An Omni-Friend (who, to be fair, may no longer consider himself such) who voted for Trump, sent The Omnivore a hard-to-follow email that, as far as The Omnivore can tell (and this is honest--no snark) boiled down to this:
Paraphrase: The Left's "rent-seeking" led to Trump. That "rent-seeking behavior" is exemplified in refusal to acknowledge that a person believes that black lives matter unless they say it in exactly the right way. This demand, (which he described as bullying) is pervasive with the left.Is this a good point? Well, if black lives matter is a valid sentiment how about white lives mattering too? It would seem to be logical, right?
|These Guys Think So|
Okay, okay--White Lives Matter might be going a bit too far, yeah? How about the saintly "All Lives Matter"? Shouldn't black people be okay with that?
Huhh. Okay--but who is this guy? Let's look.
When the Omni-Friend expressed his distaste with rent-seeking and accused The Omnivore of ignoring his arguments, The Omnivore asked him: "Do you think black lives matter? How would I know?"
How Would The Omnivore Know?He hasn't responded. Maybe because he's busy. Maybe because he's pissed. The Omnivore wouldn't blame him for either. You see, he thinks The Omnivore shouldn't be asking that question--he's a good guy (and he is!). He wouldn't let a black guy drown if he was walking by the lake and saw him in distress.
He (probably) gives to charities. He doesn't call black people racist names--he even (probably) voted for Obama. Of course he fucking thinks black lives matter--and he shouldn't have to say it in Just That Way for people to know.
The Omnivore even bets he's got black friends.
So sure--this guy isn't a Kloset Klansman--but let The Omnivore pretend to ask him what he thinks about Philando Castile.
Philando Castile was a black man who was shot in Minnesota in 2016. There was a traffic-stop because the cop thought he looked like a suspect. Philando was in the passenger seat, a three-year-old girl in the back--and, when the officer approached, Philando told him that he was a Concealed Carry Permit holder and had a gun.
In case anyone is not aware--this is what you're supposed to do. Philando was ordered to hand over his Id (he wasn't driving) and when he reached for it, the officer shot him and killed him. It was captured live. If not, the officer would probably not have gotten off.
The officer got off anyway.
Let's look at the National Rifle Association's statement on that acquittal--the NRA is one of the biggest proponents of Concealed Carry in the world. They defend--and seek to expand--those rights. They point out, relentlessly, that CC-permit holders are one of the least likely demographics to commit a crime.
Here is their fiery statement on the officer's acquittal
I don't agree with every single decision that comes out from courtrooms of America. There are a lot of variables in this particular case, and there were a lot of things that I wish would have been done differently. Do I believe that Philando Castile deserved to lose his life over his [traffic] stop? I absolutely do not. I also think that this is why we have things like NRA Carry Guard, not only to reach out to the citizens to go over what to do during stops like this, but also to work with law enforcement so that they understand what citizens are experiencing when they go through stops like this.Reason Magazine notes:
Although Loesch goes further than that, she is careful not to take a position on whether Yanez should have been acquitted. She says she sometimes disagrees with decisions reached by juries but does not say whether this is one of those times.Surely The Omnivore is nit-picking here? One could almost think the life of a black-man is worth less to the NRA's philosophy than their signaling to their base. Let's take another shooting in the same general area.
Justin Ruszczyk, a 40 year old yoga instructor in her pajamas, called the police to report a potential sexual assault. One of the police officers was allegedly startled and shot her, killing her. Here's a reporter from the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
So, yeah--there seems to be a difference. Could it be--might it be--that black lives matter less than some other lives?
Perish the thought.
The Omnivore doesn't know if the Omni-Friend considers BLM a terrorist organization--chanting about killing cops and ambushing and shooting five police officers in Dallas. The Omnivore is going to give him the benefit of the doubt that he doesn't believe those things--but who knows.
Maybe he's a big, even-handed, both-sides guy?
Or maybe he's not that well read? (He is). But here's the thing--if he really resents not being able to say All Lives Matter--or White Lives Matter--how is The Omnivore to know what he would do if, say, one of The Omnivore's black children was killed in a traffic stop like Castile? Would he be outraged? Or just kind of shrug?
How would The Omnivore know?