The KnockOut Game is in Town

[Bham1982]

That's a disturbing sentiment. This behavior is reprehensible but it shouldn't have anything to do with eliminating social injustice. You see, "justice" requires that you treat each individual the way they deserve to be treated.

I disagree. I am not African American, and I do not think anyone "speaks for" a community, but I think it is sad that you have a [[metaphorical) house burning down and the leadership is only complaing about extraneous stuff.

You have tens of thousands of African American males being slaughtered by other African American males, and you will never hear a thing from leadership. You will hear constaint complaints about Macys stopping people for alleged shoplifting though, you will hear about the Trayvon Martin killing, you will hear about police profiling.

The differnce, to me, is that in the former, we have something that threatens the African American community down to its foundations. In the latter, we have very murky circumstances where a reasonable person could conclude that Macys is trying to prevent getting ripped off [[the same reason Hudsons closed downtown), and where the police are trying to prevent kids from killing each other.

Also, part of the reason that the latter episodes occur is because of the former. IMO, you solve the latter by solving the former. If young African American males were not involved in such a wildly disproportionate amount of criminal behavior, there would be less Macys incidents, less police profiling incidents, etc. As it stands, it makes perfect sense that Macys would be watching young African American males more than any other demographic cohort.

[Locke09]

I disagree. I am not African American, and I do not think anyone "speaks for" a community, but I think it is sad that you have a [[metaphorical) house burning down and the leadership is only complaing about extraneous stuff.

If young African American males were not involved in such a wildly disproportionate amount of criminal behavior, there would be less Macys incidents, less police profiling incidents, etc. As it stands, it makes perfect sense that Macys would be watching young African American males more than any other demographic cohort.

I certainly respect your right to disagree and you express very well why you disagree. But a couple of the premises, upon which you base your arguments, are faulty.

First, Jackson and Sharpton both [[especially Sharpton) frequently discuss the issue of black on black crimes, as do other African-American leaders. It is often a point of discussion on Sharpton's radio show and there are forums held all over the country in an attempt to address the issue. They discuss treating each other with respect [[hence their former campaign to encourage AA's to stop the use of the N-word when talking to each other), they talk about male responsibility and other topics. It is simply untrue that they never speak out against black on black crime or other inappropriate behavior by blacks.

Second, profiling of African-Americans began long before they starting becoming a real problem [[demographically speaking). They were a perceived problem as soon as they were emancipated. One could just as easily argue that if they weren't profiled from the beginning, and relegated to a mostly second-class existence, then they wouldn't be displaying such aberrant behavior. Another chicken or the egg question.

Study history some more. African-American mothers were traditionally very strict with their sons because they didn't want them to display any behavior that might cause them to "get into trouble". Their sons were more careful back then, but that didn't stop them from being profiled, lynched, you name it. And what about middle-aged African-American women who also get profiled by high-end department stores?

Bottom line is this: people have a right to protest over causes large and small. I don't try to tell PETA that they cannot protest mistreatment of animals unless they also protest human rights abuses. There are enough leaders around for any kind of protest or forum that needs to take place. Let the civil rights leaders deal with civil rights and let some other kinds of leaders deal with the troubling issue of African-American youths.

[Wesley Mouch]

I certainly respect your right to disagree and you express very well why you disagree. But a couple of the premises, upon which you base your arguments, are faulty.

First, Jackson and Sharpton both [[especially Sharpton) frequently discuss the issue of black on black crimes, as do other African-American leaders. It is often a point of discussion on Sharpton's radio show and there are forums held all over the country in an attempt to address the issue. They discuss treating each other with respect [[hence their former campaign to encourage AA's to stop the use of the N-word when talking to each other), they talk about male responsibility and other topics. It is simply untrue that they never speak out against black on black crime or other inappropriate behavior by blacks.

I'm glad to hear that. My ears don't get to hear those comments. So maybe its media bias on what gets reported. Please bring his criticism to the table. Its not getting to me.

Second, profiling of African-Americans began long before they starting becoming a real problem [[demographically speaking). They were a perceived problem as soon as they were emancipated. One could just as easily argue that if they weren't profiled from the beginning, and relegated to a mostly second-class existence, then they wouldn't be displaying such aberrant behavior. Another chicken or the egg question.

Profiling is such a hot button. It means such different things. So we often talk past each other. Chicken or egg is a good analogy. Are the problems with black America a cause of profiling, or a result of profiling. Good question -- but it doesn't matter. Thought policing doesn't work very well. So I encourage action change.

[jt1]

I'm glad to hear that. My ears don't get to hear those comments. So maybe its media bias on what gets reported. Please bring his criticism to the table. Its not getting to me.

So the main media outlets ignore this and, instead of checking into it for yourself, you expect others to deliver it to you.

Pretty sad that, if major media outlets don't cover it you are unwilling to believe it until it is proven to you.

[Locke09]

So the main media outlets ignore this and, instead of checking into it for yourself, you expect others to deliver it to you.

Pretty sad that, if major media outlets don't cover it you are unwilling to believe it until it is proven to you.

Yeah. All you have to do is use google to know that the issue is not being ignored.

[Wesley Mouch]

So the main media outlets ignore this and, instead of checking into it for yourself, you expect others to deliver it to you.

Pretty sad that, if major media outlets don't cover it you are unwilling to believe it until it is proven to you.

Actually, its the major media coverage that's making me doubt its existence. Are they ever right?

As to my laziness -- I prefer to think of it as openness.