If you teach one group identity politics and "us vs them", then by default you've taught the other group the same thing. Don't like it? Lead by example and stop doing it yourself.

The NRA's only true mission is to get as many dues-paying members as possible. i.e., to make money.

I'd guess their official response to this will be whatever will make them the most money. So probably, they'll just say it was a terrible tragedy and more people should take NRA training courses (which is essentially what Loesch did).

@2: you should say what you mean more clearly. it's very confusing.

who is this "one group"? be specific.
who taught them "identity politics"? be specific.
who is the "them"/"the other group"? be specific.
how does "the other group" practice "identity politics" in this case? be specific.

@1 As if it mattered at all where the victim was reaching. This black man could just as well have scratched his nose and become just as dead.

...uh, well, the officer didn't SAY he could scratch his nose....

@1: The cop asked him to get his wallet. That's what he was reaching for. He told the cop that's what he was doing. If he hadn't reached for his wallet, he would've gotten shot for not complying. He was going to get shot either way.

@2: snicks, are you just going to let @8 perfectly illuminate your self-pitying bigotry like that?

If the NRA can't take a stand on what is such obvious racism in the Castille case, then let's get rid of the 2nd Amendment. But for a few hunting rifles in rural locations, I can sure live without guns, and I know how to fire them - so I can speak with authority. After that, we can get rid of all the police guns, too, and live without cops with guns as they do in Europe. The citizens don't have guns, and neither do the police. Not bad, huh?

In the meantime, while I appreciate the obvious intelligence and professional ability of each participant in this otherwise televised charade, it's inescapably obvious that each was selected to participate on the basis of racist, sexist and ageist bigotries. The superior white blonde as the moderator, the slightly suspect brunette representing the NRA, and the beautiful African American for civil rights. C'mon, most of us don't look like we'd qualify for Cosmopolitan modeling spreads, and it's this element, as well, that contributes to my aversion to CNN along with the rest of these MSM media circuses - more prominent on FOX (though CNN is catching up rapidly). Half the conversation, here, I couldn't even hear, since we were supposed to watch these young beautiful women of these "various shades and associations" - not in terms of what each actually thinks and speaks - but, rather - talking at one another like they were ready to scramble around in a sexified mud-wrestling match.

My conclusion? Again, get rid of the 2nd Amendment. Thank you, CNN, for convincing me - by so thoroughly wasting my time with a lot of BS.

@9: Right. It was a clear cut case of Police Incompetence and Procedural Overreaction. The officer panicked in an effort to eliminate any risk to himself, likely because Philando Castille was black.

And that narrative still fits BLM's simple message: Stop Killing Us. White people act foolishly and walk away; why can't we?

It's a very good question.

I will reiterate: those of you who refuse to acknowledge and confront the racism in the Castille case are in deep doo-doo denialism!

So - again - let's get rid of the 2nd amendment.

@1/9- He followed the exact procedure people should follow when interacting with the police while carrying. The cop flipped out when a black man told him he was legally armed. It didn't used to be the cops killed people for reaching for their wallets, not even black people. The police have been getting trained to be more and more paranoid and violent, and racism makes that paranoia much more dangerous for black people. I know you'll excuse any behavior from a uniformed man because you're a born lick-spittle fascist, but I feel compelled to point out the truth to you nevertheless.

BTW @1 - you "think the cop over-reacted"???? Say whaa??? "Over-reacted?" The cop killed this man!! He took his life!! Oh, but it was a "black life," so it was "over-reacting?" Rather than homicide?

Wow, that we all have such a PASS on "over-reacting!"

Since when are citizens supposed to trained for police INADEQUACY vs what the police are supposed to be trained to do, themselves, since they have the legal authority and weaponry and protection of courts of law?

The policeman is supposed to tell HIM, mister, "Don't reach for your waist." "Put your hands here." "Reach, now, ONLY in this direction."

Who is responsible?

Well, since you can't attribute responsibility, correctly, let's get rid of ALL guns, starting with yours!

However much I may support the cause, walking the entirety of Fairfax and Arlington Boulevards in the middle of July is unimaginable.

@9 That's not correct. Right at 0:12 on your video, Yanez asked Castile for his license and proof of insurance, where the hell do you keep your license?

Then Castile handed him the insurance card. Castile presumably then was going to get his license out of his pocket, but first warned Yanez that he was carrying a gun. Yanez said "don't reach for it", "don't pull it out", and Castile said he wasn't. Because he was reaching for the license Yanez asked him for twenty seconds earlier.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/30/us/philand… which links to the PDF of the criminal complaint against Yanez.

And [citation needed] on @9 "the clear cut case of police brutality it was made out to be by the liberal media." I saw no media source present it as a cop who loved killing black people. The mainstream presentation was: he's a cop who is scared of black people (men) to an irrational degree, meaning any black person (man) he pulled over was at many times the risk of getting shot compared to a white person.

(What's more, I don't know if you knew this, but Yanez pulled Castile over on a pretext stop, good old broken taillight, which he stated was because he thought Castile looked like a suspect who had been described. Castile didn't look any more like the description than half of the black men on the road, meaning black men were at a far higher risk of getting pulled over and brought into a dangerous cop situation. Compared to white men on the road when a white-man description has gone out, you think Yanez is that bad at telling one white guy from another?)

@9 - You're spending so much time and effort trying to legitimize this murder. I know, you're hand waving "oh it's horrible" but you're excusing everything the officer did and blaming it all on the person who got killed. Why?

Nevermind, we all know why.

@4. The one group is represented by the key demographic of the stranger, i.e. Progressive liberals. Specifically, the idea of personal identity being linked to group rather than individual is taught at university and championed at the political level. I think that's obvious. Now it seems dangerous though, when the group that thinks they're being oppressed (and for the most part isn't) has guns and an "other" mentality. It ain't no fun when the rabbit got the gun!

@8. I know you think youre intelligent when you make that argument, but you sound like a parrot. Try again in your own words. With your own thoughts. Race does have an impact on people lives. You jump to the conclusion that I don't believe that because you are no better than a conditioned rat looking for "the other" to repeat your memorized talking points to in a virtue signal for your own benefit. It affects their lives and deaths and interactions with the police and the criminal justice system. How do we change that? By creating and enforcing victimhood, segregation,isolation, and lack of dialogue with marginilized groups based on historical oppression? That sounds stupid AF. (And don't say they encourage dialogue, that's just false)The strength of democracy and western civilization is the idea of the individual, not what oppressed group you identify with.

If you want to discuss the best practices for changing systemic racism and creating a more equal playing field, sure. We are both vastly under qualified, but go ahead. Balls in your court.

@20 - The rabbit got the gone? You mean like how you arm your toddlers to blow away your family members on the regular?

"I know you think youre intelligent when you make that argument"

The irony.

@21. There's that parrot squawking again. What are you saying that's so intelligent? The word irony?

You are so indoctrinated that you are salivating at the thought of morally one upping me. I could qualify with all the criteria that make me a part of your own "in" group, but I won't. Because that's what's stupid about you and your philosophy that you've bought into. The most important thing is what group you identify with. Not who you are. Not what you're capable of. Not what you can contribute. Not what you need.

I will qualify that I don't own guns and you're a child for assuming I did.

Also. "It ain't no fun when the rabbit got the gun" is a saying that means it doesn't feel good when someone uses your own tactics against you. It doesn't actually have anything to do with guns.

::ignoring of hundreds of POC shot by other POC on a daily basis in this country intensifies::

@22 whatever intonation you hear, Castile then handed Yanez the proof of insurance. Yanez apparently meant it as a request. Castile was complying. You are trying way too hard here.