Will the NHL boycott games? Should it?

[GIODUDE]

Curious, is there any thing BLM has done that people here don't agree with? Just a straight forward question. I have my own thoughts on it and it may surprise you. I'd like to see anyone can critique it without fear of being bullied.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by GIODUDE

Curious, is there any thing BLM has done that people here don't agree with? Just a straight forward question. I have my own thoughts on it and it may surprise you. I'd like to see anyone can critique it without fear of being bullied.

What do you mean by BLM? Do you have a specific organization in mind? Do you mean anyone who has affiliated him or herself with the BLM movement? Do you mean anyone who has attended protests where BLM supporters are present?

Obviously there are plenty of reasonable criticisms one might make of all of these categories (particularly the violence and needless destruction of property). But those criticisms are, in my view, are collateral to assessment of the deep and important societal issues that most people associate with the BLM movement.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GIODUDE

Curious, is there any thing BLM has done that people here don't agree with? Just a straight forward question. I have my own thoughts on it and it may surprise you. I'd like to see anyone can critique it without fear of being bullied.

Sometimes individuals do things on behalf of a cause that are objectionable, and maybe even contrary to the views and/or purpose of the cause.

But it is important to judge those individual events as such, and not to denigrate the cause they were supposed to represent.

[GIODUDE]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Sometimes individuals do things on behalf of a cause that are objectionable, and maybe even contrary to the views and/or purpose of the cause.

But it is important to judge those individual events as such, and not to denigrate the cause they were supposed to represent.

Would it not be fair to view law enforcement with the same lens? Seems they are all painted with the same brush. Actual statistics don't validate it though.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by GIODUDE

Would it not be fair to view law enforcement with the same lens? Seems they are all painted with the same brush. Actual statistics don't validate it though.

They are employees, who have managing staff. Historically they have not punished their own individual employees for breaking laws. And more often than not, support those individuals. So no, you can’t compare that to protestors.

Nobody will argue that there aren’t good cops. But the system is ####ed from the top down.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GIODUDE

Would it not be fair to view law enforcement with the same lens? Seems they are all painted with the same brush. Actual statistics don't validate it though.

But the stats DO indicate that there is a systemic problem.

The parallel would be that individuals REGULARLY did something disagreeable on behalf of the cause. Are you suggesting that is the case?

[LeatherFace]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

The timeline is informative, but the "other details highlighted that some might've missed" are irrelevant discussions about possible criminal records belonging to the victims, and a lot of hand-waving at Ritterhouse's actions in justifying the murders as self-defense.

Why do people keep saying a person's criminal record if they have one is 'irrelevant' when its often VERY RELEVANT or at least it use to be until recently when looking someone's history was useful in seeing if that person had a pattern of bad behavior or criminality or if they were just a good person with no record.

Now that's somehow become 'irrelevant' because when you look closer at many people's records you find out they're not quite the angel you thought they were? Should we believe the media's portrayal of people and accept that without question? I was watching CTV news and how they reported the Jacob Blake shooting and all they said was 'UNARMED BLACK MAN shot 7 times in the back by police while trying to get to his vehicle where his 3 kids were'. And that's it. NOTHING ELSE.

Even now few if any major news outlets wants to bring up Blake's history or that he fought the cops and refused all police commands etc. and that maybe he's not exactly the greatest choice for athletes and companies to be taking a stand for.

What is the most ####ed up part of what happened is the fact that several men were emboldened enough to show up and counter-protest an angry mob with assault rifles and pistols. The reason two people are dead and another seriosly wounded is that people with guns were there in the first place.

What about the effed up part where rioting, lawlessness, looting, seriously injuring and sometimes even killing innocent people, destruction and burning of property is allowed to go on without government trying to stop them? Maybe if political leaders did their jobs in protecting the citizens of their city, keeping them safe and not allowing these protests to get so out of hand that they felt bold enough to riot, loot and destroy neverendingly then perhaps some people wouldn't be fed up and finally decide enough is enough and its time to stand up against these not very 'peaceful protesters' and stop them from destroying the country that they love?

I just find it interesting that many protesters and/or people who use them as cover to commit crime, violence and destruction WANT chaos, lawlessness and anarchy. They WANT the police and government to stay far away from them so that they can loot and destroy as they wish, BUT as soon as any civilians DARE to stand up against them to and try stop their madness, they magically DO CARE about laws again and how Ritterhouse was illegally carrying weapons and how he came from outside the state. They suddenly DEMAND that the police they hate so much 'do their job' and arrest him. That the justice system they despise so much to convict a person who got in their way of all their fun and killed a couple of them.

But hey if they do THIS to someone its fine. They deserved it I'm sure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqUP...ature=youtu.be

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by LeatherFace

Why do people keep saying a person's criminal record if they have one is 'irrelevant' when its often VERY RELEVANT or at least it use to be until recently when looking someone's history was useful in seeing if that person had a pattern of bad behavior or criminality or if they were just a good person with no record.

Now that's somehow become 'irrelevant' because when you look closer at many people's records you find out they're not quite the angel you thought they were? Should we believe the media's portrayal of people and accept that without question? I was watching CTV news and how they reported the Jacob Blake shooting and all they said was 'UNARMED BLACK MAN shot 7 times in the back by police while trying to get to his vehicle where his 3 kids were'. And that's it. NOTHING ELSE.

Because none of that is relevant to the shooting. He could have served 30 years in jail for murder and just got out. It's not relevant. He could have punched a cop in the face. It's not relevant. The only thing that would be relevant if he did something that made him an immediate deadly threat, and he didn't.

Bad patterns of behaviour are irrelevant. Each interaction with cops is unique on it's own. If an all-around angel pulls a gun on a cop and gets shot, it doesn't matter how much of an angel he was. If someone with a criminal record the size of the state of Texas poses no lethal threat and gets shot by a cop while he's walking away, it doesn't matter how much of a criminal he was.

It's only relevant to people who want to justify the shooting in ways it cannot be justified. You're free to bring it up, but it doesn't matter. Either cops shooting people in the back is something you're ok with, and cops choking people to death when they're no threat to them is something you're ok with, or it's not.

Originally Posted by LeatherFace

I just find it interesting that many protesters and/or people who use them as cover to commit crime, violence and destruction WANT chaos, lawlessness and anarchy. They WANT the police and government to stay far away from them so that they can loot and destroy as they wish, BUT as soon as any civilians DARE to stand up against them to and try stop their madness, they magically DO CARE about laws again and how Ritterhouse was illegally carrying weapons and how he came from outside the state. They suddenly DEMAND that the police they hate so much 'do their job' and arrest him. That the justice system they despise so much to convict a person who got in their way of all their fun and killed a couple of them.

Protesters do care about laws. Do rioters and looters? No, but why confuse them? If every protester is no different than a rioter and looter, every white man is no different than a white supremacist.

The protests are entirely based around the demand that police officers do their jobs – properly. What that means is arresting an unarmed Black man without killing him or shooting him multiple times, it also means arresting a White shooter without killing him or shooting him multiple times. Police seem to regularly fail at half that.

Nobody deserves to be killed who isn't an immediate deadly threat. You understand that, right? Prostestors, Black people, White people, people defending property. An unarmed Black man with a warrant deserves to be treated the same as a White shooter carrying a gun at least.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by LeatherFace

Why do people keep saying a person's criminal record if they have one is 'irrelevant' when its often VERY RELEVANT or at least it use to be until recently when looking someone's history was useful in seeing if that person had a pattern of bad behavior or criminality or if they were just a good person with no record.



Now that's somehow become 'irrelevant' because when you look closer at many people's records you find out they're not quite the angel you thought they were? Should we believe the media's portrayal of people and accept that without question? I was watching CTV news and how they reported the Jacob Blake shooting and all they said was 'UNARMED BLACK MAN shot 7 times in the back by police while trying to get to his vehicle where his 3 kids were'. And that's it. NOTHING ELSE.



Even now few if any major news outlets wants to bring up Blake's history or that he fought the cops and refused all police commands etc. and that maybe he's not exactly the greatest choice for athletes and companies to be taking a stand for.

I don't think anyone is excusing the bad behaviour of the victims in these shootings, but making a point of it IS irrelevant for two reasons: first, having been charged or convicted of prior offenses ought not ever subject a person to mob justice or police execution or irreversible physical harm. In the case of Blake, his prior offenses do not in any way absolve the police for permanently injuring him as they did. In the case of Rittenhouse's victims, he has no special insight into their past behaviour, so as far as he is concerned they are no different from any random passers by. From his perspective, he is shooting and killing nameless, faceless people whom he has identified as an immediate threat, and I find that totally reprehensible.

The only reason to introduce past prior behaviour of the victims is in a feeble effort to excuse the perpetrators, or otherwise in a despicable attempt to posit that they were somehow deserving of permanent disability or death. However you choose to play this, it's all gross.

What about the effed up part where rioting, lawlessness, looting, seriously injuring and sometimes even killing innocent people, destruction and burning of property is allowed to go on without government trying to stop them? Maybe if political leaders did their jobs in protecting the citizens of their city, keeping them safe and not allowing these protests to get so out of hand that they felt bold enough to riot, loot and destroy neverendingly then perhaps some people wouldn't be fed up and finally decide enough is enough and its time to stand up against these not very 'peaceful protesters' and stop them from destroying the country that they love?

BAWADDABOU...!
BAWADDABOU...!
BAWADDABOU...!

Grow up, and stop retreating into these meaningless tu quo que responses that don't do anything but detract from real issues.

I just find it interesting that many protesters and/or people who use them as cover to commit crime, violence and destruction WANT chaos, lawlessness and anarchy. They WANT the police and government to stay far away from them so that they can loot and destroy as they wish, BUT as soon as any civilians DARE to stand up against them to and try stop their madness, they magically DO CARE about laws again and how Ritterhouse was illegally carrying weapons and how he came from outside the state. They suddenly DEMAND that the police they hate so much 'do their job' and arrest him. That the justice system they despise so much to convict a person who got in their way of all their fun and killed a couple of them.



But hey if they do THIS to someone its fine. They deserved it I'm sure:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqUP...ature=youtu.be

They WANT chaos! They WANT to get shot!

Those are quite the assertions, there.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Ped]

Originally Posted by LeatherFace

Why do people keep saying a person's criminal record if they have one is 'irrelevant' when its often VERY RELEVANT or at least it use to be until recently when looking someone's history was useful in seeing if that person had a pattern of bad behavior or criminality or if they were just a good person with no record.

Now that's somehow become 'irrelevant' because when you look closer at many people's records you find out they're not quite the angel you thought they were? Should we believe the media's portrayal of people and accept that without question? I was watching CTV news and how they reported the Jacob Blake shooting and all they said was 'UNARMED BLACK MAN shot 7 times in the back by police while trying to get to his vehicle where his 3 kids were'. And that's it. NOTHING ELSE.

Even now few if any major news outlets wants to bring up Blake's history or that he fought the cops and refused all police commands etc. and that maybe he's not exactly the greatest choice for athletes and companies to be taking a stand for.



What about the effed up part where rioting, lawlessness, looting, seriously injuring and sometimes even killing innocent people, destruction and burning of property is allowed to go on without government trying to stop them? Maybe if political leaders did their jobs in protecting the citizens of their city, keeping them safe and not allowing these protests to get so out of hand that they felt bold enough to riot, loot and destroy neverendingly then perhaps some people wouldn't be fed up and finally decide enough is enough and its time to stand up against these not very 'peaceful protesters' and stop them from destroying the country that they love?

I just find it interesting that many protesters and/or people who use them as cover to commit crime, violence and destruction WANT chaos, lawlessness and anarchy. They WANT the police and government to stay far away from them so that they can loot and destroy as they wish, BUT as soon as any civilians DARE to stand up against them to and try stop their madness, they magically DO CARE about laws again and how Ritterhouse was illegally carrying weapons and how he came from outside the state. They suddenly DEMAND that the police they hate so much 'do their job' and arrest him. That the justice system they despise so much to convict a person who got in their way of all their fun and killed a couple of them.

But hey if they do THIS to someone its fine. They deserved it I'm sure:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqUP...ature=youtu.be

Holy ####


This has been posted by others and it is just as ignorant and despicable as it was then.


Why does a criminal record mean its OKAY TO FREAKING SHOOT YOU 7 TIMES IN THE BACK.


Oh look, there's a shoplifter. Let's just shoot him 7 times in the back.


You act surprise that people are surprised and outraged that the police SHOT SOMEONE NOT CARRYING A WEAPON OR THREATENING THEM 7 TIMES IN A BACK, yet let go a white kid WHO HAD ACTUALLY JUST SHOT PEOPLE AND WAS CARRYING A WEAPON?


You can't possibly be this oblivious or ignorant unless it is on purpose or you have some sort of mental deficiency.


I mean, seriously, what the ####, if you can't see the difference in those two things then you should not even be allowed to internet access.



Your viewpoint is complete and utter garbage and you should be ashamed for even thinking it, let alone posting it.\


I mean this is so freaking ridiculous at this point it makes me utterly outraged.


Stupid ignorant racist bull#### posts


Edit: I guess I shouldn't surprised this is from a poster who is apparently named after a fictitious serial killer. Seriously just shut the #### up.

[Doctorfever]

When I first heard what the NBA was doing, my first thought was “what is the point, keep politics out of sports” as some others on here have stated. Given some time to process what is actually happening and how much discussion and even some positive changes that have come about, I definitely have to applaud them for it.

It does not bother me at all that the NHL was late to the party. It’s better to think it out on their own, make the correct decision (which they did), rather than just follow along for the sake of following along. Lots of positive discussions, even if everyone doesn’t always agree.

While the US government has been brought up a few times, that change needs to happen there because they don’t think systematic racism exists. Before we, as Canadians start calling them out, we better take a good hard look in the mirror and think about who we voted in, and his history with poor judgment, specifically related to racism.

[JackIsBack]

Just starting on this thread.... so please excuse me if some of these things were already discussed.

1) when I watch sports - I want a break from politics and the such... this is not the place for it. I won't watch the NFL or NBA anymore, so now I'll add the NHL to that for awhile at least.... playoffs are over for me.

2) Why do these players feel that I care what they say about politics - I don't. They are millionaires and pretty privileged.... if they want to give something up personally for this cause... well, I may listen then.

3) They just boycotted or "cancelled" themselves... this makes no sense... and what does it do regardless of what people think about the cause - delaying a few games does nothing for the cause... absolutely nothing. Like knelling for the national anthem.... it does nothing, you knelling for the national anthem for a country that has allowed you to make millions... if not for the USA, all these players would be making much much less - it's just not very productive.

4) I think maybe people should wait on the investigation before rushing to judgement on all these cases.... can anyone name even one unarmed white person killed by a cop.... because there were more last year in the USA than unarmed black people killed by police, now, I really could care less about the color of ones skin (but it seems like some do) , if a cop kills anyone without justification, then they should be in jail for the rest of their lives - it's that simple. Not to mention, more cops have been killed since the outbreak of all this than the cases they are angry about - more cops killed because of this madness (black cops too!) - don't we care about those lives?

[jayswin]

^^^^^^^^
Yeah, you really should just read the thread instead of making everyone go over the same thing for the 100th time. No offence, and I don't mean because your opinion is invalid or unworthy of discussion, but because there's literally been dozens of posters just like you and each one comes in with the same "I haven't read the thread, but here's my hot take".

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by JackIsBack

Just starting on this thread.... so please excuse me if some of these things were already discussed.

1) when I watch sports - I want a break from politics and the such... this is not the place for it. I won't watch the NFL or NBA anymore, so now I'll add the NHL to that for awhile at least.... playoffs are over for me.

2) Why do these players feel that I care what they say about politics - I don't. They are millionaires and pretty privileged.... if they want to give something up personally for this cause... well, I may listen then.

3) They just boycotted or "cancelled" themselves... this makes no sense... and what does it do regardless of what people think about the cause - delaying a few games does nothing for the cause... absolutely nothing. Like knelling for the national anthem.... it does nothing, you knelling for the national anthem for a country that has allowed you to make millions... if not for the USA, all these players would be making much much less - it's just not very productive.

4) I think maybe people should wait on the investigation before rushing to judgement on all these cases.... can anyone name even one unarmed white person killed by a cop.... because there were more last year in the USA than unarmed black people killed by police, now, I really could care less about the color of ones skin (but it seems like some do) , if a cop kills anyone without justification, then they should be in jail for the rest of their lives - it's that simple. Not to mention, more cops have been killed since the outbreak of all this than the cases they are angry about - more cops killed because of this madness (black cops too!) - don't we care about those lives?

Since when is wanting black people to be fairly treated, and not racially profiled based on the colour of their skin, a political issue? This isn't a democratic, republican, liberal, conservative, ndp, or green issue. These are athletes saying they want blacks to be treated better. If you still think that kneeling during the anthem has anything to do with disrespect for a country, and not everything to do with police brutality and systemic racism towards black people, then you haven't been listening. By arguing that more whites are killed by cops than blacks you are missing the point of both police brutality, and that people of colour are killed on a higher per capita rate.


The players are the ones protesting now and hoping to start conversations because the politicians aren't doing it for them.They are standing up for themselves because others are continuing to try and push them down. Brad Marchand's comment said it best:

https://twitter.com/ConorRyan_93/sta...04632016461825

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/20...medium=twitter

While you are taking a break from sports, I suggest you actually read up on the issues and why the protests matter, instead of telling everyone to shut up and play sports.

[flylock shox]

The more I think about this issue, the more I come around to the idea that the NBA - and the other sports leagues - actually haven't gone far enough.



The USA is facing an existential crisis, and a huge chunk of its population is totally ignorant about it. The racial justice issue is just one tear in their social fabric, and there are people with shears lining up to cut their society and institutions to ribbons.



One of the biggest barriers to civic engagement to both educate themselves and take action on these issues are the first world comforts that allow people to sit comfortably on the sidelines, content that things are going okay for them, and that the problems in society aren't that many, that bad, or their problems.



Sports is one of those social luxuries that distracts from and obscures the issues American society is facing. Players kneeling for the anthem causes a blip of confusion or annoyance. The cancellation of a game or two causes a few people to discuss and pay attention to the issues for a moment, but simply infuriates others. Either way they go back to being distracted when the games resume, coming away either somewhat enlightened, or increasingly hostile to the issues that briefly cost them their valued entertainment.



With two months and a week to go until the US votes for its next president, it actually makes sense for all sports to simply stop. Broader social actions - like the shutdown of transit, streets, or private businesses - are likely to stir up social unrest and violent confrontations. The shutdown of sports does not: it simply eliminates one of the things that prevent people from paying attention to the very real crisis they are in.



Basically, the water is coming to a boil, and sports are just one more thing that's keeping the frogs from noticing it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The "I don't want politics in sports and I won't watch NBA of NFL" corwd

[Elkyiv]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Because none of that is relevant to the shooting. He could have served 30 years in jail for murder and just got out. It's not relevant. He could have punched a cop in the face. It's not relevant. The only thing that would be relevant if he did something that made him an immediate deadly threat, and he didn't.

Bad patterns of behaviour are irrelevant. Each interaction with cops is unique on it's own. If an all-around angel pulls a gun on a cop and gets shot, it doesn't matter how much of an angel he was. If someone with a criminal record the size of the state of Texas poses no lethal threat and gets shot by a cop while he's walking away, it doesn't matter how much of a criminal he was.

well, you say that but I distinctly remember that literally EVERY news media outlet ran the OJ hotel robbery conviction story with the "finally, the pos got
what he deserves" angle.

Not a single one of them ran that story without mentioning the you know what.

Having said all that, I do agree with you that it shouldn't matter.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by GIODUDE

Curious, is there any thing BLM has done that people here don't agree with? Just a straight forward question. I have my own thoughts on it and it may surprise you. I'd like to see anyone can critique it without fear of being bullied.

I don't think people are being bullied. The people that have received criticism for fly by one liners and not being able to make a point about why they feel the way they do beyond juat saying they disagree. That's fine to disagree but why do you disagree. I asked some one 2 times and all that poster respond was " you figure it out" thats why people are jumping on comments.
Eg.

Originally Posted by Magnum PEI

Lol, the guy's not even dead. I'll be pissed if the NHL skips a day over this nonsense.

[Brando]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

But the stats DO indicate that there is a systemic problem.

The parallel would be that individuals REGULARLY did something disagreeable on behalf of the cause. Are you suggesting that is the case?

Which stats are you referring too? Are you suggesting that police are killing unarmed black people at a disproportional rate?

Last year there was 24 unarmed white people killed by police. There were nine unarmed black people killed. Considering that black men (6% of the population) make up for over 50 percent of the violent crimes, it shows us that it is not the case that unarmed black people are being murdered by racist cops.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Brando

Which stats are you referring too? Are you suggesting that police are killing unarmed black people at a disproportional rate?

Last year there was 24 unarmed white people killed by police. There were nine unarmed black people killed. Considering that black men (6% of the population) make up for over 50 percent of the violent crimes, it shows us that it is not the case that unarmed black people are being murdered by racist cops.

Dude, read what you just said again. That leap in logic could get you from San Francisco to Jersey.