# Are the actions of BLM wise or foolish? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 22, 2015, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278 "2015-11-22T15:18:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/141 "2015-12-02T01:14:45Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > So, **Magiver** , I ask again: what did you mean by a “proper nuclear family”, and why are you dismissing, e.g., extended/multigenerational families from consideration as family structures that “would help”? And why do you think that saying that the nuclear family structure ought not to be the _required_ model for all families is somehow tantamount to “attacking” or “protesting” the nuclear family? good luck with that rabbit hole. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/142 "2015-12-02T01:32:27Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > good luck with that rabbit hole. Well, I wouldn’t have taken it upon myself to equate inquiring about your reasoning processes with venturing into the lightless tangled maze of a “rabbit hole”, but if that’s how you choose to characterize it, I’m not going to contradict you. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/143 "2015-12-02T02:28:59Z")
Isn’t the phrase “following someone down a rabbit hole” a direct reference to _Alice in Wonderland_? If so, **Magiver** didn’t compare his own thought process to a tangled, lightless warren, he compared it to a surrealist, cacophonous hellscape governed by incomprehensible rules, and filled with equal parts deliberate gibberish and cultural referents that have antiquated entirely out of the popular consciousness. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/144 "2015-12-02T02:50:42Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Isn’t the phrase “following someone down a rabbit hole” a direct reference to _Alice in Wonderland_? If so, **Magiver** didn’t compare his own thought process to a tangled, lightless warren, he compared it to a surrealist, cacophonous hellscape governed by incomprehensible rules, and filled with equal parts deliberate gibberish and cultural referents that have antiquated entirely out of the popular consciousness. But with a tea party. Apparently **Magiver** ’s thought process serves tea. And bread and butter. I’m up for it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/145 "2015-12-02T03:32:10Z")
Kimstu asked me to define a term I didn’t use. I used the same terminology BLM used. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/146 "2015-12-02T03:43:46Z")
**Kimstu** asked you to define a term, because you appear to be angry about the way BLM used it. If you don’t have a definition of the term, how do you know to be angry about what BLM said about it? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/147 "2015-12-02T04:14:29Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Kimstu asked me to define a term I didn’t use. I used the same terminology BLM used. 😕 Dafuq? You absolutely did use the term I asked you for your definition of. You are the **only** one to use it so far in this thread, AFAICT, except for me asking you what you meant by it. It is certainly not “the same terminology BLM used”. Recap in detail: In post #17, **John Mace** claimed to have pulled this quote from the BLM website: > [@](#): > > We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable. I didn’t see a link in his post, and I can’t access the BLM website at present due to 503 errors, but that appears to be quoted from [blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/](http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/). Then in post #84, you responded to **John** ’s post with: > [@Magiver](#): > > Wow. They’re protesting the nuclear family. that explains a great deal. And you followed that up in post #113 with: > [@Magiver](#): > > Given the manifesto cited earlier the movement is literally attacking the one thing that would help and that’s a proper nuclear family. By this point, your remarks seemed to be seriously distorting the sense of what the BLM quote actually said (and also to be getting into some peculiar shit like arbitrarily asserting what sort of family structure is “proper”). So in post #116 I pointed that out and asked for clarification of exactly what you meant: > [@Kimstu](#): > > What’s “a proper nuclear family” in your book, and why isn’t, say, an extended/multigenerational/same-sex-couple-headed family equally “proper” for childrearing purposes? > > Anyway, ISTM that the BLM website’s reference to “disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another” was not actually “attacking” the nuclear family, but rather objecting to the prescription that family structure **has** to be nuclear. And ever since then you’ve just been blowing smoke and dodging the question: > [@Magiver](#): > > [post #136] I’m not the one chasing that windmill. perhaps you could ask the official BLM spokesperson. […] > > [post #141] good luck with that rabbit hole. […] > > [post #145] Kimstu asked me to define a term I didn’t use. I used the same terminology BLM used. Come on **Magiver** , you’re the one who brought up the term “proper nuclear family”, which does **not** appear in the quoted BLM statement, and incorrectly claimed that the BLM movement was “attacking” the nuclear family and “protesting” it. Either explain what you meant or admit that you weren’t really clear about what you were saying. Sheesh. Rabbit hole, indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/148 "2015-12-02T04:58:25Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Really? I’d like to see a cite for that. Well my memory of law school torts is foggy but I found this case. [http://masscases.com/cases/app/18/18massappct796.html](http://masscases.com/cases/app/18/18massappct796.html) All the cases I found were cases where someone intentionally rammed someone else’s car but sometimes an assault on property is in fact the same as an assault on people. A lot of law has changed since I went to law school. There once was a time when self defense was what is called an affirmative defense and the burden was on the killer to prove self defense, that apparently is not as universal as it once was. > [@](#): > > In any case, none of the cops who were there when McDonald was actually damaging the cop car seem to have considered him enough of a threat to warrant shooting him. I’m not defending this guy. I am having a little but of trouble understanding why they waited so long to charge this guy and only charged the guy when the tape was about to be released without suspecting that the prosecutor is a complicit scumbag. > [@](#): > > I’m kind of appalled at this videogame approach to law enforcement that several posters seem to be promoting: _“if the suspect did x, y or z, then he broke a rule and it’s okay to shoot him”_. What cops are supposed to do is _avoid_ shooting people, even criminals, unless they absolutely _have_ to in the face of _imminent deadly threat_. Is that the criteria you would want applied to your kids if they were cops? You want them to wait until they HAVE to shoot in the face of IMMINENT DEADLY THREAT? I’m not saying that is what happens here but cops are not heroes, they are just doing a job. A dangerous (but not thankless) job, dealing with the worst elements of our society on a daily basis. Cops have the police power and this usually means they never have the duty to retreat. We do not require them to walk away from conflict. We grant them with the ability to use force to keep the peace and that means they sometimes can and should use force even deadly force when you or I would go to jail for doing so. > [@](#): > > Not faff around with hypothetical scenarios along the lines of _“oh well the perp might have turned violent on the next street corner and attacked somebody”_ in order to use the back of a fleeing suspect (who hasn’t even injured anyone) for live target practice. I think the cop cold have gotten away with shooting Laquan, after all he was holding a knife and refused to obey orders to drop the knife, he had PCP in his system and he had been carjacking people (which could mean anything from verbal threats to Grand Theft Auto kick you in the face) but once he fell to the ground its really hard to imagine what sort of threat a guy with a knife might pose unless he is a ninja or Hawkeye the Avenger. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/149 "2015-12-02T05:26:20Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I am having a little but of trouble understanding why they waited so long to charge this guy and only charged the guy when the tape was about to be released without suspecting that the prosecutor is a complicit scumbag. Hmm. I don’t think I’m having [any trouble at all understanding that.](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/protesting-the-corrupt-system-that-killed-laquan-mcdonald/417723/) > [@](#): > > Thanks to clear video evidence, Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke was charged this week with first-degree murder for shooting 17-year-old Laquan McDonald. […] > > Yet that dash-cam footage was suppressed for more than a year by authorities citing an investigation. “There was no mystery, no dead-end leads to pursue, no ambiguity about who fired the shots,” Eric Zorn wrote in The Chicago Tribune. “Who was pursuing justice and the truth? What were they doing? Who were they talking to? With whom were they meeting? What were they trying to figure out for 400 days?” […] > > Protestors want accountability for investigators whose inexplicable slowness allowed Van Dyke to remain on desk detail and to collect a paycheck from taxpayers. And the civic derelictions of duty run even deeper. They implicate Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, the city council, Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, rank-and-file cops, Pat Camden, who speaks for Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, and members of the press who credulously report police-union talking points. […] > > The New York Times unearthed a stunning anecdote last week about one Chicago cop’s record: > > > [@](#): > > > > In 18 years with the Chicago Police Department, the nation’s second-largest, Jerome Finnigan had never been disciplined — although 68 citizen complaints had been lodged against him, including accusations that he used excessive force and regularly conducted illegal searches. > > > > Then, in 2011, he admitted to robbing criminal suspects while serving in an elite police unit and ordering a hit on a fellow police officer he thought intended to turn him in. He was sentenced to 12 years in prison. “My bosses knew what I was doing out there, and it went on and on,” he said in court when he pleaded guilty. “And this wasn’t the exception to the rule. This was the rule.” > > > > …the data for 2015 shows that in more than 99 percent of the thousands of misconduct complaints against Chicago police officers, there has been no discipline. From 2011 to 2015, 97 percent of more than 28,500 citizen complaints resulted in no officer being punished, according to the files. > > […] In short, Chicago does an atrocious job of identifying and disciplining bad cops. And this failure appears to have directly contributed to the wrongful death of McDonald—Van Dyke had 18 civil complaints filed against him, but had never been disciplined. “The Independent Police Review Authority, the civilian board that handles the most serious cases, doesn’t take into account previous complaints against the same officer when investigating a new one,” according to a Tuesday editorial in the Chicago Tribune. “11 officers racked up a combined 253 complaints that resulted in a single five-day suspension. Come on. What does it take to flag a problem cop?” > > The answer is actually clear: It takes video evidence that the public can access. But Chicago leaders are loath to turn such information over to a public to whom it is owed. […] > > Simon Balto, a Ball State University history professor, […] expounds on another example of almost unimaginable failure to purge a bad cop: > > > [@](#): > > > > Once you begin digging through the records of individual officers, patterns of abuse on the part of certain men and women begin to emerge that should stun even the most determined denier of racism and police conduct. Officer Raymond Piwnicki, for instance, who works on the Southwest Side, has had sixty-eight different complaints lodged against him since the early 2000s. In one of only three instances in which institutional review found the charges to be sustained, an off-duty Piwnicki, who is white, was found to have instigated an altercation with a black man and his wife as all of them tried to board an elevator. Piwnicki swung at the man, pushed the woman in the chest, and told the man to “Shut up, you fucking coon, you fucking cluck, I do whatever the fuck I want to a fuckin’ nigger coon.” […] > > > > Over and over again, Piwnicki and other high-volume offenders have been brought before investigators because of citizen complaints of abuse. A year ago, an investigation into CPD “impunity” by Truthout found Piwnicki the highest offender in the department, with fifty-five misconduct complaints in just five years. Yet he received precisely _zero_ disciplinary penalties for that misconduct. (Indeed, the Truthout investigators reported, Piwnicki was “awarded the Superintendent’s Award of Valor in 2013, for a shooting in which he is now a defendant in a civil suit that cites his ‘deliberate indifference’ to a fellow officer’s deadly force.”) Together, repeat offenders like Piwnicki comprise about 10 percent of the CPD’s personnel, but are responsible for roughly 30 percent of misconduct complaints. [QUOTE=Damuri Ajashi] Is that the criteria you would want applied to your kids if they were cops? You want them to wait until they HAVE to shoot in the face of IMMINENT DEADLY THREAT? [/quote] Uh, yeah. That’s [the law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_force), right? > [@](#): > > In the United States, the use of deadly force is often granted to law enforcement officers when the person or people in question are believed to be an immediate danger to people around them. For example, an armed man flaunting a firearm in a shopping mall without regard to the safety of those around him, and refusing or being unwilling to negotiate, would warrant usage of deadly force, as a means to protect others. The use of deadly force is also authorized when a person poses a significant threat to a law enforcement officer, usually when the officer is at risk of serious bodily injury or death. Lethal force is supposed to be a last resort to be used when you have very good reason to believe that something worse is about to happen immediately if you don’t shoot now. Not a go-to response that you reach for whenever it seems plausible that you “could get away with it”. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/150 "2015-12-02T12:18:32Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > For all you know they could all be wonderful students. What we do know is that they are hard-working, disciplined, and cunning enough to recognize that they are in a rare/unique position to wield their influence in school politics. Kingmakers. For all the empty talk of how ‘respect needs to be earned’ or how the public ‘doesn’t respect protesters.’ Few ‘respected’ students, faculty, or staff have the power to offer the president’s head on a platter. > > That’s the power of mass protesting. That why Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel [is sacred enough to fire his police superintendent](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/us/chicago-police-rahm-emanuel-laquan-mcdonald.html) today. That’s why Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez’s political opponents [are circling her like sharks](http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Anita-Alvarez-Responds-to-Calls-for-Her-Resignation-359012851.html). > > For all the talk on how protesters’ would be more effective by taking no, little, or more passive actions they seem to be getting results. The result of black lives matter protests is a [sharp rise in homicides](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0). So we agree. That’s the power of mass protests. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/151 "2015-12-02T12:25:53Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Sheesh. Rabbit hole, indeed. You got me there. I did a search and didn’t see the phrase. But look at the effort you just went through. Yes, rabbit hole. You don’t want to posit a debate, you want to argue about what the definition of “is” is. As I just pointed out, BLM has manage to increase the homicide rate through their efforts. But you want to argue about what the definition of a family is when you know this is part of the problem. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/152 "2015-12-02T12:28:42Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The result of black lives matter protests is a [sharp rise in homicides](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0). > > So we agree. That’s the power of mass protests. Ahh, you haven’t yet discovered that correlation doesn’t necessarily equal causation. No problem at all, and happy to help. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/153 "2015-12-02T12:39:55Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Ahh, you haven’t yet discovered that correlation doesn’t necessarily equal causation. No problem at all, and happy to help. uh huh. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/154 "2015-12-02T12:54:00Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The result of black lives matter protests is a [sharp rise in homicides](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0). > > … The result is also the top cop in Chi-town losing his job, the State’s Attorney in fear for her future employment, the Mayor himself on shaky ground, the Illinois Attorney General calling for the Federal investigation of the Chicago PD. So, yeah, foolish is entirely the wrong word to describe the movement. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/155 "2015-12-02T14:06:19Z")
The mayor was overwhelmingly reelected this year, he’s going nowhere. The BLM crybabies conveniently ignore the 9 year old shot which contributed highly to the police commissioner ouster. Lisa Madigan is simply pandering for political purposes. I don’t think another protest is going to met so peacefully. They completely shot their wad with their ridiculous trespassing. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/156 "2015-12-02T14:09:17Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The result of black lives matter protests is a [sharp rise in homicides](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0). > > So we agree. That’s the power of mass protests. > **[Why violent crime increased in the first 6 months of 2015](https://www.vox.com/2015/9/8/9273139/murder-rates-rising-sharply)** > > Vox is a general interest news site for the 21st century. Its mission: to help everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help shape it. In text, video and audio, our reporters explain politics, policy, world affairs, technology,... The idea that this is somehow demonstrated to be causative is nonsense. Even the claim that it’s statistically significant has come under fire. > [@dalej42](#): > > I don’t think another protest is going to met so peacefully. :dubious: Why is it that you seem to be brimming with glee at the possibility? ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/157 "2015-12-02T16:41:30Z")
I certainly don’t want to see any violence. But anarchy and trespassing can not stand. If there are future such protests which restrict access to businesses or public facilities , the police need to react swiftly. If the protestors refuse to disperse , then arrests need to be made and charges filed. Ideally, the use of tear gas can be avoided. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/158 "2015-12-02T17:46:37Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > I certainly don’t want to see any violence. But anarchy and trespassing can not stand. If there are future such protests which restrict access to businesses or public facilities , the police need to react swiftly. If the protestors refuse to disperse , then arrests need to be made and charges filed. Ideally, the use of tear gas can be avoided. Maybe they can use fire hoses too? Like if protesters were marching across a bridge and blocking traffic or something? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selma\_to\_Montgomery\_marches](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selma_to_Montgomery_marches) ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/159 "2015-12-02T18:38:34Z")
I’ve got no objection to an organized march as long as it proceeds peacefully down an prearranged route. My objection is to the chaos and anarchy by prohibiting entry and exit from innocent businesses just so the social justice warriors could complain. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2015, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278/160 "2015-12-02T18:38:58Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You got me there. I did a search and didn’t see the phrase. But look at the effort you just went through. Yes, rabbit hole. You don’t want to posit a debate, you want to argue about what the definition of “is” is. Asking you what you mean by the statements you make **is** part of posting a debate. If you don’t want to defend your claim about a “proper nuclear family” being “the one thing that would help” disadvantaged black people, then don’t, but quit whining about having been called out on it. > [@Magiver](#): > > As I just pointed out, BLM has manage to increase the homicide rate through their efforts. You haven’t “pointed it out”, you’ve made it up. Other posters have already explained to you the absurdity of assuming that correlation equals causation. You have shown jack shit in the way of evidence that the recent rise in homicide rates is actually caused by BLM in any way. If you’re going to change the subject, at least reach for a new assertion that is somewhat logically defensible. [QUOTE=Magiver] But you want to argue about what the definition of a family is when you know this is part of the problem. [/QUOTE] You’re the one who brought up the issue of what a “proper” family is. If you post something in Great Debates that you’re not willing to argue about, you have to expect some pushback. You can’t just post indefensible bullshit and expect other posters not to challenge it, though I agree you seem to be giving it a jolly good try. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-the-actions-of-blm-wise-or-foolish/738278.md?page=9)