Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
No they wouldn't, we'd here about for a day or two and it would fade. Last year 48 officers were killed in the line of duty, 9 unarmed black men were. How many of those 48 officers did you hear CNN reporting on?
And stop putting words in my mouth, I never said that racial protests would lead to riots, I said their wouldn't be either of those in the situation You gave.
Right now Minneapolis has a problem with there PD that they need to take a hard deep look at.
You sure do make a lot of assumptions about what I think from two lines of text.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Fair point, I’m not thrilled with the way I made my point, a bit holiest-than-thou than I intended, apologize for that.
What I did want to point out is that the words we use are important, especially around a topic as charged and complex as the one playing out across the country eight now.
You said there would be no protests/riots. Which, as written, insinuates that they come together.
By saying them together you are suggesting, you’ve now confirmed unconsciously, that they go together. This was the point I was trying to make.
Saying “there would be no protests/riots” is a symbolically different way of referring to current events than saying “no one would be protesting it and providing cover for others to riot in their wake.”
I know it sounds like it’s splitting hairs, but the reality is that if we perpetuate the perception that rioting and looting are hand-in-hand with protesting, we are a part of the problem.
Again, wasn’t trying to put words in your mouth, was trying to provide an example of how the words you did use could be interpreted.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device