Meeting with police officers, very rarely helps to stimulates discussion. It's a simple statement of "we need to be better..:" It doesn't ask deeper questions, it doesn't identify the problems at hand in society, it's a stand that is done to make people feel better- unfortunately when discussing topics such as these one party or another will be alienated or insulted. If the feelings of those individuals and not those also actually enduring injustices, were to be put forth at center stage, there would still be Jim Crow, the Civil War would have not happened. That cannot be the main priority. The simple matter is that many are reluctant to acknowledge that in this country, we are separated and divided by characteristics, such as gender and color. Instead of acknowledging this, they attempt to distance themselves from these topics, by actually not talking about them all. Ever heard of the comment "I don't see color.? I'm sure you have. That's an example of what I'm speaking about it. With a topic as delicate as race and how emotive it can be, expecting a minority who openly comments about what he believes to be perceived slights to be received with open arms is naive. The reason I mentioned MLK earlier is because he carried out his protest in the ideal manner yet he was met with vicious, hateful, and resentful comments that are similar to Kap. Have you ever read the responses to some of his protests in letters? The content of the responses include comments about black on black crime, admonishing the form of protest, and many other knows that would make you think your reading letters drafted in 2017. Again, why should kneeling for the national anthem be seen as childish? Symbols are inherently simple in nature, they are intended to force fed or prop the virtues of an individual, state or country. However, the meaning of symbols can be shaped/ altered by an individual's background. What may be viewed as the blood sweat and tears of a nation to one person, may be viewed as the blood sweat and tears of lineage that consisted of slavery. That's what the flag represents to some people- to some people it is a symbol of oppression of their people, not the greatness of America. It is the the symbol of some of a country that has prevented their people from advancing. In addition, Francis Scott Key was a slave owner, there are also lines (truncated), that can be interpreted as racist in nature. With these factors considered, why is it suddenly considered heinous, stupid, or childish that one choose to protest the anthem to display one's deprecation of injustice? My question to you is what method of protest should Kap have chosen? What method of protest, which included him being forceful in his opinion, which one would have led to the acceptance of his message and rejection of injustices? What in our history makes you come to the assumption that the treatment or reaction to his message is simply because of his form of protest? Our country has a history of division, sparked by racial tensions. If Acts of protest to overthrow certain overt racism means were meant with fierce resistance, what reason do I have to assume that Kap's method was the issue? What else could have chosen to bring notoriety to the issue at hand, without sugar coating what he perceived to be true? Looking at our history, I have no reason to assume he would not have been met with this resistance, regardless of whatever method he chose. People will find the next crutch and excuse to hold to diminish the argument. The inability to actually understand that racism is not overt, but many times covert, and the inability to sometimes be able to fully define racism and it's content in entirety is why I believe that protests even by people far more eloquent than Kap will fail to resonate with a majority of our country. Many are just incapable of recognizing, or they simply choose to ignore it . Kap is certainly flawed, as I have said before. It's possible that following his initial protest, that he did, indeed, have a few botches of his own. But his initial protest was not disruptive. It was not loud. It was silent. If that form of protest is childish and rejected so vehemently, change will never occur in this country.