Stephanie Siler All of which is perfectly logical and valid. My issue is with the assessment that being black is the reason for the disparity.
They people who are killed 5 times more are in fact black. But that is not all that they are. Is it? That is not the only circumstance in regards to their death? Is it?
So back to the original point. BLM good, KKK bad. Assigning race as the reason why those people were killed does not tell the whole story, thus IMO it is not a justification for social outrage, but it has proven to be an overriding factor in how people address these instances. How people discuss and debate the problem.
THAT is bad.
We could break down the numbers in countless ways. We could come to many different conclusions based on what numbers we used and how we presented them(context). Correct?
A birds eye view(400 vs 3,000,000,000), is not disregarding the multitude of ways in which the data could be interpreted. However it is a valid starting point when assessing the validity of a movement predicated on the idea that police should stop killing black people.
OK, they kill black people. They also kill other people. Why does this happen? Is it all racially motivated? Do demographics play any part?
How deep should we go considering the number of encounters vs the number of deaths. Those are all relevant questions.
Questions that I feel are important when starting a movement based on race.
If 200 of the 400 are from one city, doesn’t that change the assessment of the nation as a whole? What if all 400 are from 4 cities? They aren’t, but my point remains the same. Scope of a problem is important in addressing that problem.
And a generalization of the problem, as has been done groups such as this are bad. It’s dangerous.