You have to admit that the poverty pimps who jump on the 'racism' bandwagon in specific cases when it doesn't exist hurts more than helps. They only want 'the truth' when it fits their narrative. Otherwise they'll just repeat the lies until people believe it really happened.

The point that most people are missing is the fact that Kaepernick is wearing a uniform while doing all this. He is wearing a uniform of a professional football player. He is on that field to play football and do the best that he can for his team. That's what he is getting paid to do. He is not getting paid to display his own personal beliefs on the field. Football is a team sport, not an individual sport.

I agree that he is allowed his own opinions, views on life, religious beliefs, sexual preferences and so on, but not on the field. If he wants to sit while the National Anthem is playing, that's fine, but do it on his own time, not while he is in uniform.

I'll bet he is only doing this nonsense when the cameras are on.

My vote was for choice number 1 in the poll. It was the only choice close to what I feel should happen to him. Personally if he wants to sit, then the 49ers should let him sit for the rest of the year. Allowing him to play would be nothing more than justifying a wrong with a wrong.

(veteran)

I disagree with an earlier post that suggests legal backlash if the 49'ers dump craperneck. The notion that he did nothing illegal and thus making it an illegal termination can be proved erroneous easily: assume a pro player goes to one of the highly liberal states and partakes in legal recreational marijuana. Then upon failing a drug test could be suspended or terminated.

Although I obviously have no access to any of the players contracts, I am fairly certain that each and every one has moral clauses as well as team rule clauses. These are not law, but the player is obligated to abide by them. I am surprised the players union hasn't gotten involved to admonish craperneck, as the last thing they desire is reduced public support, i.e. reduced revenue. The failure of the 49'ers organization to take any public reaction to this treasonous(imo) act shows their management as weak and afraid to make any public decision whether favorable or unfavorable. And is probably why they are not winners any longer. The tail is wagging the dog.

If you are unsure of how I voted, please reread my post as I'm sure my stance is conveyed.

Mark Medlin

Not a 49er fan but hey, anything that keeps Kapernick off the playing field can only help the Niners chances of winning games.

Not standing for the National Anthem to me is kind of a catch 22, one of the main reasons to stand is that you live in a country where you have the right to speak up for what you believe.

Does Kaepernick not standing make us more or less uncomfortable than this?

Or you could reword to say it "One of the main reasons to stand for the flag is that you live in a country where you have the right not to stand for the flag."

Though my answer would be: If the tradition was that you kneel in front of the flag, he would be chastised for standing.

It just bothers me when people disrespect the founding of this country and, by extension, the flag, especially by someone who probably couldn't even name the first president. It's really that simple. You want to protest unfair jail sentences, or whatever, go lobby your congressman. As a football player, you've got some clout - they might actually listen to you. Hold a press conference and explain your views. You're a public figure, you can do that. Write an article. Hell, run for congress yourself; the average football career is only about 4 years, and yours is looking shorter than that. You'll have the time.

There's at least a dozen ways I can think of that you could make your point without offending at least half the country. Even if you're completely right, you've already alienated half (I hope it's more) of your audience. Dumb. Immature. Ignorant.

if this guy really wants to protest our country - he should do so by quitting his job, as this country is the only one that has an NFL and he should move to a better country. And show everyone how much better off he is.

About the same to me.....both are out of place and both should have/had punitive ramifications for the participants.

One little known fact about the Smith and Carlos ceremony is that the white silver medalist also protested in his own way, he (like the other two) was wearing the badge of an Olympic human rights committee, and apparently was ostracized in Australia for the act.

If you support freedom in all forms then how can you be against someone who chooses to exert that freedom?

I find it ironic that this thread has some white posters telling other people that minorities aren't disadvantaged. How could you possibly know that or what it is like to be a minority in this country? Doesn't it seem strange that you, a white male at the top of society's hierarchy, are telling others that they have the same opportunities as you?

Carlos and Smith were almost immediately forced to leave the Olympic Village by the same Avery Brundage who had not objected to the Heil Hitler salutes at the 1936 Olympics. They doubtless suffered a great deal of ostracism for many years afterward, although from my reading they are now looked on mostly favorably.

Actions have consequences. It's America. As much as I would support their (any of them) right to do what they did, I would support my right, if I were in that position, to mete out punitive consequences. We would both be within our rights. :) (See first sentence.)

Leon are you at all familiar with the Tuskegee experiments? They were still being conducted when that photo was taken. There is a historical and societal history that you are ignoring when you say things like actions have consequences.

Is it equally ironic that other white posters seem to think they know exactly what it's like to be a minority in this country? For example, when surveyed, only 10% of Native Americans were actually offended by the name "Washington Redskins". Yet by the uproar you'd assume it would be the opposite.

And to me anyway, it's not a problem that he's allowed to exercise his freedoms, it's HOW he went about it. I think it was just plain stupid. But, hey, stupidity is in style these days.

I don't claim to know what it's like because I don't know what it's like. I never could and I never will but I also don't pretend to have some type of understanding that I don't have.

With everything that is going on (and not just referring to a black/white issue), you seriously still believe that? I'd be more inclined to say that consequences and personal responsibility are the exception to the rule these days. ;)

I double down on my comment. That being said I would have held ALL of those responsible for that experiment accountable for their actions. We have a criminal justice system.

Yes.... and unfortunately you are correct.

Right but they weren't held accountable at all and I would argue that they chose their subjects carefully for that very reason. Do you think that equates to an equal society?

What opportunities are minorities (specifically black, since that is the topic of discussion) lacking?

And what of Rosa Parks, would you have punished her too?

The individuals authorizing those atrocities should have been held accountable, I agree 100%. However there was this..

"As part of the settlement of a class action lawsuit subsequently filed by the NAACP on behalf of study participants and their descendants, the U.S. government paid $9 million (unadjusted for inflation) and agreed to provide free medical treatment to surviving participants and to surviving family members infected as a consequence of the study."

and this is more than many injustices receive though I would have made more individuals be held accountable-

A year later on May 16, 1997, President Bill Clinton formally apologized and held a ceremony at the White House for surviving Tuskegee study participants. He said:
"What was done cannot be undone. But we can end the silence. We can stop turning our heads away. We can look at you in the eye and finally say on behalf of the American people, what the United States government did was shameful, and I am sorry ... To our African American citizens, I am sorry that your federal government orchestrated a study so clearly racist."


And bringing this full circle, I don't have a problem with any athlete expressing their views and opinions. However, I do have an issue with where and when it is done. And to those that say, well he got your attention, I say he could have gotten it elsewhere too.

Of course not. It's not the same. I would hope I would have been on her side concerning sitting on a bus.

No, it's not. She broke the law, they didn't.

Rosa Parks was protesting for racial equality. Kaepernick is protesting for...well, nothing. Huge difference!

My earlier question may have been overlooked. What opportunities are minorities (specifically black, since that is the topic of discussion) lacking?

The comparison was to Smith and Carlos at the Olympics.

I would of valued the protest higher if it came right at the height of his fame after the super bowl loss. Hes now more famous for the protest than for anything he has done on the field.

Jim Brown is a famous proponent for civil rights etc and he was equally famous for the work he did on the field.

They dont get to be president even if they are half african american...oh woops that changed. You would think if the President of the United States was half african american during the time of attempting to create jim crow laws or other times that impacted minorities..that holding the position of POTUS could impact that more than whatever was done in our history

Their actions are worse than hers in my eyes.

You are on the world's stage at different moments in your life if you are lucky to be on it at all. Why wouldn't black athletes take a stand against social inequality while on the biggest stage available to them? Saying you have a problem with when and where is a little shortsighted. These were men protesting at the height of the civil rights era. African Americans had only just had their rights affirmed with the civil rights act and the government was still injecting African Americans with syphilis just to see what happened. How could they not take that moment to express themselves? And how could you, a person exempt from anything they experienced, possibly have a perspective on when and where they should express themselves?

I understand that, but not why.

Today, folks, today! Why are we discussing events from decades ago? What opportunities are minorities (specifically black, since that is the topic of discussion) lacking today?

Did you see the video of Philando Castille? What did he do to deserve to die other than being black in America? He had been stopped 52 times by police in his area. 47 violations were dismissed because they had no merit. But he had the same opportunities as you, right?

I probably saw the same thing you saw - a much edited video of Philando Castille that showed NOTHING about what lead up to the shooting. I'll reserve my comment on that until ALL the facts are in.

You really didn't answer my question though. What opportunities are minorities lacking today?

Well the point I was demonstrating was that African Americans lack the opportunity to live their lives unimpeded by people violating their civil rights and taking their lives for no reason.

Also that video was not edited. It was streamed live as it happened.

The only things I can think of as of today are having a prime time show on MSNBC and being nominated for an Oscar :D.

One more stat for you since you think life gives everyone in this country a fair shake. Are you familiar with the Innocence Project? If not please read up on it. They have worked tirelessly to exonerate 344 people who were serving sentences for crimes they did not commit. Of those 344 people, 212 of them were African Americans. The system does not treat everyone the same, nor does life. You can't deny what exists.

Some more perspective for you. This was the government's finding on how the police department in Baltimore does business:

In Baltimore, a city that is 63 percent black, the Justice Department found that 91 percent of those arrested on discretionary offenses like “failure to obey” or “trespassing” were African-American. Blacks make up 60 percent of Baltimore’s drivers but account for 82 percent of traffic stops. Of the 410 pedestrians who were stopped at least 10 times in the five and a half years of data reviewed, 95 percent were black.

Yeah, I think I get it now. You're looking for equal OUTCOME, not equal application. No allotment for police force allocation, time of day for stops, or even for possible offenses. Don't matter whether or not the vehicles stopped had expired plates, taillights out, etc. You just want to see people arrested in proportion to their population, regardless of offense. I get it.

Regarding traffic stops. A little anecdotal discovery. A number of years ago there was some hub-bub around blacks being stopped disproportionately for speeding violations in North Carolina. Something like 3x the amount than whites (not remembering the exact numbers). Based on my amount of driving, I thought that odd. So on my numerous trips between the triangle and Charlotte I did my own little experiment. Cruising at 5 MPH over the speed limit, I counted the number of times I was passed by whites vs blacks. Ended up that I was passed by blacks 2-3x MORE than the disparity they were complaining about. (unscientifically, it seemed like an even faster speed as well). So the conclusion could be promoted that they were being stopped LESS FREQUENTLY than they should have been.

But you are correct in that you can't deny WHAT exists. But WHY it exists might not be the blatant racism all the little Sharptons who cry wolf would always like you to believe either. Is there racism? Yep. Is it the case most of the time? Probably not.

Ok so 95 out of every 100 people stopped 10 times or more for walking around are black but you don't see a disparity between how people of different races are treated by a police force. If you aren't convinced after reading a stat like that nothing will convince you. For you to deny that the world treats you differently based on the color of your skin is absurd.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging the failures of your country and society at large. In fact, it is always a good thing to acknowledge these things because giving reality legitimacy equates to change. I want the world to treat people equally too, but that world is not the world we live in.

In the end i do hope the problem with police is worked with.

Most of the victims of violent crime in the inner cities are black (or at least disproportionately, correct me if i am wrong) and i want to ensure that black victims lives matter. We want to ensure the right type of police are there to help protect them and to serve.

Black victims lives matter too.

OK, you don't want to answer my question, you want to discuss statistics instead. OK, I'll play along. Blacks make up 13% of the American population, yet they are responsible for over half of America's violent crime.

From 1980 to 2008, blacks accounted for 52.5% of of homicide offenders (whites 45.3% and "other" 2.2%. - U.S. Department of Justice - Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Shouldn't the crime rate be somewhat proportionate to the population? Why isn't it?

Obviously you didn't read anything I posted. I said I posted those figures to demonstrate that African Americans lack the opportunity to live their lives unimpeded by a police system that routinely targets them based on their race. Since that means nothing to you, we can't really have a discussion on the topic.

No, I did read it and I fully understand it. You say they are being racially profiled, right?

No, I'm saying the system is geared toward arresting them, as evidenced by the government's own finding. So you asked people to suggest what opportunities African Americans lack that white Americans have. I've demonstrated very clearly that they lack the ability to live their lives without being harassed by a police system that clearly targets them because they are African American. That is a big difference between your life and the life of an African American, isn't it?

And, as also evidenced by the government's own finding, the majority of the violent crimes are committed by blacks. That's not racist, it's a fact. Are facts racist? You said the police system targets them because they're black. Gee, there's a shocker! They're actually targeting the ones committing the majority of the crimes :eek:

If you're the police, and crime is a problem in your neighborhood, who are you going to target? The ones that match the description or the ones that don't? Let me word it another way. If street racing is a problem in your neighborhood and it is putting children at risk, should the police be targeting the soccer moms in minivans, or should they look closer at the sports cars? :rolleyes:

Wow is all I can say. I already posted the Innocence Project data for a reason. That reason is to demonstrate that who people say committed a crime and who actually committed a crime are often at odds, but there is one thing they have in common: it must have been the black guy.

And I didn't address at the time it because it's a ridiculous statistic. But I'll play your game. There are nearly 1 million black males in prisons in this country. And you're saying that 212 of them are serving time for a crime they didn't commit? :eek:

It's unfortunate yes, but I think a .000212 error rate is probably a lot better than most countries. Do you do your job with a .000212 error rate?

Any more ridiculous stats?

...
 

since we're at or near triple-digit posts in this thread, I'm thinkin' we're long-overdue for a memorabilia contribution to this discussion.

NOT trying to derail a discussion that's been reasonably amicable, and while I personally value everyone's perspective/opinion, like they say, "opinions are like a$$holes and..." - I've got one (an opinion AND an a$$hole) and I've been one (an a$$hole) more times I care to admit to or even to remember, but...

time to inject some sports (imagery) into the discussion, as NOT everything - or anyone/everyone - is right or wrong at ALL times...in "black and white" terms, as there's always exceptions on both sides.

JMO...enjoy a few vintage images (not mine - swiped from Google images):

DS