meloshouldgo wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

arkrud wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

fishmike wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

dk7th wrote:1) the nra needs to be demolished and gun shows heavily proctored where all invitees are thoroughly checked.
2) the second amendment needs to be re-written to ban semi-automatic weapons from both citizenry and the regular police forces. possessors of any such weapons should be tried for treason and put in jail for lengthy prison terms. **** "originalism."
3) marijuana needs to be legalized and heavily regulated and taxed
4) the very wealthiest should be taxed heavily and the majority of funds should be diverted to pre-k through grammar school programs for inner city minorities
5) teachers in inner city pre-k through grammar school programs should be amply rewarded to the degree they are trained and vetted for this work
6) police forces must be representative of the communities they are meant to serve, and if a demographic changes rapidly, such as in ferguson, then the policemen need to be relocated to other communities or furloughed by some federal oversight. this is similar to members of the army and their families.
7) every citizen between the ages of 18-24 must serve in the military for two years in a defensive capacity, defending our borders and ports.

that would be a good start.

Not bad proposals. I'd also want to expand no.5 to include the creation of teaching assistants for the classroom. I think it is simply unreasonable in this day and age to expect teachers to handle classrooms of 20 or more students without some assistance in helping keep the room orderly. We're able to spend $500,000 or your standard conventional bomb....we should be able to pay for programs like this.

And if funding does become a problem, I'd like to see Estate Taxes increased exponentially. I feel no one person should be inheriting more than $5 million worth of net assets under any circumstance. The last thing this society needs are more Donald Trumps of the world that clearly are not worthy of being a leader of anything simply by birth-right. You want to be a part of the ruling class, earn it and prove your utility to the whole.

those are pie in the sky proposals that indicate little understanding of how the gov work.

Also we are not a socialist state. This proposal to take away rich peoples money, keep it from their children and "make them earn it" is un-American. Tim Duncan has two kids. So if he and his wife die in a car crash his kids should only get $5mm each and the rest of the $100mm of his estate should go to inner city educational funds? Lets the gov decide what to do with it? Is that it?

Read about the NRA lobby, the size of its membership and its power in Washington, and why it exists in the first place. Dumping the NRA is as good a suggestion as "we should all just stop fighting and love each other." Good sentiments, no basis in reality.

Im not trying to throw water on your discussion or ideas, simply suggest that some things can be accomplished and others cannot, at least as the game is currently constructed. Might want to focus on what can be accomplished.

Start with decriminalizing all drugs. I think it was mentioned someone in the thread but those stiff laws go back the to Nixon administration where heroin (blacks) and marijuana (anti gov hippies) were used to all the gov to control groups it viewed as a threat. Now those laws just are avenues to continue the criminalization of poor minorities, the incarceration of the men/fathers of those communities, and rendering those lives as "don't matter."

Tough issues with generations of laws of lousy thinking to cut through

If those are pie-in-the-sky ideas, why does it seem that every industrialized country has managed to put these or similar measures into practice? Israel (and Turkey, I believe) has mandatory military-service laws. Weed is legal in Amsterdam(the Netherlands). France has very tight gun control laws and no viable opposition to them. So why can't we make in-roads to doing the same in this country?

And what founding document of our country articulates how our economy is suppose to function? And does it define an aggressive Estate Tax as explicitly "un-American"? If so, how or why? And if it's against socialist policies, how have Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the like been deemed Constitutional?

As for what I'd spend the increased revenue on, it'd basically look like the Bernie Sanders playbook: massive infrastructure investments, public (and inexpensive) healthcare for all, massive re-investment in public universities, etc.

Be careful at what you wish for...
Look at Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, etc.
How socialism worked out for them? Not very cool.

and Brazil. I always get a kick out of Americans wanting socialism. What ends up happening is you relinquish your freedom and give the complete control to blatantly you as citizens. I know because my cousin is one of the ones impeached and indited on charges from Brazil's latest corruption scandals. I've seen how radical far left politicians are capable of ripping off a entire country and reap the benefits first hand

One of these days real soon after the next 2000 unarmed black people have been shot to death for the crime of being black one of you geniuses will realize we are already living in a society where non white people have already relinquished all their freedom. Including the freedom to walk on the street. Till then let's reiterate the same tired BS about socialist countries and pat ourselves on the back for being enlightened. It's working or great so far.

Not sure what are talking about.
Just walked the streets of Brooklyn.
Sow all kind colors of people walking freely and showing no fear of each other or police or anything.
Where is the dangerous place you are living? South Sudan? Nigeria? Livia? Syria? Afghanistan? Somalia? East Ukraine?

meloshouldgo wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

arkrud wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

fishmike wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

dk7th wrote:1) the nra needs to be demolished and gun shows heavily proctored where all invitees are thoroughly checked.
2) the second amendment needs to be re-written to ban semi-automatic weapons from both citizenry and the regular police forces. possessors of any such weapons should be tried for treason and put in jail for lengthy prison terms. **** "originalism."
3) marijuana needs to be legalized and heavily regulated and taxed
4) the very wealthiest should be taxed heavily and the majority of funds should be diverted to pre-k through grammar school programs for inner city minorities
5) teachers in inner city pre-k through grammar school programs should be amply rewarded to the degree they are trained and vetted for this work
6) police forces must be representative of the communities they are meant to serve, and if a demographic changes rapidly, such as in ferguson, then the policemen need to be relocated to other communities or furloughed by some federal oversight. this is similar to members of the army and their families.
7) every citizen between the ages of 18-24 must serve in the military for two years in a defensive capacity, defending our borders and ports.

that would be a good start.

Not bad proposals. I'd also want to expand no.5 to include the creation of teaching assistants for the classroom. I think it is simply unreasonable in this day and age to expect teachers to handle classrooms of 20 or more students without some assistance in helping keep the room orderly. We're able to spend $500,000 or your standard conventional bomb....we should be able to pay for programs like this.

And if funding does become a problem, I'd like to see Estate Taxes increased exponentially. I feel no one person should be inheriting more than $5 million worth of net assets under any circumstance. The last thing this society needs are more Donald Trumps of the world that clearly are not worthy of being a leader of anything simply by birth-right. You want to be a part of the ruling class, earn it and prove your utility to the whole.

those are pie in the sky proposals that indicate little understanding of how the gov work.

Also we are not a socialist state. This proposal to take away rich peoples money, keep it from their children and "make them earn it" is un-American. Tim Duncan has two kids. So if he and his wife die in a car crash his kids should only get $5mm each and the rest of the $100mm of his estate should go to inner city educational funds? Lets the gov decide what to do with it? Is that it?

Read about the NRA lobby, the size of its membership and its power in Washington, and why it exists in the first place. Dumping the NRA is as good a suggestion as "we should all just stop fighting and love each other." Good sentiments, no basis in reality.

Im not trying to throw water on your discussion or ideas, simply suggest that some things can be accomplished and others cannot, at least as the game is currently constructed. Might want to focus on what can be accomplished.

Start with decriminalizing all drugs. I think it was mentioned someone in the thread but those stiff laws go back the to Nixon administration where heroin (blacks) and marijuana (anti gov hippies) were used to all the gov to control groups it viewed as a threat. Now those laws just are avenues to continue the criminalization of poor minorities, the incarceration of the men/fathers of those communities, and rendering those lives as "don't matter."

Tough issues with generations of laws of lousy thinking to cut through

If those are pie-in-the-sky ideas, why does it seem that every industrialized country has managed to put these or similar measures into practice? Israel (and Turkey, I believe) has mandatory military-service laws. Weed is legal in Amsterdam(the Netherlands). France has very tight gun control laws and no viable opposition to them. So why can't we make in-roads to doing the same in this country?

And what founding document of our country articulates how our economy is suppose to function? And does it define an aggressive Estate Tax as explicitly "un-American"? If so, how or why? And if it's against socialist policies, how have Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the like been deemed Constitutional?

As for what I'd spend the increased revenue on, it'd basically look like the Bernie Sanders playbook: massive infrastructure investments, public (and inexpensive) healthcare for all, massive re-investment in public universities, etc.

Be careful at what you wish for...
Look at Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, etc.
How socialism worked out for them? Not very cool.

and Brazil. I always get a kick out of Americans wanting socialism. What ends up happening is you relinquish your freedom and give the complete control to blatantly you as citizens. I know because my cousin is one of the ones impeached and indited on charges from Brazil's latest corruption scandals. I've seen how radical far left politicians are capable of ripping off a entire country and reap the benefits first hand

One of these days real soon after the next 2000 unarmed black people have been shot to death for the crime of being black one of you geniuses will realize we are already living in a society where non white people have already relinquished all their freedom. Including the freedom to walk on the street. Till then let's reiterate the same tired BS about socialist countries and pat ourselves on the back for being enlightened. It's working or great so far.
[/quot

You mighy include all people in your statement about police shootings of unarmed since unarmed whites are more likely to be shot at by police according in findings by a Harvard study led by black professor. The recent tragedies ate terrible but apparently not unique to one race despite belief. Page 1 New York Times today

meloanyk wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

arkrud wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

fishmike wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

dk7th wrote:1) the nra needs to be demolished and gun shows heavily proctored where all invitees are thoroughly checked.
2) the second amendment needs to be re-written to ban semi-automatic weapons from both citizenry and the regular police forces. possessors of any such weapons should be tried for treason and put in jail for lengthy prison terms. **** "originalism."
3) marijuana needs to be legalized and heavily regulated and taxed
4) the very wealthiest should be taxed heavily and the majority of funds should be diverted to pre-k through grammar school programs for inner city minorities
5) teachers in inner city pre-k through grammar school programs should be amply rewarded to the degree they are trained and vetted for this work
6) police forces must be representative of the communities they are meant to serve, and if a demographic changes rapidly, such as in ferguson, then the policemen need to be relocated to other communities or furloughed by some federal oversight. this is similar to members of the army and their families.
7) every citizen between the ages of 18-24 must serve in the military for two years in a defensive capacity, defending our borders and ports.

that would be a good start.

Not bad proposals. I'd also want to expand no.5 to include the creation of teaching assistants for the classroom. I think it is simply unreasonable in this day and age to expect teachers to handle classrooms of 20 or more students without some assistance in helping keep the room orderly. We're able to spend $500,000 or your standard conventional bomb....we should be able to pay for programs like this.

And if funding does become a problem, I'd like to see Estate Taxes increased exponentially. I feel no one person should be inheriting more than $5 million worth of net assets under any circumstance. The last thing this society needs are more Donald Trumps of the world that clearly are not worthy of being a leader of anything simply by birth-right. You want to be a part of the ruling class, earn it and prove your utility to the whole.

those are pie in the sky proposals that indicate little understanding of how the gov work.

Also we are not a socialist state. This proposal to take away rich peoples money, keep it from their children and "make them earn it" is un-American. Tim Duncan has two kids. So if he and his wife die in a car crash his kids should only get $5mm each and the rest of the $100mm of his estate should go to inner city educational funds? Lets the gov decide what to do with it? Is that it?

Read about the NRA lobby, the size of its membership and its power in Washington, and why it exists in the first place. Dumping the NRA is as good a suggestion as "we should all just stop fighting and love each other." Good sentiments, no basis in reality.

Im not trying to throw water on your discussion or ideas, simply suggest that some things can be accomplished and others cannot, at least as the game is currently constructed. Might want to focus on what can be accomplished.

Start with decriminalizing all drugs. I think it was mentioned someone in the thread but those stiff laws go back the to Nixon administration where heroin (blacks) and marijuana (anti gov hippies) were used to all the gov to control groups it viewed as a threat. Now those laws just are avenues to continue the criminalization of poor minorities, the incarceration of the men/fathers of those communities, and rendering those lives as "don't matter."

Tough issues with generations of laws of lousy thinking to cut through

If those are pie-in-the-sky ideas, why does it seem that every industrialized country has managed to put these or similar measures into practice? Israel (and Turkey, I believe) has mandatory military-service laws. Weed is legal in Amsterdam(the Netherlands). France has very tight gun control laws and no viable opposition to them. So why can't we make in-roads to doing the same in this country?

And what founding document of our country articulates how our economy is suppose to function? And does it define an aggressive Estate Tax as explicitly "un-American"? If so, how or why? And if it's against socialist policies, how have Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the like been deemed Constitutional?

As for what I'd spend the increased revenue on, it'd basically look like the Bernie Sanders playbook: massive infrastructure investments, public (and inexpensive) healthcare for all, massive re-investment in public universities, etc.

Be careful at what you wish for...
Look at Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, etc.
How socialism worked out for them? Not very cool.

and Brazil. I always get a kick out of Americans wanting socialism. What ends up happening is you relinquish your freedom and give the complete control to blatantly you as citizens. I know because my cousin is one of the ones impeached and indited on charges from Brazil's latest corruption scandals. I've seen how radical far left politicians are capable of ripping off a entire country and reap the benefits first hand

One of these days real soon after the next 2000 unarmed black people have been shot to death for the crime of being black one of you geniuses will realize we are already living in a society where non white people have already relinquished all their freedom. Including the freedom to walk on the street. Till then let's reiterate the same tired BS about socialist countries and pat ourselves on the back for being enlightened. It's working or great so far.
[/quot

You mighy include all people in your statement about police shootings of unarmed since unarmed whites are more likely to be shot at by police according in findings by a Harvard study led by black professor. The recent tragedies ate terrible but apparently not unique to one race despite belief. Page 1 New York Times today

NoT True!!! Were your numbers adjusted for population?

According to the most recent census data, there are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population but only about 49 percent of those who are killed by police officers. African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger as the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer.
[Unarmed and black: Police are still killing unarmed black men at higher rates than whites]

Police have shot and killed a young black man (ages 18 to 29) — such as Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. —175 times since January 2015; 24 of them were unarmed. Over that same period, police have shot and killed 172 young white men, 18 of whom were unarmed. Once again, while in raw numbers there were similar totals of white and black victims, blacks were killed at rates disproportionate to their percentage of the U.S. population. Of all of the unarmed people shot and killed by police in 2015, 40 percent of them were black men, even though black men make up just 6 percent of the nation’s population.

Uptown wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Uptown wrote:The Blacks Lives Matters movement began when George Zimmerman killed and unarmed black teen named Trayvon Martin, and Zimmerman was not held accountable for the crime he committed. Since Martin's death in 2012, hundreds of unarmed black men and women were killed by police officers and most of them were not held accountable. When we say Black Lives Matter, we are talking about the ways in which Black people are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity, the injustices and the lack of accountability.

The laws, the constitution, the system was not created and written with black people in mind.....

I was always under impression constitution was created for all people.
I do not see any color or race specified anywhere. Do you?

Really? You are kidding, right?

Slaves were not considered full citizens...could not vote.

At one point the Supreme Court branded slaves as property.

Women, except for some short-lived moments, could not vote.

The Constitution had to be amended to give both groups full rights...we needed a Civil Rights movement to improve upon the amendments... and there are still issues.

Also seem to recall a war that might have been partially caused by how the Constitution did not protect blacks

A fine document, with many flaws that have needed to be fixed over time.

Do we still have slaves? Hmmm... I was under impression this is illegal.
And women I guess have full rights... even more rights that man in some areas like family.
It should be no lows which provides for any different treatment based on race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/national descent/political affiliation. That it. If this is not implemented in specific law the law must be change.

YOU used the word "created." It was not created to give ALL people rights, even if it gave lip service to that idea.

I know what you are getting at...you are looking at some kind of romanticized view of the Constitution...but that was not the reality of the times.

Sorry, but you are totally in error, here- there was no intent to give everyone equal rights in the original document.

The intend of people who created the Constitutions is irrelevant.
The constitution itself is.
Show me the place in it and amendments which are of your specific concern and which promote or enforce inequality of races.
I am 20 years in US and do not have any preexisting bias.
I just read the document and amendments and see no issues whatsoever.
I also cannot see any issues of this kind in any lows we have in this country.
Contrary I see some lows which design to provide additional rights to assist minorities who were historically at disadvantage.
I have no problem with this also.
Some laws are not enforced as we all want but this is another issue and this should be a focus not blind nihilism.

Let me show you....

Here is the 13th Amendment: to the Constitution declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Formally abolishing slavery in the United States, the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865.

So basically, the amendment abolished slavery with one critical exception: Slavery and involuntary servitude actually remain lawful "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." In other words, according to this so-called punishment clause, if a black person gets pulled over with the wrong controlled substance in their trunk, there's nothing in the 13th Amendment to ensure you can't be considered a slave of the state.

Today, there are more black men incarcerated (roughly 4 million) than there were slaves in 1850 (roughly 3.2 million). Still stink slavery was completely abolished?

You do realize that is a fallacy since there are only about 2.2 mil people incarcerated on federal and state prisonsin last US Bureau stats . Right? You might also like to know that there has been a drastic decline in black incarceration over the past six years and an acceleration in white incarceration but why cite those facts .https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/10/almost-nobody-is-paying-attention-to-this-massive-change-in-criminal-justice/

meloanyk wrote:

Uptown wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Uptown wrote:The Blacks Lives Matters movement began when George Zimmerman killed and unarmed black teen named Trayvon Martin, and Zimmerman was not held accountable for the crime he committed. Since Martin's death in 2012, hundreds of unarmed black men and women were killed by police officers and most of them were not held accountable. When we say Black Lives Matter, we are talking about the ways in which Black people are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity, the injustices and the lack of accountability.

The laws, the constitution, the system was not created and written with black people in mind.....

I was always under impression constitution was created for all people.
I do not see any color or race specified anywhere. Do you?

Really? You are kidding, right?

Slaves were not considered full citizens...could not vote.

At one point the Supreme Court branded slaves as property.

Women, except for some short-lived moments, could not vote.

The Constitution had to be amended to give both groups full rights...we needed a Civil Rights movement to improve upon the amendments... and there are still issues.

Also seem to recall a war that might have been partially caused by how the Constitution did not protect blacks

A fine document, with many flaws that have needed to be fixed over time.

Do we still have slaves? Hmmm... I was under impression this is illegal.
And women I guess have full rights... even more rights that man in some areas like family.
It should be no lows which provides for any different treatment based on race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/national descent/political affiliation. That it. If this is not implemented in specific law the law must be change.

YOU used the word "created." It was not created to give ALL people rights, even if it gave lip service to that idea.

I know what you are getting at...you are looking at some kind of romanticized view of the Constitution...but that was not the reality of the times.

Sorry, but you are totally in error, here- there was no intent to give everyone equal rights in the original document.

The intend of people who created the Constitutions is irrelevant.
The constitution itself is.
Show me the place in it and amendments which are of your specific concern and which promote or enforce inequality of races.
I am 20 years in US and do not have any preexisting bias.
I just read the document and amendments and see no issues whatsoever.
I also cannot see any issues of this kind in any lows we have in this country.
Contrary I see some lows which design to provide additional rights to assist minorities who were historically at disadvantage.
I have no problem with this also.
Some laws are not enforced as we all want but this is another issue and this should be a focus not blind nihilism.

Let me show you....

Here is the 13th Amendment: to the Constitution declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Formally abolishing slavery in the United States, the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865.

So basically, the amendment abolished slavery with one critical exception: Slavery and involuntary servitude actually remain lawful "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." In other words, according to this so-called punishment clause, if a black person gets pulled over with the wrong controlled substance in their trunk, there's nothing in the 13th Amendment to ensure you can't be considered a slave of the state.

Today, there are more black men incarcerated (roughly 4 million) than there were slaves in 1850 (roughly 3.2 million). Still stink slavery was completely abolished?

You do realize that is a fallacy since there are only about 2.2 mil people incarcerated on federal and state prisonsin last US Bureau stats . Right? You might also like to know that there has been a drastic decline in black incarceration over the past six years and an acceleration in white incarceration but why cite those facts .https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/10/almost-nobody-is-paying-attention-to-this-massive-change-in-criminal-justice/

The numbers for black men imprisoned have come down some (one being the fact that President Obama granted clemency to men and women serving years in prison under outdated and unduly harsh sentencing laws) but there are more black men in prison than white men. One of the reasons (not the only) why it seems as if whites going to prison have spiked up is because of a loop hole. The figures all use the loose federal government’s definition of race, which routinely classifies Hispanics as “white,” and the actual figures could be even more distorted than the reported statistics. Also...Nonwhites—blacks and Hispanics—account for 64 percent of the US prison population, even though they account for 37 percent of the total population—and they account for 75 percent of all prisoners in federal penitentiaries.

This happens in schools as well. I am a school teacher and when students are filing out info for state exams, Hispanics are classified as white. Take a look at the article...

http://newobserveronline.com/nonwhites-23-us-prisoners/

Uptown wrote:

meloanyk wrote:

Uptown wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Uptown wrote:The Blacks Lives Matters movement began when George Zimmerman killed and unarmed black teen named Trayvon Martin, and Zimmerman was not held accountable for the crime he committed. Since Martin's death in 2012, hundreds of unarmed black men and women were killed by police officers and most of them were not held accountable. When we say Black Lives Matter, we are talking about the ways in which Black people are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity, the injustices and the lack of accountability.

The laws, the constitution, the system was not created and written with black people in mind.....

I was always under impression constitution was created for all people.
I do not see any color or race specified anywhere. Do you?

Really? You are kidding, right?

Slaves were not considered full citizens...could not vote.

At one point the Supreme Court branded slaves as property.

Women, except for some short-lived moments, could not vote.

The Constitution had to be amended to give both groups full rights...we needed a Civil Rights movement to improve upon the amendments... and there are still issues.

Also seem to recall a war that might have been partially caused by how the Constitution did not protect blacks

A fine document, with many flaws that have needed to be fixed over time.

Do we still have slaves? Hmmm... I was under impression this is illegal.
And women I guess have full rights... even more rights that man in some areas like family.
It should be no lows which provides for any different treatment based on race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/national descent/political affiliation. That it. If this is not implemented in specific law the law must be change.

YOU used the word "created." It was not created to give ALL people rights, even if it gave lip service to that idea.

I know what you are getting at...you are looking at some kind of romanticized view of the Constitution...but that was not the reality of the times.

Sorry, but you are totally in error, here- there was no intent to give everyone equal rights in the original document.

The intend of people who created the Constitutions is irrelevant.
The constitution itself is.
Show me the place in it and amendments which are of your specific concern and which promote or enforce inequality of races.
I am 20 years in US and do not have any preexisting bias.
I just read the document and amendments and see no issues whatsoever.
I also cannot see any issues of this kind in any lows we have in this country.
Contrary I see some lows which design to provide additional rights to assist minorities who were historically at disadvantage.
I have no problem with this also.
Some laws are not enforced as we all want but this is another issue and this should be a focus not blind nihilism.

Let me show you....

Here is the 13th Amendment: to the Constitution declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Formally abolishing slavery in the United States, the 13th Amendment was passed by the Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the states on December 6, 1865.

So basically, the amendment abolished slavery with one critical exception: Slavery and involuntary servitude actually remain lawful "as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." In other words, according to this so-called punishment clause, if a black person gets pulled over with the wrong controlled substance in their trunk, there's nothing in the 13th Amendment to ensure you can't be considered a slave of the state.

Today, there are more black men incarcerated (roughly 4 million) than there were slaves in 1850 (roughly 3.2 million). Still stink slavery was completely abolished?

You do realize that is a fallacy since there are only about 2.2 mil people incarcerated on federal and state prisonsin last US Bureau stats . Right? You might also like to know that there has been a drastic decline in black incarceration over the past six years and an acceleration in white incarceration but why cite those facts .https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/10/almost-nobody-is-paying-attention-to-this-massive-change-in-criminal-justice/

The numbers for black men imprisoned have come down some (one being the fact that President Obama granted clemency to men and women serving years in prison under outdated and unduly harsh sentencing laws) but there are more black men in prison than white men. One of the reasons (not the only) why it seems as if whites going to prison have spiked up is because of a loop hole. The figures all use the loose federal government’s definition of race, which routinely classifies Hispanics as “white,” and the actual figures could be even more distorted than the reported statistics. Also...Nonwhites—blacks and Hispanics—account for 64 percent of the US prison population, even though they account for 37 percent of the total population—and they account for 75 percent of all prisoners in federal penitentiaries.

This happens in schools as well. I am a school teacher and when students are filing out info for state exams, Hispanics are classified as white. Take a look at the article...

http://newobserveronline.com/nonwhites-23-us-prisoners/

“It’s not enough to acknowledge problems of police violence; Americans—and white Americans in particular—have to agree to end it, which means jettisoning views that equate crime with blackness.”

- Jamelle Bouie, Slate

The US has its flaws but it is by far the best place the World has had and still does. The flaws are, I believe, in education system. Hatred is being taught to our children rather than the equality that is indeed in the declaration and constitution. The words themselves say ALL are created equal. I try to live my life that way and respect all. I teach my children to judge by character not color. Whichever race you are, your insides are the same as the race next to you.

I believe that there are those who profit from propagating racial disharmony and fear. They exist on all sides. That must be rejected by each race and within each race. Again this leads back to education, not only by school but by families. By doing this then perhaps there can be change but I am not hopeful that this can/will happen any time soon. Individual Morality is something that is fading away and that is at the root of our issues.

Melo's comments were great and the solution must be with peace not reciprocity, IMO.

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

arkrud wrote:

Uptown wrote:The Blacks Lives Matters movement began when George Zimmerman killed and unarmed black teen named Trayvon Martin, and Zimmerman was not held accountable for the crime he committed. Since Martin's death in 2012, hundreds of unarmed black men and women were killed by police officers and most of them were not held accountable. When we say Black Lives Matter, we are talking about the ways in which Black people are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity, the injustices and the lack of accountability.

The laws, the constitution, the system was not created and written with black people in mind.....

I was always under impression constitution was created for all people.
I do not see any color or race specified anywhere. Do you?

Really? You are kidding, right?

Slaves were not considered full citizens...could not vote.

At one point the Supreme Court branded slaves as property.

Women, except for some short-lived moments, could not vote.

The Constitution had to be amended to give both groups full rights...we needed a Civil Rights movement to improve upon the amendments... and there are still issues.

Also seem to recall a war that might have been partially caused by how the Constitution did not protect blacks

A fine document, with many flaws that have needed to be fixed over time.

Do we still have slaves? Hmmm... I was under impression this is illegal.
And women I guess have full rights... even more rights that man in some areas like family.
It should be no lows which provides for any different treatment based on race/gender/sexual orientation/religion/national descent/political affiliation. That it. If this is not implemented in specific law the law must be change.

YOU used the word "created." It was not created to give ALL people rights, even if it gave lip service to that idea.

I know what you are getting at...you are looking at some kind of romanticized view of the Constitution...but that was not the reality of the times.

Sorry, but you are totally in error, here- there was no intent to give everyone equal rights in the original document.

The intend of people who created the Constitutions is irrelevant.
The constitution itself is.
Show me the place in it and amendments which are of your specific concern and which promote or enforce inequality of races.
I am 20 years in US and do not have any preexisting bias.
I just read the document and amendments and see no issues whatsoever.
I also cannot see any issues of this kind in any lows we have in this country.
Contrary I see some lows which design to provide additional rights to assist minorities who were historically at disadvantage.
I have no problem with this also.
Some laws are not enforced as we all want but this is another issue and this should be a focus not blind nihilism.

I am in favor of equal rights for all...just pointing out the historical inaccuracy on your part.

The Constitution and laws you admire today were not the same when the original Constitution was ratified. You have to understand this or you are missing a major aspect of this nation's evolution.

Equality has been gained through effort, sweat, and blood. The Constitution, unfortunately, as well as the "law," does not always hand you equality, and there are forces today who are working to weaken certain voters who they fear.

The Black Lives Matter movement, whether or not you believe in its cause, is simply the latest version of the Civil Rights Movement. Hopefully changes will be made because of it. It is part of the political and social evolution of the nation.

Look around and see the attempts to make it more difficult for people to vote, or Supreme Court decisions which empower corporations to have more power over the democratic process. Look at the fact that women STILL do not make the same money as men for similar work. If you don't see what is happening you end up being part of the problem.

A strong belief in something that is untrue does not make it true. Sorry.

Strong disbelief in something that not perfect but works does not make it false. Sorry.

The truth is always in the middle.
US is one of the most progressive, safe, and free country in the world for a reason.
We do have issues but we can freely debate it at every level.