Live Poll: BLM: Black Lives Matter

One very good black winner is Hunter in Crimson Tide:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112740/
Another winner (Jesse Owens):
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3499096/
Another black hero:
Jackie Robinson with #42 in 42:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3499096/

Thanks for your input.

I've made some changes to the list.

Y'all may or may not be aware that Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Larry Elder, Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, Anthony Brian Logan, Brandon Tatum, Candace Owens, the Hodge twins, among many others of various descents (including and beyond the designation "Black" or "African") and slightly diverging viewpoints, would probably be able to debunk, to a degree, the sentiment but forth by people who claim, in the 21st century, that Americans of Caucasian descent have far less to worry about from committers of homicide (be it in self defense, cold-blooded murder or extrajudicial, be it committed by civil servants, military officers or ordinary civilians) than do Americans of Black descent.

So many control advocates, intersectionality theorists, cancel cults, "progressives", identity political pundits, social democrats, "underclass" fascists and Marxist-sympathizing capitalists ignore all the progress that the United States and all the States that comprise so have made since 1776, along with the triumph over the former empires of England, France, Spain and Portugal, all guilty (not necessarily equally) with the United States, Quebec, Mexico and Brazil, of carving out powerful nations at the expense of the inhabitants of the Americas who happened to arrive long before 1492 and who often had many of the same faults as the folks who arrived later. They have all made progress. If anybody should be particularly upset, it would be constitutionalists, the valuers of the tenth amendment, as progress has not always been toward the appreciation of freedom over safety, and individual identity over community identity, and private property over public property, and holding tax-paid employees of the public trust to a much higher standard than common folk.

xD My methods aren't PC, either!

Thank you for apologizing, and I do understand where you come from.  :)

If it would ever somehow be scientifically proved that human-applied constriction of cartoid artery, jugular vein, trachea, lung or heart was not the cause of death, then characterizing the death as a "killing" could be interpreted as inflammatory. Right now, there is a minor circulating fuss as to whether or not intoxication via fentanyl was the primary or sole contributing factor in death.

This is a forum about movies. I'm tired of witnessing poll taking advantage of actuality/tragedy for the sake of getting votes and ultimately the poll maker badge.

This is such an outrageous and stupid motivation because let be honest, this poll is not sensitive. A man is dead!!! and we are taking advantage of his death and the whole political state to make a poll and to get votes. It is immoral. Honestly, I can't endorse this, it is a matter of the overall impression that we are gonna get as Poll Maker. 

Imagine that this poll goes live:

1) Voters come on IMDb to get entertainment details about actors movies etc. If they want to learn about politics, they can go to Fox News, CNN, BBC, CBC, NBC, etc. Diversity is not a problem. This is not a place where you can post any poll, it reserved for polls about the entertainment industry. 

We should stay politically neutral in our poll suggestions!!!

2)  I have made 43 polls in more than a year now. Our names are connected to our poll, so our names are connected to the IMDb Poll Section. Would you want your movie poll to be displayed below a poll sympathizing with Nazi Germany??!!

I was exaggerating below. But I'm sure that you get the picture. I don't want my entertainment polls to be on the same page as political polls.

Well, I don't think BONAFIDE had those intentions, and quite frankly, as I said above, it is not our choice.
What someone wants to suggest is their business.  We can disagree.

My biggest problem here is not the poll sugg itself, but the spewing of comments, on both sides of the issue.  As on my other forum, the best thing to do is calm down.
There is no need for all this frustration.  I mean, I get the controversy, but it's not helping anything.

I do agree with what you say though, cinephile.

That wasn't quite my point.  :)
I have nothing against people saying what they think (I do it ALL the time), it's just the anger that doesn't help anything.  
You, Selina, made a polite, short, respectful comment.  
It's the rants that I don't get.
BONAFIDE obviously meant no harm in this suggestion, and there is no need for people to get quite so up in arms about it, whether it's right or wrong.

I know, Ed.  I'm not discrediting what you feel.  I have strong opinions, too, and I am hurt when others do not see my side, which I feel is right.
I guess I'm just saying, look at where this has gotten us?  
A warning to BONAFIDE that it may not quite be in the best taste is fine.
So is stating your side of it.
But the numerous comments complaining about it is just childish.

<3 I love you people and I wish you all the best in this.  I just don't want this to get out of hand and turn us comrades against each other.  :)

Ed... you're being sarcastic, right?  :0

I would like to know: why did I cross the line?

I suppose I commented one too many times, sorry.
Selina...
I certainly hope we're still good...
:)

Oh, I see... I am very sorry.  I can see how that can be hurtful.
I did not realize that that was why; I thought it was just because I was kind of disagreeing...
Again, I am sorry.  :(  I wasn't actually addressing you; I meant any social media thread ever.  On that ever-mysterious other forum I'm on, the amount of people who can't disagree without cussing each other out is through the roof... I'm shell shocked.  xD
I'm sorry that hurt you, and I hope you can forgive me.  We all make mistakes.
I also apologize for my other comment.  I was under the impression that you were cutting me off just because I spoke up; I see now that that is not the case.

I have had numerous experiences, both online and in real life, where friends have turned their back on me for no good reason.  I'm always on alert for that.  I should've known that you are not like that.

Can you ever forgive me?

It says Black Lives Matter, because it's racism that happens. I didn't hear for white men got shot (by police) on the tv for the last ten years. It seems symptomatic that unarmed black people got shot by police in USA. So why call it "All Life Matters"? That fails the thematic. It's not opposing racism to protect that group of people by changing the game.

They fight for injustice. The word is a little complicated, but shows up the urgency of the issue. They use dramatic words to be effective. But fight doesn't mean they want to fight you. They fight to feel save at last. When I look at documentary feature at tv that report what happens, I could cry. Black parrents need to teach their children to first state that they are unarmed, when police faces them. Those parents got the fear their kids could get shot, If they do not do that.

Just in mind: Please turn arround the situation. Black men conquerred the new land and settle. Then they abduct thousends and thousends of Europen whitees to work for them. They got whipped, if they don't do right. And get killed whenever a black man has enough of them. 150 years later the white people have given their best to be slave no more, but get scorned, bothered and in worst case shot by a black sheriff  while just driving their car. How do you feel, when you read this? I got shivers down my spine.

I still say that I don't have to stipulate what you gotta do overseas. I know that America saved us from the Reign of the Hitler regime. I'm grateful for that. But I nearly cry when I see your country burn. On the other hand -  would you notice the irregularities, if there weren't handyvideos as a proof and the peoples anger? I don't think so. It's not unfounded.

Selina: No, I don't think so. But I think there are different causes why white or black men got shot. I just count unarmed. Another question: When was the last time, a black person did a massmurder or amok run? I can't remember.

You are right when you tell me, that I'm not completely informed. I don't claim validity. I just told what I perceive in overseas. I guess many other people in Europe perceive the same or simmilar.

Breu, many yellow vest demonstrators lost their hands or eyes or worse during the marches in France... they got a taste of police brutality and use of grenades and most of the victims were white.... no one really protested or seemed to care outside France.

Hi, Breumaster. You wrote, "Black parents need to teach their children to first state that they are unarmed, when police faces them. Those parents got the fear their kids could get shot, If they do not do that." Why do you believe this?! Don't you know that plenty of Americans of Black descent are never taught this yet have also never been injured at all while encountering law enforcement officers?! Unfortunately reliable statistics are not available on the matter. Everybody is just kind of stuck evaluating the anecdotes of notable people, who vary in age and location of residence. Thus much of the beliefs we are left to work with are bred of suspicions, educated guesses or outright myths. Please trust me when I tell you that the experiences of inhabitants of the United Stats vary with location and time period. The situation is nowhere nearly as violent, in quality or quantity, as it had been in times past. The mainstream media outlets tend to misrepresent the likelihood of various kinds of corruptions, and they most frequently completely ignore the corruption of the media sources themselves including universities.

Hi, Breumaster. You wrote, "Black parents need to teach their children to first state that they are unarmed, when police faces them. Those parents got the fear their kids could get shot, If they do not do that." Why do you believe this?! Don't you know that plenty of Americans of Black descent are never taught this yet have also never been injured at all while encountering law enforcement officers?! Unfortunately reliable statistics are not available on the matter. Everybody is just kind of stuck evaluating the anecdotes of notable people, who vary in age and location of residence. Thus much of the beliefs we are left to work with are bred of suspicions, educated guesses or outright myths. Please trust me when I tell you that the experiences of inhabitants of the United Stats vary with location and time period. The situation is nowhere nearly as violent, in quality or quantity, as it had been in times past. The mainstream media outlets tend to misrepresent the likelihood of various kinds of corruptions, and they most frequently completely ignore the corruption of the media sources themselves including universities.

Well, just put in this search line in yt:
Black parents teach their children police
One example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coryt8IZ-DE

This might not be the case in some parts of the USA, but in some other states it doesn't look easy to live as a black male/woman/*
Not to talk about the black LGBT+ community. The got it even harder to cope with the system.

But in Germany we have our own problems. We got similar, but other problems. There were 69 threatening mails sent to leftwing and far leftwing politicians by far right criminals, using police computers to gather the adresses of the politicians. So parts of the police are involved into these hate crimes. Now they have to comb the police for far right police man/men to end it.

The mails were signed with NSU2.0, which means National Social Underground 2.0
The last few years, people from the NSU (1.0) were torn into a court of law, with only one convict, Beate Tschäpe. But i fear the network reaches wider than our state Germany will admit.

The idea that the advice conveyance being undergone in Cut's video "Black Parents Explain How to Deal with the Police" be a requirement for a non-injurious encounter with 21st century American law enforcement personnel is disingenuous propaganda. (The comments section for the video is full of disingenuous rhetoric.) There are children of all colors whose parents will be concerned about the possible dangers of interacting with state actors who believe somebody is guilty of an offense, and those parents teach their children the law, including the Constitution of the United States. The media outlet that Cut is may possibly not have a record of honesty and very likely is incentivized by political donors to not present any sincerely-held beliefs. I should look into it.

Of the media, the same problem exists with Cable News Network (CNN), Microsoft Network National Broadcast Channel (MSNBC), Bloomberg News, The Young Turks (TYT), Democracy Now!, Vox, The Huffington Post (HuffPo), The New York Times (NYT) and The Washington Post (WaPo), and not only them (the mainstream "drive-by media") but also Fox News Channel (FNC) and even perhaps One America News Network (OAN), with political biases opposite of the aforementioned social democrat media outlet bloc. (There are many others as well of course.) Every last one of them tells half truths, and sometimes they outright commit defamation. (You've heard of the way they mistreated one Nick Sandmann, right?) Furthermore, YouTube's search algorithm is biased in favor of CNN above all, as far as "news" be concerned. The only time a Fox News video ever appears at the top of any search results is when there is a newsworthy topic not being covered by CNN, MSNBC, Bloomberg et cetera. Conversely, Fox News appears, with rare exceptions, to make it a point not to cover stories of police brutality, police corruption, police perjury or police dereliction of duty. Many Fox News viewers could possibly be left under the impression that poorly-mitigated instances of such things simply do not exist anymore.

Newsy has a so-called chart on the media matter:

But invariably even Newsy would also fail to be impartial. Hell, even Public Broadcast Station (PBS)'s NewsHour, on par with Reuters, is not completely impartial, but at least they are always respectful and cannot afford to pay the consequences for defamation.

In the United States, if law enforcement personnel injure an innocent person (especially a child) to the point of death, then somebody or some agency on the state actor side of the equation will get into deep trouble, provided (but not necessarily provided) that the root cause of interaction was not a criminal behavior on the part of somebody other than law enforcement personnel, and of course provided that no kind of successful coverup is employed by criminals that may possibly inhabit the office of trust that is law enforcement or higher, or adjacent.

By the way, in the parts of the United States where life is very hard for people of Black descent, life is also very hard for people of other descents as well. Believe it or not, there are places where life is indeed harder for poor people of Caucasian descent than poor people of other descents. Life will probably be hard for anybody who lives in a civic district in which the majority of the inhabitants feels that person doesn't belong. Nobody has precisely figured out why any disparities exist in demographic statistics. Some will attribute it to nature. Some will attribute it to nurture. Whereas many will write it off as long-lived systemic racism or at the very least the very long jet lag after the time that many racist laws became inoperative. There is always a big fuss as to which political party's ideas, methodologies and policies lengthen the jet lag. A lot of Americans believe that neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party has a viable plan to mitigate the valid complaints about any civic topic.

Back to Cut's video on the police encounter advice matter. One major problem with it is that it does not bother to address why law enforcement personnel might believe that a "person of color" has committed a crime. For one, innocent people of all colors have been, are and will be sometimes mistaken for a known criminal for fits the innocent person's description. That's actually a major problem, even if it doesn't happen most of the time. Outside of that scenario, why would anybody expect for law enforcement agencies to not go fishing for incriminating evidence when conversing with a civil infraction committer who fits an authentic criminal profile? Disincentivizing that may be a matter of law, uh, tax law.

I've stopped adding action-comedies since ElMo pointed out that almost all these films have a happy ending.

Thanks for your suggestion, though. I found and added Ray (2004) instead. :)

Btw, I'm only adding films with 100k votes. I forgot to mention it before 'cause of stress.