Dr. Peterson is repeating the "black on black" story from right wing.
Before one asserts the truth of that statement, one must factor out "poor on poor" statistics. Once that is done, and it is significant that there is more "black on black" crime, I'll pay attention
Dr. Peterson joins a very long list of very racist individuals who like to bring out that counterargument. Maybe he could clarify his position on SEN if he does not want to be classified as such. Or maybe he is taking up the DezNat banner and becoming on of their apologists.
Sorry Dan there really isn't a comparison of random violence within a demographic group, and violence perpetuated against a group by a government agency and to do such is intellectually lazy, and more likely concealing racist thought.
I want to see Midgley's comments and analysis... I betcha he can put Peterson to shame in vileness. Any takers? Come on, man and woman up, lets get a kitty going here.
I think it is in poor taste to imply, even very indirectly, that George Floyd’s life was of cheaper value than those of his fellow citizens. The police should always be held to a higher standard in the way they apply the tool of physical force in protecting and serving the public. Floyd’s life was forged in the crucible of racist America, where people of his color have been systematically disadvantaged for decades after centuries of slavery followed by Jim Crow. Privileged white people often just don’t get it, and they look really callous and ignorant when they opine along these lines.
That said, I think the selective treatment given DCP’s post is problematic. He stated clearly that he agreed with the verdict against Chauvin.
I do wish that he were able to recognize the reality of systemic racism. To say that the police are not waging war against Black Americans may be true in a narrow sense, but they have been harassing them and violating their civil rights for decades, including too many incidents of murder (any is too many).
Pointing to Floyd’s problems or “black-on-black” crime when a police officer was found guilty of all three charges in connection with Floyd’s murder is justifiably interpreted as a kind of soft-pedaling of Chauvin’s crime. “Chauvin is guilty, but . . . You know the real problem is . . . . “
That makes me queasy in my stomach like I just bit into and swallowed rotten food.
By the way, you know who else has failed to live a law-abiding life? Derek Chauvin. And he had many more opportunities and breaks than George Floyd. So how did he end up destroying his own life, George Floyd’s life, and the lives of grieving family members? Why would we even bring up George Floyd’s problems, when Chauvin murdered him?
“The past no longer belongs only to those who once lived it; the past belongs to those who claim it, and are willing to
explore it, and to infuse it with meaning for those alive today.”—Margaret Atwood
The problematic thing that police have been doing is "overreach", is it? Good to know these technical legal terms.
Would that be overreach in the first degree, or the second?
And where do death squads fit into the legal framework? You know, where state officials just openly massacre citizens? Is that first degree overreach? Is there a separate category of aggravated overreach?
Or does that finally rise to a level where we don't excuse it with idiotic euphemisms? Death squads sometimes kill white people, after all.
One of the commenters over on sic et non basically thinks it was Floyd's own fault.
Mary Ward
I certainly believe that Chauvin was correctly convicted; in my opinion the facts at trial clearly showed that his actions were illegal. But do you realize that Floyd would not have even encountered Chauvin if he hadn't bought cigarettes with a counterfeit $20 bill? Who is responsible for starting this close-in-time chain of events with his own illegal action?
One of the commenters over on sic et non basically thinks it was Floyd's own fault.
Mary Ward
I certainly believe that Chauvin was correctly convicted; in my opinion the facts at trial clearly showed that his actions were illegal. But do you realize that Floyd would not have even encountered Chauvin if he hadn't bought cigarettes with a counterfeit $20 bill? Who is responsible for starting this close-in-time chain of events with his own illegal action?
“The past no longer belongs only to those who once lived it; the past belongs to those who claim it, and are willing to
explore it, and to infuse it with meaning for those alive today.”—Margaret Atwood
