1. Legalize all drugs. 2. There are 330 million people in the USA. 330 million is a big number. Some cops have done bad things,some retribution have taken place. IMHO Both sides are overreacting.
Anecdotes are not evidence. Her statistics are true but selective and don't demonstrate any war on cops. The central problem that for whites the presence of a cop (of any race) is calming to white victims and bystanders and white victims and bystanders cooperate with the police. In black (nearly always poor) neighborhoods the presence of a cop (of any race) is agitating to black victims and bystanders who respond with fear and panic that the cop will treat them as suspects. They do not cooperate and often actively obstruct police intervention. This is because of a long history of the behavior Lynch describes (over decades). Pew Research has published data on black vs white trust in the police. www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016/09/29/the-racial-confidence-gap-in-police-performance/. There is a vast gap between white and black trust in police. As Lynch points out, stop and frisk policing tactics increase black police distrust. MacDonald never considers this when she writes that black lives matter (BLM) protesters are dishonestly prosecuting a war on cops. This is nonsense. BLM correctly argues that police conduct often does more harm than good for crime victims in poor black neighborhoods. Lynch, at least, offers examples of reform. I'm far more persuaded by the libertarian than by the shrill anecdote and data manipulating conservative.
I appreciate the format and the concept, but this execution was weak. the debate question was weak. the definition of the "black lives matter" movement was never stated. I'm black. I believe black lives matter, I've tweeted #blacklivesmatter but I'm not "in" the organization. black lives matter is more of a rallying cry than it is an organization. the hashtag is more influential than the organization. ask a run of the mill black person what they think about "black lives matter" and they'll say something about justice, accountability and equal protection - not any of the neoliberal stuff in the actual BLM platform. "war" was never defined. the dude didn't argue the question (at least not until the very end) - probably because it was a weak question. no one challenged the lady on her failure to establish causation between "BLM rhetoric" and the "war on police". she responds to what she believes to be a false narrative with a different narrative that is at best unproven and more likely than not, false. a better question could have been - with regards to policing and the police, what is the problem that needs to be solved?
Jeez, this is a rough debate. Her argument is nothing but anecdotes with a few stats that don't directly support the supposition. And his speech is just a recitation of cato institute policy points and he doesn't really engage the question in debate. Neither really did a good job of actually debating the core question.
![ค้างคืนโรงเก็บกระสวยอวกาศร้างกลางทะเลทราย [Around The World Ep. 3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E5bWZQhABJE/mqdefault.jpg)
An important topic like this and so few views, makes me sad. Thank you SOHO forum, please keep up the good work.
1. Legalize all drugs.
2. There are 330 million people in the USA. 330 million is a big number. Some cops have done bad things,some retribution have taken place. IMHO Both sides are overreacting.
MR Lynch beat her
Anecdotes are not evidence. Her statistics are true but selective and don't demonstrate any war on cops.
The central problem that for whites the presence of a cop (of any race) is calming to white victims and bystanders and white victims and bystanders cooperate with the police. In black (nearly always poor) neighborhoods the presence of a cop (of any race) is agitating to black victims and bystanders who respond with fear and panic that the cop will treat them as suspects. They do not cooperate and often actively obstruct police intervention. This is because of a long history of the behavior Lynch describes (over decades). Pew Research has published data on black vs white trust in the police.
www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016/09/29/the-racial-confidence-gap-in-police-performance/.
There is a vast gap between white and black trust in police. As Lynch points out, stop and frisk policing tactics increase black police distrust. MacDonald never considers this when she writes that black lives matter (BLM) protesters are dishonestly prosecuting a war on cops. This is nonsense. BLM correctly argues that police conduct often does more harm than good for crime victims in poor black neighborhoods. Lynch, at least, offers examples of reform. I'm far more persuaded by the libertarian than by the shrill anecdote and data manipulating conservative.
I appreciate the format and the concept, but this execution was weak.
the debate question was weak.
the definition of the "black lives matter" movement was never stated. I'm black. I believe black lives matter, I've tweeted #blacklivesmatter but I'm not "in" the organization. black lives matter is more of a rallying cry than it is an organization. the hashtag is more influential than the organization. ask a run of the mill black person what they think about "black lives matter" and they'll say something about justice, accountability and equal protection - not any of the neoliberal stuff in the actual BLM platform.
"war" was never defined.
the dude didn't argue the question (at least not until the very end) - probably because it was a weak question.
no one challenged the lady on her failure to establish causation between "BLM rhetoric" and the "war on police". she responds to what she believes to be a false narrative with a different narrative that is at best unproven and more likely than not, false.
a better question could have been - with regards to policing and the police, what is the problem that needs to be solved?
Black Lives Matter is the name of an organization...
Jeez, this is a rough debate. Her argument is nothing but anecdotes with a few stats that don't directly support the supposition. And his speech is just a recitation of cato institute policy points and he doesn't really engage the question in debate. Neither really did a good job of actually debating the core question.