Skip to main content

One can be both pro-cop and pro-Black Lives Matter

I'm getting a little tired of the us-vs.-them rhetoric we hear so often nowadays, especially with regard to law enforcement and the Black Lives Matter movement. The two aren't mutually exclusive. It's perfectly rational to be both pro-cop and pro-Black Lives Matter. 

First off, no matter who we want to pin the blame on, I think many have misunderstood the intent of Black Lives Matter (BLM). BLM activists aren't saying only black lives matter; they're simply saying black lives matter too. Many black-Americans feel like their voices have been ignored and like their lives mean less than those in other demographics (perhaps 3/5 of a person), to the point where they've decided to stand up and say, "Hey, our lives matter too!" So for those who like to counter chants of "Black Lives Matter!" with "All Lives Matter!" while that's technically true, it illustrates your lack of understanding for the BLM movement. Allow me to provide an example to hopefully better illustrate the point of the movement.

Nine white children have no problem getting the best public education

One black child doesn't have this benefit and says, "My education matters too!"

Parents of the nine white children then chime in, "Sweetie, everyone's education matters!"

Yes, while it's true that everyone's education matters, the white parents are continuing to ignore the problem at hand - that this black child's education is not being seen through an equal lens as the nine white children's. So, yes, while it's true that all lives do in fact matter, by countering "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter," it shows the respondent isn't listening to nor fully understanding the BLM movement.

Segueing from that, there's also a distinct difference between being anti-police and being anti-police brutality. Humans are imperfect, so regardless of the demographic, there are going to be mistakes made and some bad apples, and while no group should be defined by those bad apples, we shouldn't outright ignore them either. This is especially the case when it comes to positions of power and authority. While we shouldn't paint all cops with a broad brush due to abuses of power by a small minority of them, we also shouldn't ignore those abuses of power. There needs to be a certain level of trust and cooperation between cops and the general public, for without that trust, the cooperation will dwindle, and we'll be left with an increase in crime and the vicious cycle will continue. So more definitely needs to be done by both law enforcement and the general public on reaching out to one another and once again building that trust, because the trust is anything but sturdy at the moment, especially in the African-American community. But make no mistake about it, just because a person or a group of people is against police brutality doesn't mean they're against the police, generally speaking. While I'm against erratic driving, I'm not against all driving. 

There's no doubt we should do more to honor and appreciate what law enforcement officers regularly do to serve and protect us. They put their lives on the line day in and day out and should be greatly admired for that. At the same time, though, no law enforcement officer should be above the law, so if he/she abuses their power and another suffers the dire consequences, they should be held accountable like anybody else, for what is the point of law if it only applies to some but not to others? Changes need to be made. More needs to be done to strengthen the relationship between law enforcement and the general public, especially those in the African-American community. Cops need to learn not all blacks are out to get them, and likewise, blacks need to learn not all cops are out to get them. So how do we bridge that divide? Through communication and understanding. Without communication, there won't be understanding; without understanding, there won't be trust; and without trust, there will be minimal cooperation. So let's help push for reasonable police reform to help win back the public's trust of law enforcement, reach out to one another to try and improve upon these divisions, and prove that it's perfectly rational to be both pro-cop and pro-Black Lives Matter, for while we should respect law enforcement, no person should be suspected of a crime due to the color of their skin.

Comments

  1. I'm new to the The Tracy Fort Show. I decided to read your blog today & was truly touched .I adore your stance.(and a bio that's me,as well).Looking forward to *seeing* you today on the TTFS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks a bunch, and sorry for the delay! For some crazy reason, I didn't receive notification about this response until this past weekend. :: shrugs ::. Thanks again, though, and I hope you continue to enjoy the show! :)

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"