect on that person. They will aspire to greatness, as they armed with a strong and true education. What a person thinks they are, then therefore they will be.
-
@DoubleDD Peace.
-
The trouble (or challenge, depending on your level of optimism) is that many of the proposals are things known to the policy makers.
For instance, I think most people would be willing to increase the jury pay, but that takes money, and most people don’t want to invest the money in it. Same with the budgets for prosecutors and indigent defense. Nobody wants to put the money into it to hire independent investigators (isn’t that what the police are for! they say).
Nobody wants to beef up the budget for indigent defense, lest they be accused of being “soft on crime.”
Even the body cam and dash cam stuff has been a nightmare to get passed - many places still refuse to require body cameras (a bill in Missouri to require such failed last year, I think). Between the cost and opposition from police lobbying groups, most of that stuff has yet to make it into law.
And the data collection stuff, well, the current Department of Justice is unraveling a lot of the stuff that was put in place under AGs Holder and Lynch requiring additional data collection and a central repository.
It’s not just that it isn’t being done. A lot of these things are actively opposed - some for financial reasons, some simply because police groups lobby against it.
How can we make strides when the police don’t even want the public to get the information. I’m not even saying that there is anything untoward going on. We just don’t know, and without the data, we can’t find out.
And this is why we need awareness. Awareness of the issue of police violence. Awareness of the issue of lack of information and data collection. Awareness of a lack of funding and a lack of independence between prosecutors and police. Not because every officer or prosecutor is bad. They are not. But because we, as the public, are the only ones that can act as a check on this system. But we can only do that if we have the information - something we sorely lack right now.
-
Been busy, and this site is growing big so I miss some good discussions. Trump caused this whole controversy when he dared the players to kneel. I probably would’ve kneeled too. I’m not much of a patriot these days. Just not a focus of mine. Too many big things going on in the world to worry about someone kneeling, or sitting out the anthem.
-
Mike Ditka really embarrassed himself this week. Wow.
-
@justanotherfan to many blows to the head?
-
Honestly, every time a former football player says something absurd or can’t remember (or doesn’t know) something fairly common, that is the first thing I think about. I think he honestly doesn’t know or can’t remember some of these things. That’s its own separate tragedy.
-
@justanotherfan heard he apologized.
-
His apology didn’t make a lot of sense, either, though. The NFL wasn’t integrated until 1946, so even on the football field, there was oppression within the last 100 years. The University of Buffalo declined a bid to the Tangerine Bowl in 1958 because the stadium operator would not allow games with integrated teams (Buffalo had two black players). The SEC went largely unintegrated until the 1960s. Pretending that sports was somehow untouched by that societal division is just historically and factually incorrect.
Even if his comments were focused on the NFL exclusively, his statement is still incorrect. Like I said earlier, I am just chalking it up to him not knowing or not remembering because of undetected head injuries, because even the clarification is impossibly wrong.
-
@justanotherfan Let’s just go with speaking before thinking. Kinda stupid to not be more careful in his word choice, but although I have long considered Ditka an idiot I am going to conclude he probably just thinks things are not oppressive anymore.
I am equal opportunity in my willingness to forgive idiotic exaggeration. Kaep similarly pushed my limits with some of the stuff he said and with his Castro shirt. I liked his silent dignified protest better.
