Black Lives Matter plans to disrupt Twin Cities Marathon

exthrower wrote:

14 Black people shot by other Blacks last night in Chicago....6 died.....

Your enemy is yourself...not cops....

I wish more blacks would protest the culture of drugs and violence and making babies you can't support within the black community.

I'm guessing there are a substantial number of law abiding and hard working blacks who are sick of these race baiters and white do-gooders like Randy Oldman who support the thugs behind this movement.

It sounds like they won't impede runners but will probably jump into the course with signs, or something like that.

The American government throws Palestinian-Americans in jail when they give to charities that are said to have some kind of connection to Hamas, a Palestinians resistance group that arose because Palestinians were thrown out of their homes and villages, etc. But Woolley gets to raise money happily on behalf of a military force that killed 2300 Palestinians in Gaza, including 500 children, just a year ago (and that executed an 18-year-old woman at a checkpoint in illegally occupied territory last week). At the very least the U.S. ought to be neutral in this conflict. But we’re on one side.

Conundrum wrote:

It sounds like they won't impede runners but will probably jump into the course with signs, or something like that.

Why would you write this? Did you not see the three videos of the BLM organizer discussing why it is of no issue that a marathon runner be stopped when black citizens have their entire lives stopped by felonious police murderers?

The BLM protesters intend to stop runners in the same manner that they have stopped traffic on interstates and public transportation in major metro areas.

The NIMBY attitude of you runners is disgusting. You're all in support of BLM as long as it does not inconvenience you. As soon as it begins to affect your race, you disagree with the movement.

Conundrum wrote:

It sounds like they won't impede runners but will probably jump into the course with signs, or something like that.

Where did you see that. Everything I have heard from the protest organizer has said they "intend to be the finish line". Sounds exactly like they want to impede runners.

You're all NIMBYs wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

It sounds like they won't impede runners but will probably jump into the course with signs, or something like that.

Why would you write this? Did you not see the three videos of the BLM organizer discussing why it is of no issue that a marathon runner be stopped when black citizens have their entire lives stopped by felonious police murderers?

The BLM protesters intend to stop runners in the same manner that they have stopped traffic on interstates and public transportation in major metro areas.

The NIMBY attitude of you runners is disgusting. You're all in support of BLM as long as it does not inconvenience you. As soon as it begins to affect your race, you disagree with the movement.

What are runners supposed to do you mo-Ron! Hold hands with BLM and sing songs? I am pretty sure there is an ordinance against impeding an event such as a marathon. It could get messy but an protesters on the course will likely be removed rather quickly by law enforcement.

God some of you are just so stupid!

Real Nooz wrote:

The American government throws Palestinian-Americans in jail when they give to charities that are said to have some kind of connection to Hamas, a Palestinians resistance group that arose because Palestinians were thrown out of their homes and villages, etc. But Woolley gets to raise money happily on behalf of a military force that killed 2300 Palestinians in Gaza, including 500 children, just a year ago (and that executed an 18-year-old woman at a checkpoint in illegally occupied territory last week). At the very least the U.S. ought to be neutral in this conflict. But we’re on one side.

Daryl, shut up.

Why don't Black Lives Matter put on a marathon of their own to raise awareness? Why do these fringe groups insist on negative press? I don't get it. In my city, we have raised millions for ALS while also raising a ton of awareness and increasing volunteer work (yearlong) by immeasurable amounts. We do this through two races: a Spring 5k and a Fall Half-Marathon.

Black Lives Matter really ought to consider this if they are looking to reach out to the running demographic (large, diverse, typically well off).

Just something I thought about when I read this...

Let Them Finish member wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

It sounds like they won't impede runners but will probably jump into the course with signs, or something like that.

Where did you see that. Everything I have heard from the protest organizer has said they "intend to be the finish line". Sounds exactly like they want to impede runners.

In the last link, they said they didn't plan any physical contact with runners.

Let Them Finish member wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

It sounds like they won't impede runners but will probably jump into the course with signs, or something like that.

Where did you see that. Everything I have heard from the protest organizer has said they "intend to be the finish line". Sounds exactly like they want to impede runners.

OK, I checked back and this is what they said, ""We don't plan on having any physical contact with runners, but we do plan to make ourselves the finish line," said Turner."

Its seems a bit contradictory what they are saying but I was thinking it meant at the finish line but not impeding and leaving room for runners to run by.........I guess.

What a bunch of losers these people are. The most vocal ones on the Facebook page appear to be fat, unemployed white people.

Conundrum wrote:

Let Them Finish member wrote:

Where did you see that. Everything I have heard from the protest organizer has said they "intend to be the finish line". Sounds exactly like they want to impede runners.

OK, I checked back and this is what they said, ""We don't plan on having any physical contact with runners, but we do plan to make ourselves the finish line," said Turner."

Its seems a bit contradictory what they are saying but I was thinking it meant at the finish line but not impeding and leaving room for runners to run by.........I guess.

They don't plan on any physical contact with the runners in the same way that they don't plan on any physical contact with the cars on an interstate.

The problem is that they don't know runners, especially fast runners hellbent on a new PR. If I am on pace to run a PR with a mile to go, you better believe that I am going to get around you.

I will have a can of bear spray. Easy enough to carry and I want to PR. My wife will hand over a can of it somewhere around the 20 mile mark and I can carry it for the final 10k no problem. It might be against USATF rules, but those rules don't account for having to battle your way to the finish.

Hell, I have run 3 Spartan races this year. I can get around these clown with a can of bear spray.

Race Director in Spare Time wrote:

Why don't Black Lives Matter put on a marathon of their own to raise awareness?

Is it easier to put on a marathon or to ruin one for others? There is your answer. Does anyone know where we can make donations to the St Paul Police Department pepper spray fund?

Hopefully, they spray the right people: http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k235/MedialMeniscus/pepperdiver.jpg

Neutral Observertard wrote:

Race Director in Spare Time wrote:

Why don't Black Lives Matter put on a marathon of their own to raise awareness?

Is it easier to put on a marathon or to ruin one for others? There is your answer. Does anyone know where we can make donations to the St Paul Police Department pepper spray fund?

I understand your point, but if they truly want to raise awareness and generate some positive momentum, they could at least try to do some positive things. Civil disobedience has a role, but there is no need for it when you are given full press and support by the city. They have all the means to be positive but choose the civil obedience route nonetheless. It doesn't make sense. They ought to read some Thoreau. They have a legitimate concern (profiling and police brutality) but they don't seem to be taking it seriously on their end.

Race Director in Spare Time wrote:

Neutral Observertard wrote:

Is it easier to put on a marathon or to ruin one for others? There is your answer. Does anyone know where we can make donations to the St Paul Police Department pepper spray fund?

I understand your point, but if they truly want to raise awareness and generate some positive momentum, they could at least try to do some positive things. Civil disobedience has a role, but there is no need for it when you are given full press and support by the city. They have all the means to be positive but choose the civil obedience route nonetheless. It doesn't make sense. They ought to read some Thoreau. They have a legitimate concern (profiling and police brutality) but they don't seem to be taking it seriously on their end.

1. I don't think they have any interest in anything other than causing trouble.

2. Trying positive things requires WORK.

3. Collaboration with the city is not fashionable or shocking.

4. Nothing about them makes sense.

5. I don't think many of them read much of anything.

6. They're legitimate concern is overshadowed by the fact that all of their "causes" are related to criminals rather than innocent people who were profiled.

7. Why am I so jaded? From reading their Facebook page.

I am running this weekend, and I will be carrying pepper spray. I don't see how they can shut down the race without touching runner. Guess Mr Turner is smart enough to know not to make a threat, but he hasn't really thought through how this will end.

You're all NIMBYs wrote:

]

The NIMBY attitude of you runners is disgusting. You're all in support of BLM as long as it does not inconvenience you. As soon as it begins to affect your race, you disagree with the movement.

That's (one place, among many) where you're wrong.

I'm NOT in support of BLM.

Now go cry about it on tumblr & twitter with the rest of the SJWs.

Nothing, really, and we're just barely out of personal jurisdiction and notice. However, just for the sake of practicing, it's fun to just walk through and say why a Minn. court would hold jx here in a suit between a runner alleging, say, assault and battery (even a cheeky false imprisonment allegation for fun if some snakey circumstances came about (and how you'd argue either way)) for the sake of reaffirming what you know in a real world scenario.

Did you just not enjoy aspects of the law and the educational process enough to create hypos and walk yourself through them in order to practice what you were learning, or were you just too far out of a relevant school for it it to matter?