The Real Outcomes of BLM

[Dogna88]

Devil is in the detail.

Which part of policing should stop taking place and who would take over it?

So far the ideas I've heard have been ridiculous

i.e. stop sending police to mental health and domestic violence reports.

This is a sure fire way for even more violence when people who have no idea how to deal with violent situations turn up to reports a husband/boyfriend is terrorizing a wife.

Yeh i don't get the whole "sending social workers to domestic assaults".

Can see it going something like this.

Social worker knocks on door. Man/woman asks who it is. Social worker says they have been received calls that a domestic violence incident has recently occured at the address. Man/woman tells social worker to fuck off or they will get their head stomped in. Social worker calls police.

Or

Social worker speaks with victim. Victim discloses criminal offence. Social worker calls police.

No doubt more funding needs to go into social worker follow ups with victims of domestic violence. But first responses wont change.

 

[Flanagun]

I'm not sure what the drive is here. Do you want us to believe the part of the article that says there was major damage, but not the part that says the protests were mostly peaceful?

You want us to cherry pick the information here?

Different day, same old tricks.

 

[Flanagun]

Yeh i don't get the whole "sending social workers to domestic assaults".

Can see it going something like this.

Social worker knocks on door. Man/woman asks who it is. Social worker says they have been received calls that a domestic violence incident has recently occured at the address. Man/woman tells social worker to fuck off or they will get their head stomped in. Social worker calls police.

Or

Social worker speaks with victim. Victim discloses criminal offence. Social worker calls police.

No doubt more funding needs to go into social worker follow ups with victims of domestic violence. But first responses wont change.

I agree with this 100 per cent. The last thing they need to do is reduce police funding in times like these. They should be increasing funding if they want to improve training and vetting processes. They just need to ensure that funding is used in a constructive way that will improve the standard of policing.... not to mention funding independent reviews to look at overarching structures.

No public service ever improves due to funding cuts. They could easily afford to increase funding for mental health and social work services and distribute funds to improve standards of policing if they trimmed a little from their obscene "defense" budget.

 

[Dawgfather]

I'm not sure what the drive is here. Do you want us to believe the part of the article that says there was major damage, but not the part that says the protests were mostly peaceful?

You want us to cherry pick the information here?

Just curious what people's thoughts are on a 'social justice' movement which created more than a billion dollars of damage to public and private property and resulted in the deaths of many.

 

[CaptainJackson]

Just curious what people's thoughts are on a 'social justice' movement which created more than a billion dollars of damage to public and private property and resulted in the deaths of many.

Peoples thoughts are that those that cherry pick, slander, and try to discredit BLM are racist piece of shit arseholes.

I've directly said it multiple times to you, you've frustrated even more posters, of different political leanings, (with your racist rhetoric) that even they have succumbed to calling you a racist arsehole.

 

[Dawgfather]

Peoples thoughts are that those that cherry pick, slander, and try to discredit BLM are racist piece of shit arseholes.

I've directly said it multiple times to you, you've frustrated even more posters, of different political leanings, (with your racist rhetoric) that even they have succumbed to calling you a racist arsehole.

IT's a fairly simple question, even for someone like you.

Do you have any thoughts about more than a billion dollars of damage by one 'social justice' cause within the space of a few short months?

 

[Dogna88]

IT's a fairly simple question, even for someone like you.

Do you have any thoughts about more a billion dollars of damage by one 'social justice' cause within the space of a few short months?

Do you have any thoughts about the millions of people damaged (emotionally, financially, physically), caused by one 'peaceful religion' such as Catholicism.

The individuals who have hijacked the motives/values/ambitions of BLM to cause chaos/ damge/suffering should be held accountable.

The individuals who hijack the motives/values/ambitions of religion to cause chaos/damage/suffering should be held accountable.

 

[Dawgfather]

Firstly, the simple fact you have compared a dangerous and violent SJW movement with a thousands year old religion says everything about your ability to do some basic analysis and form an opinion.

Do you have any thoughts about the millions of people damaged (emotionally, financially, physically), caused by one 'peaceful religion' such as Catholicism.

Yes, any instance of religious institutions damaging it's followers (or anyone else) is wrong. For example, illegal acts by catholic priests with under age kids is disgusting and has correctly been called out and deal with (largely) by western democracies.

The individuals who have hijacked the motives/values/ambitions of BLM to cause chaos/ damge/suffering should be held accountable.

While it's true BLM has been hijacked (to a degree),, this is true of any organisation of people in any walk of life and in any society. The issue is not whether a movement gets hijacked, the issue is what the organisation does to deal with the hijackers. I argue BLM has largely learnt no lessons and done next to nothing to discourage the violence (hence the $1 billion+ of damage in the space of a few months).

The democrats have enjoyed the violence (to a degree) because it caused chaos and gave them an opportunity to attack Trump and push their own politics.

As soon as the polls showed voters getting fed up with BLM burning down their towns, the democrats suddenly started speaking up a lot more than they already were. And for accuracy's sake, many republican politicians acted like scared little babies for months and let a violent organisation (BLM) do whatever they wanted for quite a while.

BLM is not about western ideals. It's own policy page on it's website makes that very clear. BLM itself (as a name) is also designed to be intentionally murky.

Black lives matter as a statement is true. No one disagrees with this. I agree that black lives matter (99.9% of us do). However, everyone (99.9% of people) already agreed prior to George Floyd (and Michael Brown) that Black lives mattered.

However Black lives matter (the movement) I fundamentally disagree with and find it to be abhorent to anyone who believes in the sovereignty of the individual, of western democracy and of nuclear families.

Many posters on here claim to be 'religious' but love saying they agree with Black Lives Matter, without having any clue on what BLM thinks should happen to their 'family'.

The idea that unless you repeat "Black Lives Matter" or take a knee or bow to the movement, you are a racist (as said by many on this forum) is ridiculous.

 

[Dawgfather]

From the Black Lives Matter website:

We disrupt the western prescribed nuclear family structure. We foster a queer affirming network. When we gather we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of hetero-normative thinking.

BLM is an extremist organisation with some very strange and extreme views.

I agree black lives matter, but I don't agree with Black Lives Matter the organisation.

 

[Dogna88]

Firstly, the simple fact you have compared a dangerous and violent SJW movement with a thousands year old religion says everything about your ability to do some basic analysis and form an opinion.



Yes, any instance of religious institutions damaging it's followers (or anyone else) is wrong. For example, illegal acts by catholic priests with under age kids is disgusting and has correctly been called out and deal with (largely) by western democracies.



While it's true BLM has been hijacked (to a degree),, this is true of any organisation of people in any walk of life and in any society. The issue is not whether a movement gets hijacked, the issue is what the organisation does to deal with the hijackers. I argue BLM has largely learnt no lessons and done next to nothing to discourage the violence (hence the $1 billion+ of damage in the space of a few months).

The democrats have enjoyed the violence (to a degree) because it caused chaos and gave them an opportunity to attack Trump and push their own politics.

As soon as the polls showed voters getting fed up with BLM burning down their towns, the democrats suddenly started speaking up a lot more than they already were. And for accuracy's sake, many republican politicians acted like scared little babies for months and let a violent organisation (BLM) do whatever they wanted for quite a while.

BLM is not about western ideals. It's own policy page on it's website makes that very clear. BLM itself (as a name) is also designed to be intentionally murky.

Black lives matter as a statement is true. No one disagrees with this. I agree that black lives matter (99.9% of us do). However, everyone (99.9% of people) already agreed prior to George Floyd (and Michael Brown) that Black lives mattered.

However Black lives matter (the movement) I fundamentally disagree with and find it to be abhorent to anyone who believes in the sovereignty of the individual, of western democracy and of nuclear families.

Many posters on here claim to be 'religious' but love saying they agree with Black Lives Matter, without having any clue on what BLM thinks should happen to their 'family'.

The idea that unless you repeat "Black Lives Matter" or take a knee or bow to the movement, you are a racist (as said by many on this forum) is ridiculous.

lol. ah Dawg, clearly rattled.

Dawg says: "compared a dangerous and violent SJW movement with a thousands year old religion says everything about your ability to do some basic analysis and form an opinion.

Dogna says: Both institutions that promote change for the better. But are open for interpretation and are used by individuals to commit atrocities. 1000 year old religion? your point? evil then, evil now.

Dawg says: The issue is not whether a movement gets hijacked, the issue is what the organisation does to deal with the hijackers.

Dogna says: Yes, like the systematic coverup of priests banging children. Who wouldnt rather pay off a victim than prosecute a pedo priest.

Dawg says: BLM is not about western ideals.

Dogna says: Mate, get over it. The world is far to globalised now. Western ideas, eastern ideas. we are moving away from that. Its not the 80s anymore. Humanity is moving forward.

Dawg says: "However Black lives matter (the movement) I fundamentally disagree with and find it to be abhorent"

Dogna says: Mate, clearly entitled to your opinion. But its my opinion your an old soul stuck in a new world.

Dawg says: Many posters on here claim to be 'religious' but love saying they agree with Black Lives Matter, without having any clue on what BLM thinks should happen to their 'family'.

Dogna says; AND THERE WE HAVE IT PEOPLE. RELIGION. WHAT THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT. Anything that is outside the scope of Christian values is considered taboo and wrong.

 

[Dogna88]

From the Black Lives Matter website:



BLM is an extremist organisation with some very strange and extreme views.

I agree black lives matter, but I don't agree with Black Lives Matter the organisation.

Catholicism is an extreme ideology with some very strange and extreme views.

Slavery, misogyny amd homophobia to name a few

 

[Dawgfather]

If you don't comply and submit to BLM you will be threatened with violence.

Some loose parallels to thekennel, where if you don't show support for BLM, you are "rrrrrrrrrrrrracist"

"say BLM homie - Say FKN black lives matter right now"

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Just curious what people's thoughts are on a 'social justice' movement which created more than a billion dollars of damage to public and private property and resulted in the deaths of many.

.. And were mostly peaceful

 

[Hacky McAxe]

While it's true BLM has been hijacked (to a degree),, this is true of any organisation of people in any walk of life and in any society. The issue is not whether a movement gets hijacked, the issue is what the organisation does to deal with the hijackers.

That would be like if a Church not only ignored kiddy fiddling but also covered it up.

 

[Flanagun]

If you don't comply and submit to BLM you will be threatened with violence.

Some loose parallels to thekennel, where if you don't show support for BLM, you are "rrrrrrrrrrrrracist"

"say BLM homie - Say FKN black lives matter right now"

Very loose parallels. It's not so much that you don't support BLM.....it is that you only want to talk about BLM and seem much less inclined to acknowledge or talk about the widespread social problems which gave rise to it.....and I'm sure nobody here would threaten you with violence.

I don't agree with every aspect of BLM. I already stated on this thread I don't agree with the whole push to defund the police. Nobody calls me racist. I think the real issue is, we can't really have a constructive conversation about what is wrong with BLM until we first have a constructive discussion about what's wrong with wider society.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

"BLM support queer people, they're extremists"

"I'm going to ignore the suffering of black people, but I'm not racist"

 

[Flanagun]

"BLM support queer people, they're extremists"

"I'm going to ignore the suffering of black people, but I'm not racist"

Leftists: LGTBQI people are just as normal as hetero people. Define normal.
Conservatives: They are saying we're not normal anymore!

 

[Dawgfather]

.. And were mostly peaceful

What's your point? More than 1 billion dollars of damage was done.

Is it suddenly "ok" because many of the protestors happened to be peaceful?

 

[Flanagun]

What's your point? More than 1 billion dollars of damage was done.

Is it suddenly "ok" because many of the protestors happened to be peaceful?

Dude, we have repeatedly said it is not ok to loot, riot, damage public or private property. The issue is you continue to use the unjustifiable actions of a minority to undermine the majority who are not engaging in violent or destructive acts. These people commit violent acts under the banner of this movement, so therefore it's a violent, anti social movement. It's a classic strawman.

 

[Dogna88]

What's your point? More than 1 billion dollars of damage was done.

Is it suddenly "ok" because many of the protestors happened to be peaceful?

I can't believe how much of a hypocrite you are.

The saying "you shouldn't throw stones in glass houses" applies to you.