South Park - Sit, Stand, Kneel

[dmm5157]

1. Racial inequality exists.
2. An NFL player taking a knee during the national anthem is not the appropriate venue or time to display his real or perceived view of something wrong in the country.
3. An NFL player has no right to demonstrate a political view as a private sector employee.
4. NFL players have plenty of money and time to do and contribute to whatever they want to raise their concerns about racial inequality. Outside of their time as an entertainer in a costume, working for a private employer.

If people could get on board with #1, then #2 thru 4 would be a non-issue. I've seen plenty of people saying not only does racial inequality not exist anymore.

I think you'll see the National Anthem thing switch directions into a league wide awareness program like domestic abuse and it'll happen pretty soon.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Here's my take as a retired AF veteran.

First and foremost, I stand for our Flag and our National Anthem. Prior to all this stuff, my wife once told me she realized what serving meant to me the first time she saw me stand for the Anthem...she said I'm in a different world for that moment.

So, that brings me to my stance on the issue (no pun intended). I 100% support the cause behind the protest. I hear the message loud and clear and know the intention is not to bring dishonor to our Flag or our country. However, I am unable to join in the protest because I literally am unable to take a knee during the Anthem nor during the presentation of our Flag. I truly believe my body just won't physically allow me too. It means to much to me (personally).

And that's frustrating because now I do not have a voice in this protest. Furthermore, am I to be viewed in opposition to the protest because I stand? Will some racist a-hat applaud me for standing thinking I'm on his/her side? What about my pops? He can't stand football...has never watched a game in his life. All he knows is there are a bunch of people kneeling to the Flag he served to protect.

Therefore, my opinion is the platform for this message is wrong. Wrong because a message of unity can't be heard when the platform is rooted in division. I imagine if Kap had shared his feelings with his teammates and the entire team agreed to kneel together before the anthem played a single note, we wouldn't be where we are with this protest today and the message would have still been heard.

Again, and just to clarify, I agree that every man, woman, and child has the freedom to sit, stand, kneel, or jump around during the anthem; however, I simply feel those protesting should have made a different choice.

That's my take.

 

[TennNole17]

Yes, but it speaks to the bigger picture here. Kneeling is not the story here, and yet that's what supposedly is bothering people the most.'

The players are also not asking the fans to kneel, this is not a movement. It's a demonstration.

Life/history is full of good messages not heard, seen, or accepted because of poor delivery.

I can't count the number of times I've been wholly right, but because of emotion my delivery totally erased my message.

 

[DFSNOLE]

1. Racial inequality exists.
2. An NFL player taking a knee during the national anthem is not the appropriate venue or time to display his real or perceived view of something wrong in the country.
3. An NFL player has no right to demonstrate a political view as a private sector employee.
4. NFL players have plenty of money and time to do and contribute to whatever they want to raise their concerns about racial inequality. Outside of their time as an entertainer in a costume, working for a private employer.

As to #3, please post the universal rules that apply to every private sector employer/employee.

 

[BarryB1081]

As to #3, please post the universal rules that apply to every private sector employer/employee.

The universal rule that applies to every private sector employee is that they have no constitutional free speech rights. It's really not up for debate. Now, a private sector employer can permit such activity, but is not required to do so. That's SCOTUS talking, not me.

 

[DFSNOLE]

The universal rule that applies to every private sector employee is that they have no constitutional free speech rights. It's really not up for debate. Now, a private sector employer can permit such activity, but is not required to do so. That's SCOTUS talking, not me.

I would agree that there are no constitutional rights but that is not how I read your original post.

 

[BarryB1081]

I would agree that there are no constitutional rights but that is not how I read your original post.

I'm responding to what was initially the view of many that constitutional rights were implicated, throwing around phrases like "free speech" and "freedom of expression" which are legal concepts developed over many years of constitutional law precedent. There is much misunderstanding and lazy thought out there about what people actually have a "right" to. Good morning btw.

 

[DFSNOLE]

I'm responding to what was initially the view of many that constitutional rights were implicated, throwing around phrases like "free speech" and "freedom of expression" which are legal concepts developed over many years of constitutional law precedent. There is much misunderstanding and lazy thought out there about what people actually have a "right" to. Good morning btw.

Agree. People are confusing the "right" to and being "allowed" to. Good morning to you too.

 

[DFSNOLE]

The universal rule that applies to every private sector employee is that they have no constitutional free speech rights. It's really not up for debate. Now, a private sector employer can permit such activity, but is not required to do so. That's SCOTUS talking, not me.

I would agree that there are no constitutional rights but that is not how I read your original post.

To expand on this after thinking about it during my morning walk, I have not heard the "rights" argument used by those saying if the NFL stopped the kneeling, the player's right to free speech and expression would be violated. I'm sure it has been though. That is why I misinterpreted your original post and for that, I apologize.
Where I have heard it used is by those who say the players have no "right" to protest because they are at their place of employment. Those are the ones who confuse/conflate "right to" and "allowed to".

 

[dmm5157]

Here's my take as a retired AF veteran.

First and foremost, I stand for our Flag and our National Anthem. Prior to all this stuff, my wife once told me she realized what serving meant to me the first time she saw me stand for the Anthem...she said I'm in a different world for that moment.

So, that brings me to my stance on the issue (no pun intended). I 100% support the cause behind the protest. I hear the message loud and clear and know the intention is not to bring dishonor to our Flag or our country. However, I am unable to join in the protest because I literally am unable to take a knee during the Anthem nor during the presentation of our Flag. I truly believe my body just won't physically allow me too. It means to much to me (personally).

And that's frustrating because now I do not have a voice in this protest. Furthermore, am I to be viewed in opposition to the protest because I stand? Will some racist a-hat applaud me for standing thinking I'm on his/her side? What about my pops? He can't stand football...has never watched a game in his life. All he knows is there are a bunch of people kneeling to the Flag he served to protect.

Therefore, my opinion is the platform for this message is wrong. Wrong because a message of unity can't be heard when the platform is rooted in division. I imagine if Kap had shared his feelings with his teammates and the entire team agreed to kneel together before the anthem played a single note, we wouldn't be where we are with this protest today and the message would have still been heard.

Again, and just to clarify, I agree that every man, woman, and child has the freedom to sit, stand, kneel, or jump around during the anthem; however, I simply feel those protesting should have made a different choice.

That's my take.

Excellent perspective, thank you for sharing. You bring up some great points.

As Tenn said, the delivery is causing the message to be lost. It started with Kaepernick sitting, changed into kneeling because of a talk he had with a veteran that changed his stance.

And I agree that people can stand for anthem and support the cause. Again, player demonstration does not mean everyone is being asked to partake if they agree with their position.

Someone else asked earlier "what's the end game here?" and that's also a valid point. We've now reached a point where there are two opposing sides. Players kneeling and fans protesting games by burning jerseys, boycotting NFL, etc.

Ultimately, I hope the players can come to a resolution that includes the armed forces in a positive way.

 

[DFSNOLE]

Ultimately, I hope the players can come to a resolution that includes the armed forces in a positive way.

Which would be hailed as a political win by some parties.

 

[BarryB1081]

To expand on this after thinking about it during my morning walk, I have not heard the "rights" argument used by those saying if the NFL stopped the kneeling, the player's right to free speech and expression would be violated. I'm sure it has been though. That is why I misinterpreted your original post and for that, I apologize.
Where I have heard it used is by those who say the players have no "right" to protest because they are at their place of employment. Those are the ones who confuse/conflate "right to" and "allowed to".

No worries, as a litigator, I'm pretty thick skinned and tend to be too confrontational sometimes where it's not called for out of "muscle memory." I think perhaps what's getting the constitutional terms involved in most of the debates I'm in is because I will always say something like "where is this 'right' you speak of coming from?", or "you realize they do not have a constitutional right," and I'm met with disbelief. If anything, maybe this whole thing will lead to a little more constitutional literacy.

On another note, just finished my 5 mile run which equates to about the calories in alcohol I will consume today. Cheers.

 

[BelemNole]

Did you not notice the location of the tweet? This is Russia trying (and succeeding in your case) to stir up stuff.

 

[seminole97]

Did you not notice the location of the tweet?

Yep. Saw it on Reddit (pointing out the loc.) and pasted it here waiting to see how long before someone pointed that out.
I'm curious, did you notice the location in the pic, or read about it too?

 

[BelemNole]

It's one of several I've seen on Twitter.

 

[DanC78]

I'll be kneeling before every FSU game moving forward in protest of our poor offensive line coaching; it must be addressed!!

 

[RangerNole]

A friend posted a link on the Michael Bennett thing when he was supposedly just randomly throw down at gunpoint. Turns out it was an active shooter situation and he ran through the casino and would not respond to police commands. It is all on the police body cam. This was posted via a TMZ link and the friend is a MOH recipient so I have no reason to not believe it, but haven't had a chance to research it. I guess my question is what about these types of things that are first reported and sound really bad, then more data comes out and the story is very different. As I remember it this was story was presented as a terrible racial injustice and now it looks very different than 1st reported. I know there are some very racists and unfair actions taken against minorities; but when certain things are inaccurate it stokes the fire of certain groups.

 

[West Duval Nole]

A friend posted a link on the Michael Bennett thing when he was supposedly just randomly throw down at gunpoint. Turns out it was an active shooter situation and he ran through the casino and would not respond to police commands. It is all on the police body cam. This was posted via a TMZ link and the friend is a MOH recipient so I have no reason to not believe it, but haven't had a chance to research it. I guess my question is what about these types of things that are first reported and sound really bad, then more data comes out and the story is very different. As I remember it this was story was presented as a terrible racial injustice and now it looks very different than 1st reported. I know there are some very racists and unfair actions taken against minorities; but when certain things are inaccurate it stokes the fire of certain groups.

That's one of the biggest problems. And on both sides in my opinion. When someone claims racism falsely once the evidence comes out no one wants to rebuke the person or that side doesn't want to admit they were wrong and misidentified the situation and apologize for doing so. Additionally, police do not want to criticize each other to the same extent they defend each other. Additionally many seem to live by the same code they don't like when witnesses follow it of snitches get stitches. Partners rarely want to say when their partner did wrong as they will be ostracized by other officers. Additionally, everything is discussed in black and white when many times the third option from both sides is what actions coukd each individual have done to prevent this from happening in the future. But no it is we ain't changing our behavior or attitude, you need to. Thus the incidents continue to happen.

With all that being said, I believe even 1 racially motivated incident is 1 too many, I believe a far majority of police officers are not racists out looking to kill or arrest based on race but not nearly enough come out to denounce the actions the same way they defend when a police officer is justified.

 

[FirewaterNole]

What's funny about this whole thing is that the league penalizes people for really stupid things, like Lynch not doing press conferences, or somebody wearing a piece of equipyother than the brand they're supposed to. They do that because they're a brand and don't want to lose sponsors, but they'll alllow maybe millions of people to boycott the league over this issue (I am one of them).

Just doesn't seem very business savvy to me!

You've got every right to boycott if you choose to, similarly the NFL has made it clear they support their players using this 2-3 min before the game to sit/stand/kneel for something they believe deeply in.

We all have choices to make in life when it comes to things we're passionate about.

As for 'offensive', the kneeling was decided upon by Kap in consultation with former Army Green Beret Nate Boyer (https://undertheradar.military.com/2016/09/kaepernick-meets-veteran-nate-boyer-kneels-anthem/).

Sure some people can choose to be offended, but I hope they understand offending people was never the point. Getting people's attention about ongoing injustices is.

But thing is most people know the statistics & that this protest is misinformed at best.

 

[FirewaterNole]

*Nope. Not going there.

 

[dmm5157]

...

Isn't just african americans, applies to hispanic, middle eastern, etc.

I know my grandfather got beaten up my border patrol because they thought he was an illegal alien back in the 60's. He was a very small framed person, very quiet and kept to himself. He didn't speak english, was walking home from work one night and some power hungry patrollers decided they could do whatever they wanted. He was a natural born US citizen, had never even been to Mexico in his life and never would. He moved north to San Antonio shortly after that event to get further away from the border, lived in fear of law enforcement after that. Refused to ever visit my family in Laredo, Texas because of its proximity to border.


That doesn't happen to an average white person. I saw "average" as I'm sure poorer white folks may face a similar discrimination if they are lower income and don't know any better.


Profiling happens whether people want to admit or defend it.

That's just one example.


One thing that is very worth while is knowing your rights. Everyone should know and deserves to know their rights. We've had discussions about that on here before. I'm not sure how many people on here have been pulled over for anything before and questioned for anything in a criminal nature but it can be a very scary event even if you have done nothing wrong. Escalate that with having a gun pointed in your face and I cannot imagine what that would be like. Especially with what we are seeing more and more due to presence of body and police car cameras.

Make no mistake, this is not something that can be completely eliminated. What would make sense is to hold people in power accountable. You want law enforcement to follow the laws themselves. If they break the laws and violate our civil liberties, they should suffer the appropriate penalties. Far too often, we're seeing that isn't the case.

 

[FirewaterNole]

Isn't just african americans, applies to hispanic, middle eastern, etc.

I know my grandfather got beaten up my border patrol because they thought he was an illegal alien back in the 60's. He was a very small framed person, very quiet and kept to himself. He didn't speak english, was walking home from work one night and some power hungry patrollers decided they could do whatever they wanted. He was a natural born US citizen, had never even been to Mexico in his life and never would. He moved north to San Antonio shortly after that event to get further away from the border, lived in fear of law enforcement after that. Refused to ever visit my family in Laredo, Texas because of its proximity to border.


That doesn't happen to an average white person. I saw "average" as I'm sure poorer white folks may face a similar discrimination if they are lower income and don't know any better.


Profiling happens whether people want to admit or defend it.

That's just one example.


One thing that is very worth while is knowing your rights. Everyone should know and deserves to know their rights. We've had discussions about that on here before. I'm not sure how many people on here have been pulled over for anything before and questioned for anything in a criminal nature but it can be a very scary event even if you have done nothing wrong. Escalate that with having a gun pointed in your face and I cannot imagine what that would be like. Especially with what we are seeing more and more due to presence of body and police car cameras.

Make no mistake, this is not something that can be completely eliminated. What would make sense is to hold people in power accountable. You want law enforcement to follow the laws themselves. If they break the laws and violate our civil liberties, they should suffer the appropriate penalties. Far too often, we're seeing that isn't the case.

Profiling=perception=reality. That's human nature & never going to end. I am a Tribal Member, a "minority". I am a "light-skinned" Indian at that. Do you think that "minority" status gets me a pass walking through the worst neighborhoods in town in the middle of the nite?!?! I would say probably not.
That my friend, is the perception in THAT neighborhood. That makes it reality.
So, where is the privilege I ask?

 

[dmm5157]

Profiling=perception=reality. That's human nature & never going to end.

So because it's human nature people shouldn't be held accountable?

 

[BelemNole]

A friend posted a link on the Michael Bennett thing when he was supposedly just randomly throw down at gunpoint. Turns out it was an active shooter situation and he ran through the casino and would not respond to police commands. It is all on the police body cam. This was posted via a TMZ link and the friend is a MOH recipient so I have no reason to not believe it, but haven't had a chance to research it. I guess my question is what about these types of things that are first reported and sound really bad, then more data comes out and the story is very different. As I remember it this was story was presented as a terrible racial injustice and now it looks very different than 1st reported. I know there are some very racists and unfair actions taken against minorities; but when certain things are inaccurate it stokes the fire of certain groups.

Except that there wasn't an active shooter and the video show LOTS of people running thru the casino.

 

[FirewaterNole]

So because it's human nature people shouldn't be held accountable?

ALL should be held accountable. That's the problem the core issue of violence & lawlessness is not being addressed. And until it is addressed you're going to have that human nature kicking in of the dreaded "profiling". You, me, ALL of us practice profiling everyday. It's the reason you don't venture down that dark street in that bad neighborhood. And when you venture down that "good neighborhood" you feel comfortable stopping for ice cream with your kids. Profiling & perception.

 

[West Duval Nole]

Except that there wasn't an active shooter and the video show LOTS of people running thru the casino.

There was no active shooting at the time but if a shooter hadn't been detained it could have started again at any time would be a valid thought process for any officers going in. There were more than just him running. A few ran towards the police officers and from the grainy footage I saw it appeared the ones that ran towards the police and past them were black. A bunch of people hit the ground. Michael Bennett crouched and ducked between some slot machines to exit. I don't necessarily blame him and he may have very well not even seen the police and probably was just trying to get the heck out of dodge. But it could also appear that they thought he saw him and they thought he was trying to avoid them thus making him suspicious. He was genuinely scared when it showed they had him. However once he complied and more information was known so less adrenaline was pumping they calmly explained what was happening. He had no ID and they allowed pics from google to identify him and let him go. He shook their hands and went on his way. It certainly doesn't appear in this specific case to have been racially motivated. He even acknowledged that he understood and shook their hands and went on his way. Now that doesn't mean bad situations and profiling doesn't occur but it sure seems to me this specific case isn't one of them.

 

[BelemNole]

There was no shooter detained. "The Police Department’s investigation found no shots were fired. Metro Lt. Peter Kisfalvi said large statues were knocked down onto the tile floor during a fight at Drai’s, causing panic and prompting the reports of a shooting."

So why did they chase him out of all the folks fleeing? What about him made them think he was a shooter? In the video lots of people were crouching and running. I also find it suspect that the officer that detained him was the only one who's camera wasn't on.

 

[West Duval Nole]

So why did they chase him out of all the folks fleeing? What about him made them think he was a shooter? In the video lots of people were crouching and running. I also find it suspect that the officer that detained him was the only one who's camera wasn't on.

The police call was shooter so at the time as far as they knew there very well could have been a shooter and were working under that report. They were much calmer and explained what the situation was and he seemed to understand.

The video I saw it appeared he was the only one that was crouched coming towards them but then instead of keeping coming towards them as the others did he went in between rows of slot machines. He was the only one I saw do that. So that could be why? Why didn't they tell the other ones that hustled towards and past them that appeared to be black to get down and check them out if it was truly racially motivated? I also find it strange that only one police officers camera was not on. However, that doesn't automatically mean something bad happened. The other officer was next to him picks up much of it. It doesn't appear a gun was put to his head with the barrel on his head, but I don't doubt a gun was pointed at him based on what the call was and the situation. And he had every reason to be scared and crouch and run out the way he did. And if he was the only one they saw that was fleeing and appeared to avoid him then that would be reasonable suspicion to stop and detain him. Once more information was known they were able to explain it to him. He understood and shook their hands and went on his way.

 

[BelemNole]

I'm sorry, but I find that they have a big press conference essentially calling him a liar and just gloss over the fact that the one camera out of the hundred that could back up his story was "off" is suspect. More of a suspect than he should have been.

 

[dmm5157]

ALL should be held accountable. That's the problem the core issue of violence & lawlessness is not being addressed. And until it is addressed you're going to have that human nature kicking in of the dreaded "profiling". You, me, ALL of us practice profiling everyday. It's the reason you don't venture down that dark street in that bad neighborhood. And when you venture down that "good neighborhood" you feel comfortable stopping for ice cream with your kids. Profiling & perception.

The essence of the protest/demonstration is that it is very clear in many cases that law enforcement has not been held to the same level of scrutiny as the general public. All parties should be very concerned with this, as it affects everyone. The percentage of law enforcement charged when killing unarmed citizens is very low.

The use of deadly force should be taken very seriously when reviewing the actions of law enforcement.


Also, you're switching back and forth from your original question (which got deleted by a mod) and what the purpose of the protest/demonstration from the players is.

I was the one that brought up the point of profiling. That was in response to your question about people of color vs white people.