I don't understand "black lives matter"

[rendelharris]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nigello Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I agree with the sentiment and acknowledge the

> > facts but I still think there is an element of

> > confection, a syntheticness about this UK

> version

> > of the movement in the US.

>

>

> I guess the local version would be "Black youths

> deserve not to be singled out for stop-and-search,

> given that so few arrests are made following these

> and it creates ill feeling in the community" but

> it's not as snappy.

>

> On a more serious note, all this stuff makes me

> grateful to be living in this state where the

> police don't typically behave like overbearing

> neanderthals and the gangs are thankfully still

> just a soft version of their Yank inspirations.

I guess the slogan over here should be "Black People Matter." I know it's only semantics but BLM (USA) is a direct response to the shocking wave of more or less executions of innocent black people by police officers. In the UK, where three BAME people have been shot dead by police since 2008, we just don't have the same issue - lots and lots of other issues around race and policing, but not really that one. I just feel that adopting the US name lays the movement open to accusations of sensationalism, of protesting against something that isn't really an issue, which will then be used to ignore the really serious points being made.

[Blah Blah]

I'm with WM and LMix on this. BLM is focussing on a specific issue that most white people don't even see. If white people were disproportionately killed by Police Officers, there would be a similar protest. Some Police Forces in the US have a serious problem with institutionalised racism, and when that is combined with a macho culture and the level of risk widespread gun availabity and ownership puts Police Officers at, it's no wonder things happen as they do. The UK is not comparable, except in terms of the disproportionate numbers of black people who have died in Police custody. But the UK has I think, a better awareness of institutionalised racism, and it's consequences.

And UncleGlen does it again. When he is not confusing the EBU with the EU, he decides to reference the execution of an innocent man as somehow being the same as the Police apprehending a (possibly armed) suspect. Not a troll imo, just not very smart.

The death of De Menezes does though highlight how easy it is for human beings with guns, to make the wrong decisions in a climate of fear. For the UK, it was an extremely shocking but also unique exercise of poor Policing. In the US though, it keeps happening - and I think part of the reason is that daily fear of facing seriously armed criminals. 123 Police Officers were killed on the job in 2015. It's also interesting to note that only 12% of US Police Officers are female as well.

[rendelharris]

Blah Blah wrote:

>The UK is not comparable, except in terms of the disproportionate numbers of black people who have died in Police custody.

That's why I feel it would be better to have our own movement with its own identity and agenda, rather than forming a branch of an American movement which fights an issue which isn't really as much of an issue over here.

Just for interest I did a little bit of number crunching on the Inquest figures I linked to above. I'm a bit hesitant in putting them out for fear of being accused of belittling the issue or similar, but I do think they make an interesting point for debate:

Deaths in police custody or by (police) shooting (England and Wales):

Year BAME deaths All deaths % of deaths BAME

2016 1 21 5%

2015 5 31 16%

2014 6 32 19%

2013 2 31 6%

2012 1 24 4%

2011 9 33 27%

2010 1 27 4%

2009 4 30 13%

2008 8 64 13%

2007 8 54 15%

2006 6 66 9%

2005 10 93 11%

2004 2 97 2%

2003 11 104 11%

2002 9 88 10%

2001 7 73 10%

2000 4 65 6%

*Percentage rounded to nearest whole number

The BAME population of England and Wales has remained fairly constant at around 13.5% since 2000. So BAME deaths from police contact, in the last seventeen years, have, in eleven of those years, statistically, been disproportionately low, in two years they have been just about exactly what would be predicted, and in four years they have been disproportionately high.

So, as above, I feel that although every one of those deaths, BAME and white, is tragic, every one needs to be properly investigated (which many haven't) and protested where necessary, the issue of police killings, which is what BLM exists for, simply isn't the same in the UK as in the USA (where every year BAME deaths are way above what could be predicted statistically). It's far more important here to protest the disproportionate use of stop and search against BAME, the under-representation of BAME at all levels of the police and judiciary, discrimination in employment etc.

This is just an opinion and a few facts I thought some might find interesting, just trying to contribute to debate, not start an argument!

Cheers,

Rendel

ETA: I realise that in quoting figures for BAME there's no definition of how many of those were black, which could make a big difference in terms of ratios. But in any case the numbers are still very small (though every one a tragedy) compared to what BLM are protesting against in the USA, e.g. as above, last year 31 people (5 BAME) died as a result of police contact in England and Wales, last year in the USA 1,134 - 35x more for a population 6x larger.

[Jules-and-Boo]

so BLM is about BLM IN REALTION TO POLICE specifically?

or generally? In which case does BLM cover gang culture and reducing it's damage on families? and all other community issues? Does it stretch to equality on work/ school.

Or is it just unspecific. Should it be more specific?

The inequality in states is not the same here at all.

In itself is the movement defining itself as protest at any injustice or is it actively trying to reduce the injustices?

Guessing I'll just get into trouble now for asking.

[Blah Blah]

Those are good points rendel. Perspective is often lost in the emotions of a single incident. Of course, the aim should be for no deaths in custody or during arrest and there is always room for improvement on that

[uncleglen]

Easily remedied- tranquiliser darts to subdue the crims

[Loz]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If white people were disproportionately killed by Police Officers, there would be a similar protest.

And yet, as I pointed out before, the proportion of male victims of police killings is wildly disproportional (about 95% in the US) and yet nobody raises a peep.

[Blah Blah]

And I wonder what percentage of crime (especially violent crime) is carried out by men? There's probably a correlation there Loz.

[Loz]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And I wonder what percentage of crime (especially violent crime) is carried out by men? There's

> probably a correlation there Loz.

And if you do the same exercise with ethnicity in the US?

[Blah Blah]

But that is the point. The rate of death of black men at the hands of police is not proportionate to the percentage of black men arrested. That is why the protests are happening - whether the actual figures are true or not.

[Loz]

I'm not sure arrest rates or even prison stats are a good justification for police killing stats, but for the moment I'll go with that.

I can't find arrest rates, but looking at prison rates from 2010 (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Ethnicity ). People with an ethnicity of 'black' comprised 40% of the US prison population.

And, in 2015, according to data from the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database ) people with an ethnicity of 'black' comprised 306 of 1147 people killed by police, or 26.7%.

I know those dates are not the same, but I doubt the US prison population ethnic make-up has changed markedly over those years.

[miga]

So what do you think Loz, do you think BLM are misguided (in the States, let's leave the very different local issues aside)?

[Loz]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So what do you think Loz, do you think BLM are misguided (in the States, let's leave the very

> different local issues aside)?

In some cases yes, in some cases no. The woman the other day that used her 5-year-old as a human shield whilst shooting at police is very different incident to the carer that was shot - the one where the white guy with learning difficulties wouldn't respond to police instructions, so they shot at his black carer who lying on the ground with his hands in the air. One is an understandable response (in as far as you can ever understand police shooting someone) and the other is a jaw-dropping 'WTF' type moment. Yet, BLM are raising both these as being part of the same problem, which I think is a mistake.

I think police body cameras are they way forward. Of the incidents where bystanders have filmed incidents, they have been usually provided enough information to either back the police or have the officer in question charged. Having all police wear tamper proof cameras can only be a good thing. And that applies in the UK as well.

[miga]

There are several conflated issues that people who have a problem with BLM seem to grab onto. It's a violent, armed society - gun deaths happen. Police over there seem very trigger happy and overbearing - some part of the population seem to think this is fair enough, others accept it as a fact of life - I guess both these groups would have an issue with BLM. As in some other societies, there is a demographic over-representation of one group in violent crime - what some other posters further up alluded to with some stats. Etc.

But, as others in the thread said, there's clearly a feeling in the community that there is systematic racism in policing. The hard evidence that says American cops disproportionately shoot more innocent American blacks is missing - to me that doesn't invalidate BLM, but the feeling in the communities is real. BLM is the tip of the iceberg, since so many factors of disadvantage go into creating edgy interactions with police in the first place. To fix BLM issues, sure, more police transparency is key. To fix all the other underlying stuff, who knows, maybe the movement will evolve.

[TheCat]

dirac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Imagine the BLM vs ALM like this:

>

> We are all at a restaurant and order food.

> The waiter comes along and gives everyone some

> food, except Bill.

> Bill says: "Bill deserves food"

> Everyone turns around and says: "Everyone deserves

> food".

>

> Even though the "Everyone deserves food" statement

> is true, the thing here is, it does nothing to

> rectify the fact *Bill has no food*.

>

> WorkingMummy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Black lives matter. Black lives matter. We

> should

> > all be saying it, with no fear at all that it

> > diminishes the value of white lives. It doesn't!

This is a nice little analogy, and did make me think a little more about this BLM vs ALM issue. But where this analogy falls down is in the assumption that everyone else ALWAYS get's their food. If Jane also didnt get her food, and bill kept saying 'Bill deserves food' then I think we would all think that a little insensitive, no?

As RendelHarris's stats point out...Bill is not the only one who doesnt get his food....

[Lazero]

I don't think hard evidence is missing. The issue isn't just overall number of shootings vs. representation in the prison system/ in violent crimes. If you look at those who are unarmed, and are still shot by police (because they are perceived as a threat), a pattern becomes more clear.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/study-finds-police-fatally-shoot-unarmed-black-men-at-disproportionate-rates/2016/04/06/e494563e-fa74-11e5-80e4-c381214de1a3_story.html

http://mappingpoliceviolence.org/unarmed/

[Earl Aelfheah]

Surely 'black live matter' is an incontrovertible truism. In the wake of some high profile shootings of unarmed black men, it seems to me like a completely appropriate slogan around which to campaign. I don't get the objections.

[DaveR]

The adoption of a slogan/movement from the US where the events and issues are obviously different is lazy and opportunistic, and likely to alienate people who would otherwise be sympathetic. IMHO. I'm one of those people.

[rendelharris]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Surely 'black live matter' is an incontrovertible

> truism. In the wake of some high profile shootings

> of unarmed black men, it seems to me like a

> completely appropriate slogan around which to

> campaign. I don't get the objections.

Absolutely no objection to it in the States, just slightly uneasy about its adoption here as if we have the same problems on the same scale. I feel a home grown black rights movement addressing issues such as disproportionate use of S&S, discrepancies in sentencing for the same offences etc would be both more effective and less open to ridicule/dismissal as bandwagon jumping.

[LondonMix]

If someone was advocating for breast cancer and someone who'd never suffered from it criticised them and told them it was only appropriate to advocate for wider cancer awareness I think most people would find the objectors comment objectionable, callous and unreasonable.

All lives matter is only offensive when telling an advocacy group they can't advocate for themselves. That's the context in which the phrase exists.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > No one ever asks breast cancer awareness groups

> to acknowledge that all cancers

> > matter (or in fact all disease).

>

> But, that works both ways. If someone did say

> 'all cancers matter', I'm fairly sure they

> wouldn't be pressed to say that phrase is

> 'offensive' and apologise for saying it.

>

> https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/jul/12/cult

> -singer-ian-astbury-apologises-for-all-lives-matte

> r

[LondonMix]

what does that have to do with anything. If you want to advocate for men go ahead but none of that negates the right of the black community to advocate for itself. Are you saying that until all social issues are resolved that impact all groups, black people have no right to advocate for changes specifically impacting their community? Why does that make sense to you?

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blah Blah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If white people were disproportionately killed

> by Police Officers, there would be a similar

> protest.

>

> And yet, as I pointed out before, the proportion

> of male victims of police killings is wildly

> disproportional (about 95% in the US) and yet

> nobody raises a peep.

[LondonMix]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Surely 'black live matter' is an incontrovertible

> truism. In the wake of some high profile shootings

> of unarmed black men, it seems to me like a

> completely appropriate slogan around which to

> campaign. I don't get the objections.

As an American I can say you've nailed it. The BLM began as a response to the acquittal of the shooter of Trevon Martin who was an unarmed teenager walking to his own house who was shot by a neighbour who perceived him as a threat. Since then the movement has largely focused on excessive police force including killings involving unarmed black men and women.

I'm really not sure what riles so many on this thread about the movement. Why can't the black community in your view come together in protest against unarmed shootings? There seems to be an under current of 'we don't really think you have it that bad, so just be quiet' among the objectors that I find unsettling.

[LondonMix]

If you really cared about this issue you'd know more than the surface story that prison stats tell. Without getting into every facet of the US criminal justice system, there is significant evidence provided by many legal scholars and research organizations regarding drug crime and mass incarceration that help explain in party why blacks are proportionally incarcerated at higher rates.

*Drug offenses make up a significant portion of the incarceration in the US, particularly as it concerns new admissions to prison (less so in terms of percentage at any given time, though even that is circa 1/5th).

*The penalties for different drugs (sentence length etc) show significant racial bias, with crack cocaine (cheaper and historically more popular in the black community) receiving significantly longer sentences than powder cocaine (more expensive and more popular with non-minority communities).

3. Blacks are estimated to be arrested for drug crimes at 3 to 4 times the rate of whites even though they are statistically no more likely to use or sell drugs than white people. https://www.brookings.edu/2014/09/30/how-the-war-on-drugs-damages-black-social-mobility/

Anyhow, that is just one small element of the US criminal justice system, which complex and broken on a number of fronts.

If you really care, educate yourself about the issues you are raising. If you don't really have the time or inclination to do a deep dive into the political issues at hand (which is totally understandable), stop criticizing something you don't actually know much about.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not sure arrest rates or even prison stats are

> a good justification for police killing stats, but

> for the moment I'll go with that.

>

> I can't find arrest rates, but looking at prison

> rates from 2010 (from

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the

> _United_States#Ethnicity ). People with an

> ethnicity of 'black' comprised 40% of the US

> prison population.

>

> And, in 2015, according to data from the Guardian

> (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive

> /2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-databa

> se ) people with an ethnicity of 'black' comprised

> 306 of 1147 people killed by police, or 26.7%.

>

> I know those dates are not the same, but I doubt

> the US prison population ethnic make-up has

> changed markedly over those years.

[Otta]

I understand completely people sharing things on social media about BLM, and I am pleased to have read some very good posts from people on the subject.

But in terms of adopting the movement here, I have to agree that it's badly thought out.

[civilservant]

I understand the reluctance to jump on the BLM band-wagon, but we need to look at the UK figures before getting too complacent

According to the Prison Reform Trust, "Out of the British national prison population, 10% are black and 6% are Asian. For black Britons this is significantly higher than the 2.8% of the general population they represent. (...) According to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, there is now greater disproportionality in the number of black people in prisons in the UK than in the United States."

I'm sure that I can find the figures about UK racial disproportionality in toughness of sentencing if you ask nicely.

so if we want to craft our own band-wagon, there's plenty of material from which to build it.

the question is, do you want to, or is this thread just a convenient stick with which to beat the 'political correct'?