>
>You mean like this (and I know it's an opinion piece, but just look at the factual content): http://www.suntimes.com/news/mitchell/21087931-452/al-sharpton-aims-to-spotlight-gun-violence-here.html#.U-3-cGOuTRc
>
>And to address the underlying meme that black people don't do anything about black-on-black violence:
>
>http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/04/why-dont-black-people-protest-black-on-black-violence/255329/
>

I'm aware of the these and I've heard other similar stories.

But the context still proves my point. If an African American is harmed by a white (or even just a non-African American), Sharpton will automatically invoke race and just keep hammering and hammering. He famously jumped to conclusions in the famous Duke Lacrosse rape case. Any other scenario and he'll stick to safely general protests - and will not call out the conduct

Back in 2008 Barack Obama gave a powerful speech on Father's Day about deadbeat dads. And he went further and blasted his own race for their conduct. If you read the text blindly without knowing the author, you'd almost think a conservative wrote it. At the time, certain African American leaders ripped Obama for his speech. And going back further, Martin Luther King many times talked about the moral standards of his own race. You don't see Barack Obama doing that today- he "learned his lesson" the last time around. And for that matter, the President gave a lukewarm "aw, it's no worse than drinking or smoking cigs" re: marijuana, despite the role it often plays.

So there is a difference between marching in safely general scenarios, and hitting the proverbial nail on the head. Bottom line, Sharpton won't call his own race out. (Just curious, did Sharpton ever call out Ray Race for knocking his future wife unconscious???) But he has no problem invoking it here.

I have no fear in saying you clearly have an issue with some of the police force in Ferguson.