Why the Equal Right To Vote Is So Important

[Esdraelon]

being required to know and recite the names of the county judges in every location in the state as shown in the film being, paying poll taxes, etc. with every one of these numerous, artificial barriers to registering to vote that were imposed on black people but not on the whites, for the explicit purpose of preventing them from being able to exercise their right to vote.

I was born and raised in south Alabama. Grew up during the desegregation era. Came of age in the late 70s and while I'm reasonably sure this will be a wasted effort... your references to Selma just show how little you actually understand the south of today. If it makes you feel self-righteous to spread that propaganda, by all means, enjoy yourself. The only hoop a citizen in my state has to jump through is to provide a government-issued photo ID to register to vote. And to produce it on election day. Our state makes photo ID available to all for free if they don't drive.

That's ALL CITIZENS. If you tried convincing the average black person here that their voting rights were being denied or restricted they'd mostly laugh in your face. Literacy tests? Poll taxes? You are still stuck in the early 60s.
I'll say this again because it really IS that important. HR1 gives the Feds ultimate control over how states are allowed to vote. The Constitution CLEARLY left that power to state legislatures. The Democrat party is attempting to create a system where there can be NO RELIABLE VERIFICATION of who is receiving and returning ballots. NO signature, NO ID required, NO request for a ballot. MILLIONS of ballots are flooded through the mail. I really don't give a damn what the Left thinks of me, my state, or my ideology.

If HR1 passes by virtue of the absence of a filibuster and it passes on a razor-thin margin you and those who think as you will soon find you've made a serious mistake in judgment about 75+ million Americans.
There will be NO way to know if only citizens are voting. NO way to know if the ballot was returned by an American at all. If you actually think that plan will be swallowed and not resisted, you are deluding yourself. The only peaceful way forward at that point will be a secessionist movement. Your party will never put a boot on the necks of half of America. Not gonna happen unless they are willing to send troops into half the states and shed BLOOD. If that happens, then you and those you love deserve the chains you'll eventually wear from that government you felt it was okay to empower against your neighbors just because they disagreed with you.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Blacks are free to emigrate, as they all have been since 1865.

I don't mean this in a racist or hateful way at all. I am being quite rational and very level headed. But I wish they all would. The country would be so much nicer if they left america. Our society would improve quite a bit overall.

Now, the ones that have a job, pay their bills, have common decency and manners for others, mind their own business, and conform to american society are welcome to stay. All the others should just leave.

Why don't you pack up, leave your home, and start over in a different country where you are the foreigner?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Blacks are free to emigrate, as they all have been since 1865.

I don't mean this in a racist or hateful way at all. I am being quite rational and very level headed. But I wish they all would. The country would be so much nicer if they left america. Our society would improve quite a bit overall.

Now, the ones that have a job, pay their bills, have common decency and manners for others, mind their own business, and conform to american society are welcome to stay. All the others should just leave.

Why don't you pack up, leave your home, and start over in a different country where you are the foreigner?

It's simple right?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Senate Republicans just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote.

How did you come to that stupid conclusion?

It was all over the national news last evening, specifically that the Senate Republicans blocked the bill.

Just like the good bad ole days.

You mean the fake news. Don't drink their grape kool-aid.

Do you think the information in the World Book or Britannica encyclopedias is false? How about what's in the hardback dictionaries?

How do you discern fact from fiction?

 

[SmokeALib]

I'm not sure I get this thread. I see black people voting all the time.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

There are not different rules or standards for people to vote today we don’t have one set for whites one for blacks one for Hispanics one for Asians and one for women. One group is not being asked to do something that others are not.

What makes you think this?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I'm not sure I get this thread. I see black people voting all the time.

Sometimes twice

 

[Turtlesoup]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Never occured to you that the movie might be just manipulation? A deception to emotional manipulate you. Most of the race ho accounts of racism are actually in reality BULLSHIT spun to manipulate useful idiots.

 

[Lastamender]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Was that a post or a bad case of diarrhea? What a bunch of crap.

 

[Mac-7]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Who doesn’t have the right to vote already?

They never seem to be able to really answer that question. They also never explain why it's necessary to remove ALL VERIFICATION of who is voting and why millions of ballots should be mailed out without being requested. Only a cheater would demand such things. If they manage to turn HR1 into law then America will never be safe from tyranny again. If there was ever a good reason for a Civil War redux, HR1 is IT.

Well you can watch the movie 'Selma' which begins with an assertion that black people already have the right to vote (hey, didn't I just hear that somewhere?!?), that is shortly after the Klan bombed a black church and killed 4 black little girls there. There is also a scene where a black woman is at the courthouse attempting to register to vote. The clerk there threatens her livelihood, she is questioned and required to recite the preamble to the Constitution and when it became obvious that she was able to recite it correctly, the clerk required her to name all of the county judges in the state, I believe he stated there were 87 of them. She didn't even attempt that feat so her application to register to vote was soundedly stamped "DENIED" by the clerk.

Because i know the likelihood of any of you watching a movie such as 'Selma' simply to seek knowledge is practically nil, I'll see if an analogy will do.

The Bill of Rights, being the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution enumerates certain rights that "the people" of the United States have that the government shall not violate. I'll use the 2nd amendment as an example for the analogy with reference to the 15th and the 19th amendments.

Most people know and understand what the 2nd stipulates even if they don't agree on its interpretation. The 2nd prohibits the government from infringing upon the rights of the people to keep and bear arms. The 15th and 19th amendment respectively when passed prohibits the government as well as the states from denying the voting rights of black people in 1870 and then women in 1920.

There are always people who will not comply with laws they don't agree with.

So I'll use the 2nd amendment to try to make my point. Under the U.S. Constitution the government is not allowed to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms, but they do so anyway only they craft it as a "lawful infringement", but it is an infringement nonetheless. How much they infringe depends on were you're standing. If you happen to be a resident of the state of California, which is what they refer to as a "may issue" state, your right to bear arms is greatly infringed in the sense that unless you have a California issued concealed carry permit, you cannot be in possession of a firearm anywhere outside of your home. If you need to transport your weapon from one location to another you must ensure the following:

1. If it's a semi-auto, the magazine must be removed from the weapon
2. Any rounds in the chamber must be ejected
3. The magazine may or may not have to be unloaded as well (it's been a long time)
4. The magazine may not hold more than 10 rounds
5. The weapon may then be transported in a locked box
6. The ammo has to be kept separate from the lockbox that contains the weapon (they can't be in the same lockbox)
7. Either the ammo or the weapon has to be transported in the non-passenger section of the vehicle - so if you have the lockbox in the front seat, the ammo has to be in a separate contained locked in the trunk.
8. Adjust accordingly for a revolver

So with the exception of the 10 round max, all of the above hassle can be avoided if one has a concealed carry permit however California being a "may issue" state doesn't have to issue a license to anyone it doesn't want to, it allows the county sheriff to issue them at their discretion. If they don't want you to have a permit, no reason is a good enough reason for them to issue while certain other people can just apparently want one so that they can carry for protection and that is sufficient.

So I hope by this point you all are getting what I'm driving act. While the 2nd amendment protects my right to keep and bear arms if I'm in California it's for all intents and purposes completely infringed upon when it comes to bearing a weapon. I clearly still have the right, under the 2nd Amendment, however that right cannot be fully exercised in the state of California.

In the state of New Jersey or Maryland, it's non-existent In Florida it exists with a concealed carry permit with some restrictions while n Washington state, which is an open carry state, it exists most fully of all compared to the other listed states but not as fully as it does in the states of Alaska and Vermont where a concealed carry permit is not required at all in order to bear arms.

So let's compare this to voting rights. The state of California with it's sheriff's ability to arbitrarily and capriciously issue carry permits to whomever they so chose is no different than what black people have encountered when they attempt to register to vote most particularly in the south and were/are "required" to jump through a series of equally arbitrary and capricious hoops, such as reciting texts from legal tomes (literacy tests), being required to know and recite the names of the county judges in every location in the state as shown in the film being, paying poll taxes, etc. with every one of these numerous, artificial barriers to registering to vote that were imposed on black people but not on the whites, for the explicit purpose of preventing them from being able to exercise their right to vote.

White voters are subject to the same laws that you complain about for black people

There is no racial discrimination for voting in any state

You just want to be coddled and given special privilage

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Never occured to you that the movie might be just manipulation? A deception to emotional manipulate you. Most of the race ho accounts of racism are actually in reality BULLSHIT spun to manipulate useful idiots.

I still have no idea how you all are able to navigate life always being fearful that someone is lying to you and not being able to discern reality from make believe.

The movie is a depiction of factual historical events and it is to those events that I was referring
Bloody Sunday - Edmund Pettus Bridge
Four LIttle Girls - The Birmingham Church Bombings
The Voting Rights Act of 1965

During the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, voting rights activists in the South were subjected to various forms of mistreatment and violence. One event that outraged many Americans occurred on March 7, 1965, when peaceful participants in a Selma to Montgomery march for voting rights were met by Alabama state troopers who attacked them with nightsticks, tear gas and whips after they refused to turn back.​

​

Some protesters were severely beaten and bloodied, and others ran for their lives. The incident was captured on national television.​

​

In the wake of the shocking incident, Johnson called for comprehensive voting rights legislation. In a speech to a joint session of Congress on March 15, 1965, the president outlined the devious ways in which election officials denied African American citizens the vote.​

​

Literacy Tests ​

Black people attempting to vote often were told by election officials that they had gotten the date, time or polling place wrong, that they possessed insufficient literacy skills or that they had filled out an application incorrectly. Black people, whose population suffered a high rate of illiteracy due to centuries of oppression and poverty, often would be forced to take literacy tests, which they sometimes failed.​

​

Johnson also told Congress that voting officials, primarily in Southern states, had been known to force Black voters to “recite the entire Constitution or explain the most complex provisions of state laws,” a task most white voters would have been hard-pressed to accomplish. In some cases, even Black people with college degrees were turned away from the polls.​

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Who doesn’t have the right to vote already?

They never seem to be able to really answer that question. They also never explain why it's necessary to remove ALL VERIFICATION of who is voting and why millions of ballots should be mailed out without being requested. Only a cheater would demand such things. If they manage to turn HR1 into law then America will never be safe from tyranny again. If there was ever a good reason for a Civil War redux, HR1 is IT.

Well you can watch the movie 'Selma' which begins with an assertion that black people already have the right to vote (hey, didn't I just hear that somewhere?!?), that is shortly after the Klan bombed a black church and killed 4 black little girls there. There is also a scene where a black woman is at the courthouse attempting to register to vote. The clerk there threatens her livelihood, she is questioned and required to recite the preamble to the Constitution and when it became obvious that she was able to recite it correctly, the clerk required her to name all of the county judges in the state, I believe he stated there were 87 of them. She didn't even attempt that feat so her application to register to vote was soundedly stamped "DENIED" by the clerk.

Because i know the likelihood of any of you watching a movie such as 'Selma' simply to seek knowledge is practically nil, I'll see if an analogy will do.

The Bill of Rights, being the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution enumerates certain rights that "the people" of the United States have that the government shall not violate. I'll use the 2nd amendment as an example for the analogy with reference to the 15th and the 19th amendments.

Most people know and understand what the 2nd stipulates even if they don't agree on its interpretation. The 2nd prohibits the government from infringing upon the rights of the people to keep and bear arms. The 15th and 19th amendment respectively when passed prohibits the government as well as the states from denying the voting rights of black people in 1870 and then women in 1920.

There are always people who will not comply with laws they don't agree with.

So I'll use the 2nd amendment to try to make my point. Under the U.S. Constitution the government is not allowed to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms, but they do so anyway only they craft it as a "lawful infringement", but it is an infringement nonetheless. How much they infringe depends on were you're standing. If you happen to be a resident of the state of California, which is what they refer to as a "may issue" state, your right to bear arms is greatly infringed in the sense that unless you have a California issued concealed carry permit, you cannot be in possession of a firearm anywhere outside of your home. If you need to transport your weapon from one location to another you must ensure the following:

1. If it's a semi-auto, the magazine must be removed from the weapon
2. Any rounds in the chamber must be ejected
3. The magazine may or may not have to be unloaded as well (it's been a long time)
4. The magazine may not hold more than 10 rounds
5. The weapon may then be transported in a locked box
6. The ammo has to be kept separate from the lockbox that contains the weapon (they can't be in the same lockbox)
7. Either the ammo or the weapon has to be transported in the non-passenger section of the vehicle - so if you have the lockbox in the front seat, the ammo has to be in a separate contained locked in the trunk.
8. Adjust accordingly for a revolver

So with the exception of the 10 round max, all of the above hassle can be avoided if one has a concealed carry permit however California being a "may issue" state doesn't have to issue a license to anyone it doesn't want to, it allows the county sheriff to issue them at their discretion. If they don't want you to have a permit, no reason is a good enough reason for them to issue while certain other people can just apparently want one so that they can carry for protection and that is sufficient.

So I hope by this point you all are getting what I'm driving act. While the 2nd amendment protects my right to keep and bear arms if I'm in California it's for all intents and purposes completely infringed upon when it comes to bearing a weapon. I clearly still have the right, under the 2nd Amendment, however that right cannot be fully exercised in the state of California.

In the state of New Jersey or Maryland, it's non-existent In Florida it exists with a concealed carry permit with some restrictions while n Washington state, which is an open carry state, it exists most fully of all compared to the other listed states but not as fully as it does in the states of Alaska and Vermont where a concealed carry permit is not required at all in order to bear arms.

So let's compare this to voting rights. The state of California with it's sheriff's ability to arbitrarily and capriciously issue carry permits to whomever they so chose is no different than what black people have encountered when they attempt to register to vote most particularly in the south and were/are "required" to jump through a series of equally arbitrary and capricious hoops, such as reciting texts from legal tomes (literacy tests), being required to know and recite the names of the county judges in every location in the state as shown in the film being, paying poll taxes, etc. with every one of these numerous, artificial barriers to registering to vote that were imposed on black people but not on the whites, for the explicit purpose of preventing them from being able to exercise their right to vote.

White voters are subject to the same laws that you complain about for black people

There is no racial discrimination for voting in any state

You just want to be coddled and given special privilage

Do you understand that there are people in this world who believe that just because something hasn't happened to them means, that it doesn't happen to other people as well OR if it does, they must have done something [bad] to have caused the negative circumstances.

That's what you all sound like every single time you deny historical facts. I understand you don't want to believe it, you certainly won't ever seek out information that is contrary to your beliefs even when you've already acknowledged that your beliefs are biased and in the case of one member here, that what he believes is not based on anything factual but it's still his opinion .

 

[Mac-7]

That's what you all sound like every single time you deny historical facts.

No one denies your historical facts

If I owned slaves 150 years ago or rode with the KKK black people of that eta would have a legitimate reason to hate me

But I didnt

In fact between the 2 of us I am the only one with a reason to regret slavery

Because it was a blessing for you and horrible luck for me

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

That's what you all sound like every single time you deny historical facts.

No one denies your historical facts

If I owned slaves 150 years ago or rode with the KKK black people of that eta would have a legitimate reason to hate me

But I didnt

In fact between the 2 of us I am the only one with a reason to regret slavery

Because it was a blessing for you and horrible luck for me

I don't hate you, why would you even think that I do?

 

[blackhawk]

There are not different rules or standards for people to vote today we don’t have one set for whites one for blacks one for Hispanics one for Asians and one for women. One group is not being asked to do something that others are not.

What makes you think this?

Common sense and I can see and read in the last Presidential election when I voted no one was asked to anything others weren't not being asked to do.

 

[Dragonlady]

Blacks are free to emigrate, as they all have been since 1865.

No other country would allow them to burn, loot, murder, and riot in the name of protesting.

That free TV upgrade is mighty appealing.

I don't see racial minorities in other first world countries protesting the treatment at the hands of police. Or because they are being prevent from voting.


The USA is the only country in the world where black people don't have an unfettered right to vote, or where police are allowed to harass, intimidate or murder minorities with impunity.

The USA is the only first world country the world which is passing laws to make it more difficult for citizens to vote. That limits what kind of government issued ID is acceptable. Every other first world country is trying to get more people out to vote. In Australia, voting is mandated. You can be fined if you DON'T vote.

Furthermore, the burning and the looting happens everywhere - soccer hooliganism in Great Britain and Europe, hockey hooliganism in Canada (it's a tradition, win or lose). Shit happens.






In every other country in the world, black people are equal citizens under the law, with the full and unfettered right to vote, attend all public schools, and to move freely without police harassment,

 

[Dragonlady]

That's what you all sound like every single time you deny historical facts.

No one denies your historical facts

If I owned slaves 150 years ago or rode with the KKK black people of that eta would have a legitimate reason to hate me

But I didnt

In fact between the 2 of us I am the only one with a reason to regret slavery

Because it was a blessing for you and horrible luck for me

But the legal system that all of that happened under still exists, and you refuse to change it. In fact, you deny that there is any problem at all today, even as you're still benefitting from the inequity that was established hundreds of years ago.

And in denying the problem, or refusing to change the racist national systems, you ARE continuing the work of the slaver owners and the KKK.

 

[whitehall]

Why do they continue to argue this point? Do liberals suffer from latent bigotry to such an extent that they think a person's color limits their ability to to obtain something as basic as a photo I.D. in the 21st century? Do democrats really think that Black people need to be nurtured and cared for in the 21st century plantation? How long are Black people going to continue to tolerate this insulting racial pandering?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Blacks are free to emigrate, as they all have been since 1865.

As are you.

The difference being, HE isn't the one bitching and moaning about how much this country sucks.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I watched the Ava DuVernay movie 'Selma' Sunday night and while there were a lot of things shown in the movie that I was previously aware of, for some reason this movie really hit home when it comes to everything that black people have encountered in this country for NO reason at all, yet when it came to the right to vote, this particular triumph really sent the white supremacists into overdrive in their hatred and violence

There have always been a lot of subtle things going on that may not appear to be even noteworthy but my brain has been working overtime in the background, turning over & over this notion I picked up that one of the primary reasons for the over policing that occurs when it comes to black people (or you can just call it a "plus") is not just that it's a lawful venue for channeling their hatred and violence where they occasionally get to beat or kill a black person, but it additionally serves to reduce the number of black people who are eligible to vote by doing all they can to turn black Americans into felons thereby forfeiting their right to vote.

Since the Senate just killed a major voting rights bill which would have provided more protection to the rights of everyone to vote, this just seems timely:

https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf​

Black people have historically been targeted by intentionally discriminatory criminal laws. Racial disparities in the criminal justice system have deep roots in American history and penal policy. In the South, following Emancipation, black Americans were specific targets of unique forms of policing, sentencing, and confinement. Laws that capitalized on a loophole in the 13th Amendment that states citizens cannot be enslaved unless convicted of a crime intentionally targeted newly emancipated black people as a means of surveilling them and exploiting their labor. In 1865 and 1866, the former Confederate legislatures quickly enacted a new set of laws known as the Black Codes to force former slaves back into an exploitative labor system that resembled the plantation regime in all but name.8 Although these codes did recognize the new legal status of black Americans, in most states newly-freed people could not vote, serve on juries, or testify in court.9 Vagrancy laws at the center of the Black Codes meant that any black person who could not prove he or she worked for a white employer could be arrested.10 These “vagrants” most often entered a system of incarceration administered by private industry. Known as convict leasing, this system allowed for the virtual enslavement of people who had been convicted of a crime, even if those “crimes” were for things like “walking without a purpose” or “walking at night,” for which law enforcement officials in the South aggressively targeted black people.11​

​

Northern states also turned to the criminal justice system to exert social control over free black Americans. Policymakers in the North did not legally target black Americans as explicitly as did their southern counterparts, but disparate enforcement of various laws against “suspicious characters,” disorderly conduct, keeping and visiting disorderly houses, drunkenness, and violations of city ordinances made possible new forms of everyday surveillance and punishment in the lives of black people in the Northeast, Midwest, and West.12​

​

Though such criminal justice involvement was based on racist policies, the results were nevertheless used as evidence to link black people and crime. After Reconstruction, scholars, policymakers, and reformers analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration in the North as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of black Americans.13 Higher rates of imprisonment of black people in both the North and South deeply informed ongoing national debates about racial differences. The publication of the 1890 census and the prison statistics it included laid the groundwork for discussions about black Americans as a distinctly dangerous population.14 Coming 25 years after the Civil War and measuring the first generation removed from slavery, the census figures indicated that black people represented 12 percent of the nation’s population, but 30 percent of those incarcerated.15 The high arrest and incarceration rates of black Americans—though based on the racist policies discussed above—served to create what historian Khalil Gibran Muhammad has called a “statistical discourse” about black crime in the popular and political imagination, and this data deeply informed national discussions about racial differences that continue to this day.16 Indeed, a 2010 study found that white Americans overestimate the share of burglaries, illegal drug sales, and juvenile crime committed by black people by approximately 20 to 30 percent.17 (See “The myth of black-on-black crime,” on page 4.)​

​

These distorted notions of criminality continued to shape political discourse and policy decisions throughout the 20th century. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Crime” and began the process of expanding and modernizing American law enforcement.18 Johnson made his declaration despite stable or decreasing crime levels. Perceived increases in crime in urban centers at the time may be tied in part to changes in law enforcement practices and crime reporting as jurisdictions vied for newly-available federal funding for law enforcement under his initiatives.19 Nevertheless, a discourse about high crime in urban areas—areas largely populated by black people—had taken hold in the national consciousness.20​

​

Statistics linking black people and crime have historically overstated the problem of crime in black communities and produced a skewed depiction of American crime as a whole.21 The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report—one commonly cited source for U.S. crime statistics—fails to measure criminal justice outcomes beyond the point of arrest, and thus does not account for whether or not suspects are convicted.22 In the 1970s, black people had the highest rate of arrest for the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape—crimes that also had the lowest percentage of arrestees who were eventually convicted.23 Yet statistical data on crime based on arrest rates deepened federal policymakers’ racialized perception of the problem, informing crime control strategies that intensified law enforcement in low-income communities of color from the 1960s onwards.24 For instance, in trying to understand where and when certain crimes occur, researchers from the National Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice spoke only with law enforcement agencies and officers stationed in low-income black communities. This skewed the data—which intentionally ignored the disproportionate police presence in these neighborhoods as well as delinquency among middle class, white, young men—yet was used to craft strategies for the War on Crime, such as increased patrol and surveillance in low-income communities of color.25​

​

There is a lot more very good information on this site that further expands on how systemic racism is baked into American society however it's nice to see someone explain it so very well.

Who doesn’t have the right to vote already?

They never seem to be able to really answer that question. They also never explain why it's necessary to remove ALL VERIFICATION of who is voting and why millions of ballots should be mailed out without being requested. Only a cheater would demand such things. If they manage to turn HR1 into law then America will never be safe from tyranny again. If there was ever a good reason for a Civil War redux, HR1 is IT.

Well you can watch the movie 'Selma' which begins with an assertion that black people already have the right to vote (hey, didn't I just hear that somewhere?!?), that is shortly after the Klan bombed a black church and killed 4 black little girls there. There is also a scene where a black woman is at the courthouse attempting to register to vote. The clerk there threatens her livelihood, she is questioned and required to recite the preamble to the Constitution and when it became obvious that she was able to recite it correctly, the clerk required her to name all of the county judges in the state, I believe he stated there were 87 of them. She didn't even attempt that feat so her application to register to vote was soundedly stamped "DENIED" by the clerk.

Because i know the likelihood of any of you watching a movie such as 'Selma' simply to seek knowledge is practically nil, I'll see if an analogy will do.

The Bill of Rights, being the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution enumerates certain rights that "the people" of the United States have that the government shall not violate. I'll use the 2nd amendment as an example for the analogy with reference to the 15th and the 19th amendments.

Most people know and understand what the 2nd stipulates even if they don't agree on its interpretation. The 2nd prohibits the government from infringing upon the rights of the people to keep and bear arms. The 15th and 19th amendment respectively when passed prohibits the government as well as the states from denying the voting rights of black people in 1870 and then women in 1920.

There are always people who will not comply with laws they don't agree with.

So I'll use the 2nd amendment to try to make my point. Under the U.S. Constitution the government is not allowed to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms, but they do so anyway only they craft it as a "lawful infringement", but it is an infringement nonetheless. How much they infringe depends on were you're standing. If you happen to be a resident of the state of California, which is what they refer to as a "may issue" state, your right to bear arms is greatly infringed in the sense that unless you have a California issued concealed carry permit, you cannot be in possession of a firearm anywhere outside of your home. If you need to transport your weapon from one location to another you must ensure the following:

1. If it's a semi-auto, the magazine must be removed from the weapon
2. Any rounds in the chamber must be ejected
3. The magazine may or may not have to be unloaded as well (it's been a long time)
4. The magazine may not hold more than 10 rounds
5. The weapon may then be transported in a locked box
6. The ammo has to be kept separate from the lockbox that contains the weapon (they can't be in the same lockbox)
7. Either the ammo or the weapon has to be transported in the non-passenger section of the vehicle - so if you have the lockbox in the front seat, the ammo has to be in a separate contained locked in the trunk.
8. Adjust accordingly for a revolver

So with the exception of the 10 round max, all of the above hassle can be avoided if one has a concealed carry permit however California being a "may issue" state doesn't have to issue a license to anyone it doesn't want to, it allows the county sheriff to issue them at their discretion. If they don't want you to have a permit, no reason is a good enough reason for them to issue while certain other people can just apparently want one so that they can carry for protection and that is sufficient.

So I hope by this point you all are getting what I'm driving act. While the 2nd amendment protects my right to keep and bear arms if I'm in California it's for all intents and purposes completely infringed upon when it comes to bearing a weapon. I clearly still have the right, under the 2nd Amendment, however that right cannot be fully exercised in the state of California.

In the state of New Jersey or Maryland, it's non-existent In Florida it exists with a concealed carry permit with some restrictions while n Washington state, which is an open carry state, it exists most fully of all compared to the other listed states but not as fully as it does in the states of Alaska and Vermont where a concealed carry permit is not required at all in order to bear arms.

So let's compare this to voting rights. The state of California with it's sheriff's ability to arbitrarily and capriciously issue carry permits to whomever they so chose is no different than what black people have encountered when they attempt to register to vote most particularly in the south and were/are "required" to jump through a series of equally arbitrary and capricious hoops, such as reciting texts from legal tomes (literacy tests), being required to know and recite the names of the county judges in every location in the state as shown in the film being, paying poll taxes, etc. with every one of these numerous, artificial barriers to registering to vote that were imposed on black people but not on the whites, for the explicit purpose of preventing them from being able to exercise their right to vote.

Sweetheart, whenever you're done hormonally rhapsodizing about all the "feelz" you confused with knowledge from watching a fucking movie, do you think you could come back to Earth and tell us what year "Selma" was set in, and what year it is now?