Flag Image of Corona Triggers Debate over Thin Blue Line Flag

In the hours after the tragic news came out about the brutal killing of Officer Natalie Corona, many quickly were able to find a stunning image of the slain young officer, wearing a beautiful blue dress and waving a Thin Blue Line flag.

However, while some have seen this as a symbol of her love of police work, others see this as supporting the Blue Lives Matter movement, seen by many on the left as a push back against “Black Lives Matter” and the protests against officer-involved shootings, particularly against people of color.

Hiding just behind the scenes of united community outpouring of grief, horror, and sympathy for the loss of this young woman has been a growing debate. 

It began with a message from the ASUCD Ethnic and Cultural Affairs Commission which noted that, while they send their “deepest condolences to the police officer’s family,” they also wanted to “provide resources for students triggered by this event and the circulating images of a flag that has been popularized by the ‘Blues Lives Matter’ crowd.

“Flashing lights, sirens, and increased police presence can be triggering to many Black and Brown people,” they wrote. “In addition, there has been the circulation of an image of the police officer with the Blue Lives Matter flag. We would like to directly address that this flag represents an attempt by law enforcement to undermine the Black Lives Matter movement. ‘Blue Lives Matter’ was… an effort to evade accountability and critical awareness of police treatment of communities of color.”

On Friday night, ASUCD student body president Michael Gofman condemned the commission for what he called “this disgusting post” and urged them to take it down and issue an apology.

Thin Blue Line USA said in a statement. “We reject, in the strongest possible terms, any association of our flag with racism, hatred, and bigotry. To use it in such a way tarnishes what it and our nation believe in. The thin blue line flag stands for the sacrifice law enforcement officers of this nation make each day. We ask our nation to hold faith with those that defend the thin blue line.”

“Its easy to sit on the third floor of the Memorial Union when there are at least 100 brave men and women in blue between you and the shooter. It is easy to argue hypotheticals, politics, and ideology when you’re in safety,” Mr. Gofman wrote. “I am ashamed that some of these same people, protected by the very officers that they are condemning, have the audacity to politicize the loss of a young officer. Her only crime was being a police officer.”

The group took down the post, but the debate roars on.

Many cite an article posted in The Public from June 26, 2018 by Michael Niman, entitled, “This is a Racist Symbol.”  He argues that this flag simply replaced the Confederate flags when the latter became indefensibly seen as a racist symbol.

But he notes “The American flag remix version first appeared in 2016 during the rise of Trumpism, the mainstreaming of racism, and the backlash against the Obama-era civil rights movements—most notably the Black Lives Matter movement.”

And it “came into being with the rise of the self-termed Blue Lives Matter movement, evolving to become the formal symbol for that group, rather than for generic support for police officers or law and order. Blue Lives Matter, like White Lives Matter and All Lives Matter, rose as a reaction to Black Lives Matter, promoting the falsehood that the civil rights movement is actually an anti-police hate group.”

In response to this debate, Davis Mayor Pro Tem Gloria Partida, who started the Phoenix Coalition in response to a violent hate incident involving the beating of her son by a man who used homophobic epithets, sought to calm tensions as they were running high.

 In a Facebook post she wrote:

“It has been a tough few days. I was at the pinning of officer Corona and remember feeling hopeful for the future in our community.

“As a person of color it is always heartening to see your own edge into places of power. I have been further grappling with the conversations around the thin blue line flag she is holding in the series of pictures widely circulated.

“I am a full supporter of changing policing practices and believe our community is on a path to do so. I felt Natalie would have made huge strides in that direction. Here are my thoughts.

“There is imagery in my culture that is almost sacred. That most of my people rally around and identify with. The image of the virgin Mary of Guadelupe and La Catrina are the two that come to mind. If a despicable hate group took those images up in a rally and they became attached to them would I give those symbols up?

“You may say that would never happen and that is a different situation, but my culture is traditionally highly conservative and fringe groups popping up are not (outside) the realm of possibility.

“Again I can not stress how emphatically I support the BLM stance on protecting POC from disproportionate policing. I also fully support the selfless service many people on the police force give to communities. I personally saw our police force work to keep us safe even as they worked with a lump in their throats.

“Many will say you must choose a side but I truly believe it is the people that fill the overlap that have ultimately moved us forward in history.”

Unfortunately, with a string of news articles on this, there has been more backlash.

A former member of ASUCD recently shared four emails the she had received in response to this controversy, each of them appearing to fortunately be from outside of the community – but disturbing and unabashedly racist nonetheless.

Will Arnold, in his response to Gloria Partida’s post, noted, “For what it’s worth, and I believe it is worth a lot, this is what Officer Corona intended it to represent in her own words. It is as if she anticipated this conversation.”

She wrote: “I would like this photograph to serve as my gratitude for all those law enforcement men and women who have served, who are currently serving, and those who have died in the line of duty protecting out liberties in this great country.”

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts


  1. Alan Miller

    Disagree — since BLM is using Nazi symbolism — should those Indians who used the swastika as a spiritual symbol for thousands of years be forced to give it up because the Nazi’s co opted it?

    As a Jew, I would not be ‘triggered’ or offended if a saw a swastika in India or even at an Indian home or religious building in the US.  Context and intent are EVERYTHING.

  2. Alan Miller

    There is also this reported on CBS Local KOVR:
    On Monday, Black Lives Matter Sacramento posted it was “taking donations of Blue Lives Matter flags acquired on the streets…” Faison [BLM spokesperson] told CBS13 the group wanted the flags for a future art piece.

  3. Edgar Wai

    When an observer sees a symbol and rejects the intended meaning of the symbol by the presenter, the observer is at fault for being pre-judgmental.
    When a presenter of a symbol presents a symbol knowing the potential misunderstanding of the symbol without proper explanation of their intended usage and meaning, the presenter is at fault for being in-sensitive. In this case, Natalie did explain what she intended the flag to mean. And I think we in general agree that her actions support her words that she was a nice and kind person with no intention of harming anyone. (Her explanation was also void of any negative message.)Regardless how anyone else take advantage of the photo, I see that the fault of her potential in-sensitiveness is less than the apparent fault of a dissenter’s pre-judgment.

    1. Alan Miller

      Agreed, EW, but you leave out the strategy of identity politics — the victim group decides the meaning, and it’s up to everyone to know what they decide and act according to their wishes.

  4. Edgar Wai

    Kudos to the Davis Police for using a different photo for the memorial service advertisement. The police is trying to be sensitive/inclusive to everyone in light that it might be insensitive. There is no real reason for someone to intentionally present a symbol and “force” everyone to see it or adopt their intended meaning when they know that it was controversial. (As far as I knew, Natalie showed her picture on her own Facebook page.)

    Forcing others to change the meaning of a symbol dear to them is some kind of cruel aggression.

    “When I see the symbol you are holding, it makes me sad because it means something sad to me. But I know that the symbol means something good for you and is important to you, therefore while I want you to know how I feel, I hope that I am not taking away something dear to you.”

    1. Alan Miller

      Agreed, EW, but you leave out the strategy of identity politics — the victim group decides the meaning, and it’s up to everyone to know what they decide and act according to their wishes.

  5. Eric Gelber

    I largely agree with Edgar’s thoughtful comments. Context is important. The concept of the “thin blue line” predates the BLM movement and was intended to represent the role of law enforcement in separating order from unrest in times of crisis and chaos. Most appreciate that meaning and are quick to laud the heroism of law enforcement and other “first responders” in times of crisis—e.g., 9-11, mass shootings, and day-to-day hazardous responsibilities. 

    But, in other contexts, the thin blue line concept and symbols have been used by some to express other, negative, sentiments, such as opposition to BLM or the closing of ranks in the face of charges of police misconduct. (Let’s not draw parallels to the confederate flag—explicitly originated as a symbol of a traitorous rebellion to preserve the institution of slavery.)

    In the complete absence of any reason to believe otherwise, there is absolutely no basis to question the positive expression of pride and appreciation expressed by Natalie Corona in her photo. This contrived controversy is disrespectful and regrettable.

  6. Craig Ross

    There are two things you guys are not taking into consideration here.

    The first is that she’s 22 years old, she has probably only really known the current usage of the flag and she’s basically waiving a confederate flag and claiming it just means state rights.

    The second thing you guys are ignoring is the underlying context here.  Look at what the person from ASUCD got in response to this – vile, naked, racism.  I’m sure Natalie wasn’t herself racist, but you don’t have to scratch too far beneath the surface before it emerges.

    1. Dave Hart

      Craig, I don’t get the relationship to the Confederate flag you are drawing.  The flag in the photo is the U.S. stars and bars with the color modified.  Symbols are powerful and at this time in history many of us feel as if we are in some kind of political free fall with no bottom in sight.  The use of symbols has become explosive and almost certain to invoke a polarized reaction.  Maybe it was always that way, but in this day it feels more intense.  So, I don’t get the reference you are making.  In fact, it’s the point many have made here that symbols can just as easily be mis-interpreted depending on inherent bias. 

      This discussion beginning with Davis Mayor Pro Tem Gloria Partida’s statement and everyone who has posted, at least up to this point, shows the very best and thoughtful side of Davis in response to the worst kind of tragedy.  Thanks to everyone who took the time to contribute something constructive.  Thanks to Alan for the link to BLM which really does help put much of this into context.

    2. Matt Williams

      I too do not see the direct line to the Confederate Flag … also kniown as the Stars and Bars.  There is nothing “Bars” about the flag Natalie has cloaked herself in.  It is the Stars and Stripes, and will always be the Stars and Stripes. 
      If you are a believer that there is nothing that the Police in this country can do right, then any symbol any police member (or police supporter) chooses will be an anathema to you.  That is a reality that you own for yourself.
      I personally know that police members, like all human beings, make mistakes.  I also know that the police as a whole, like all groups of human beings, have good and bad members.  Again, that is human nature.
      Natalie chose to serve her community by going into public service.  I honor her for that commitment, and we are all diminished by her passing.

    3. Edgar Wai

      I do not know Natalie. I am just retelling what is known or said about her. 

      At the time the photo was taken, she was only about 20 years old. But her father had been a police officer for over 20 years. So, I tend to believe that Natalie had heard stories of officers dying, been to police funerals, had seen officers that her father knew died, or even seen officers that she knew died. So I tend to believe that Natalie knew what the flag meant, and knew its meaning better than a lay person seeing the flag for the first time.

      Then, given that she knew its meaning, she took the photo around October 2016, and wrote a message that did not have any negative meaning. She enrolled in the academy about a year after. At the academy, her trainers took her she was unfit to be an officer and suggested her to quit. But she won’t quit and fractured both shins in her efforts to graduate. She earned respect from her entire class. Her class looked up to her. 

      When she became an officer, she was an inspiration to the department and went beyond her duty to care for people. People who got citations from her liked her, because she had a way to do so that the recipient accepts their faults. Everyone said that she was always nice, kind, caring. She was a rising star in the department. People could see her becoming a good police chief some day. 
      So, at the time the photo was taken, Natalia knew what the flag meant, and she had a calling of what kind of officer she would want to be. She joined the academy knowing that officers can be targeted and killed, but her commitment to show us her calling was stronger than such concern. 

      A person is a hero for their commitment to help humanity. Whether the person dies while trying to do so is irrelevant. In this case, Natalie was a hero to many people before she died. When she died, people who knew her started talking about her, which let others realize that there was a hero in the community.

      The BLM posting questioned why when a police officer was shot the officer was honored as a hero. Natalia did not become a hero because she was shot. She was already one before she joined the academy. Similarly, many (most?) police officers, fire fighters, etc. were already heroes before they started their career. The fact that they got their career and sometimes died on duty simply confirmed that they were heroes.

      1. Edgar Wai

        A display of the TBL flag is not enough for me to judge the presenter’s association with Blue Live Matter or anti-black sentiment. 

        Where do you draw the line? Is the two color TBL flag ok? Is the mourning band still ok?

        If you know that some people do not associate TBL flag with Blue Lives Matter campaign, how much do you feel that they should abandon their symbol?

        The flip side of the question was to ask Natalie what she thinks about this situation. My guess is she won’t force you to accept her meaning and would probably do what Davis PD is doing now.

        What is the proper stance when someone in your group takes your symbol and get it associated with some other meaning? Do you have to declare a war against their usage? Do you have to abandon things meaningful to you?

        Wouldn’t it be better if everyone is just more discerning so prejudice doesn’t spread so much? Then people get to love what they love, and don’t get hurt by just seeing a symbol.

        When you declare that a symbol is evil and everyone associated, presenting, or defending it is evil, you can only mark too many people evil. Why would anyone want to do so? To avoid marking too many people evil, you still need to check case by case.

  7. Alan Miller

    There are two things you guys . . .

    You guys? WHO guys?

    The first is that she’s 22 years old, she has probably only really known the current usage of the flag

    I believe BLM is claiming the current usage of the flag is anti-black.

    and she’s basically waiving a confederate flag and claiming it just means state rights.

    She stated what it meant to her quite clearly.

    Look at what the person from ASUCD got in response to this – vile, naked, racism.  

    No, that was a taste of the most vile sort of reaction, and is to be condemned.  That is not the only sort of reaction.  This is typical of some media to print the most vile as an example of the what the “other side” is like, when in fact an extreme vile reaction such as that, which most of us on all sides of the issue find despicable, is not how most people who disagree would react.

    I’m sure Natalie wasn’t herself racist,

    Ya THINK?!?

    but you don’t have to scratch too far beneath the surface before it emerges.

    Emerges in what way from beneath the surface of what?  Do tell.

  8. Jim Frame

    I don’t yet have an opinion on the controversy over the TBL flag, but I will say that when I first saw the flag I was kind of creeped out by it.  The recasting of the U.S. flag in black and white suggests a post-apocalyptic view of the nation, one in which the police are arrayed against everyone else.  I found it disturbing rather than uplifting or enlightening.  I’m not surprised that it’s controversial.

    1. Matt Williams

      Jim, the flag took me aback the first time I saw it as well.  My mind didn’t go as far as post-apocalyptic, but it certainly caused me to think about why it looked the way it did.  The symbolism of the blue color eluded me until it was explained to me.

    2. Edgar Wai

      The first time I saw the flag I felt the same or similar. My first thought was that the flag is showing whatever blue represented ruling over the US. As such, the flag seemed elitist, egocentric and unpatriotic. However, since I did not know the intended meaning, I went to google and wikipedia.According to the evolution, that flag started with just a blue line over black. Then the UK had a design of a blue line over Union Jack before the US one followed suit. 

      So, while to a casual viewer, the blue line appeared to strike across a “dead” US flag (suggesting a post-apocalyptic setting as Jim said), the chronology was that the blue line designed existed first, then the US flag was added to identify the country to provide context. 

      It was not a colored US flag being stripped of its color then crossed out by a blue line. It was a two-colored flag adding a third color to identify the country. Also note that the police had a tradition of wearing a mourning band over their badge. To common people, that gesture could mean “Anti-police” because it is the police badge being crossed out. In the mindset of the police force, that gesture is not a symbol of rejection but a symbol of respect, honor, memorial, etc. It has been that way for a long time. 

      Then, for someone who knew the history of its evolution, they do not see that the flag could be mistaken as a colored US flag being crossed out. In the police traditional symbolism, a band over another symbol is not a sign of disrespect, but a sign of respect, honor, memorial, etc. So when they say it is their tradition, it was not an excuse they just make up to hide a hideous meaning. It IS their tradition. As evident in their wearing a mourning band over the badge.

      1. Edgar Wai

        I think a few years ago when I saw some photos of police officers wearing a mourning badge (I think it might be during the pepperspray incident), I didn’t know what it meant. I just assumed that the officers that came from  other campus or agency didn’t want to confuse the students so that they covered their badges (which might show their origins from out of town) with a black band.

    3. Alan Miller

      Interesting take from a ‘fresh on the scene’ point of view.  Also interesting that not only the BLM doesn’t like flag — when I was reading up on the controversy, there are also flag-waving conservatives that believe the thin blue line flag is a desecration of the American flag.

      I’ve never been one for symbols.  I oft quote Johnny Cash from the Highwaymen 2nd tour:  “We live in a country where we have the 1st amendment, and that gives us the right to burn the flag” — (boos from the audience) — “Hold on, hold on — this country also gives us the right to bear arms — and you burn my flag, I’m gonna shoot you!” (audience goes wild).

  9. Dave Hart

    No doubt, there are those who embrace the interpretation of the Thin Blue Line Flag that “Blue Lives Matter More Than Black Lives”, but maybe it’s people, (and even more important, police officers) like Natalie who want to take the symbol somewhere else.  Gloria suggested that Natalie had such a different vision.  It’s not so different from anti-racist demonstrators using the standard U.S. flag to oppose the Confederate flag or even to oppose U.S. foreign policy.  Why not attempt to redefine a symbol or let a symbol be redefined?  Saving our damaged and imperiled democracy requires that we look past the rhetoric and symbols of people with whom we have disagreements and find common ground and common interest.  Flags and symbols do seem to appeal more to the young who are often in search of a larger identity than self.  But as a geezer, I resist the idea of my thoughts and feelings being governed by a symbol and that is how I want to treat others.

  10. Matt Williams

    Alan Miller said . . . I believe BLM is claiming the current usage of the flag is anti-black.

    If BLM is indeed claiming that then they are in effect saying that there are different shades of people of color … effectively that Natalie, clearly a woman of color, isn’t REALLY a woman of color … she isn’t black enough.  That is a very unfortunate, and misguided, message, if BLM is indeed claiming it.  We do not need more polarization in our society.  We need less.

  11. Edgar Wai

    While we are at this:
    Does anyone else feel some kind of guilt over Natalie’s death in Davis? I don’t know all the words to describe emotion, but what I feel is something like this:

    Natalie is not from Davis. Her family is not here.She came to Davis to serve us (regardless whether she applied to be here or assigned to be here).She did good work here.She got killed here.

    Because she is not from Davis, I am feeling some kind of guilt that I would not feel if she was from Davis.

    It is like we really owed her big time. We can’t repay the kindness that she did on our town enough. It is like we dropped the ball. It is like she selflessly went beyond what we would have expected from a police officer, but our town was not ready to receive and protect a person so kind and caring.

    1. Alan Miller

      Does anyone else feel some kind of guilt over Natalie’s death in Davis?

      I don’t.  I felt angry at the shooter, until it became clear the depth of his mental illness.  Then I just felt sad.  For everyone.
      I can’t take on the guilt of another’s doing.  I am not discounting your reaction.  I have found many people had a strong emotional reaction to Thursday night that is playing out in sometimes unexpected ways.  It was a pretty intense evening with hundreds of police, sirens, police in yards unannounced, spotlights, orders to shelter in place, and then the news of Natalie’s death.  An emotional reaction is real.

  12. Dave Hart

    Matt, I read the BLM site and it says nothing like that.  It focuses on the fact that the Blue Lives Matter idea has almost always been invoked as a zero sum game.  If Black/Brown/Yellow/Red/Fuscia Lives Matter, then Blue Lives must not matter or must not matter as much.  Of course that is total b.s. but it is a great way to distract from the central message of Black Lives Matter that African Americans are killed at a far higher rate simply because they are black.  So BLM has a pretty good take on this thing in that they regard Officer Corona’s killing as a horrible act as do all the rest of us.  I encourage everyone to read their statement for what it actually says.

    One other small factoid:  The Thin Blue Line is essentially a product marketing organization with some (who knows how much) of the profits going to various 501(c)(3)s that do work around police support and veterans’ support services:  https://www.thinbluelineusa.com/.  Obviously, they do not control who buys their products and have every reason not to ask as it appears it is foremost a business selling merchandise.  But these products do show up from time to time among reactionary groups.

    1. Matt Williams

      Dave, I clicked on that link and this is what I read in the first article.  I won’t republish the graphic that goes with the article.

      Blue is the color of a uniform, not a person. Blue is a choice, not forcible oppression. Blue is a job, and the phrase “blue lives matter” is simply a racist, reactionary clapback to the very real human rights struggle of the Black Lives Matter movement.

        1. Edgar Wai

          I think the definition of desecration is to take a symbol dear to someone and intentionally ridicule, mutilate, or destroy it to show one’s disapprove of those attached to that symbol. So I think the picture above is a type of desecration. That is kind of mean-spirited. 

          Symbols by themselves are innocent because they aren’t sentient. Only their sentient propagators can be blamed. When a kind person sees a Nazi teddy bear, they don’t automatically try to destroy it. They would think, “Don’t worry, I know you are just created like that, I won’t hurt you and I don’t want you to hate yourself. Because I found you, you get to redefine yourself. Because I don’t want to see things hurt and hated, I choose you to be a good bear. You get to love yourself and do good regardless how you were created.”

          * * *
          Then someone comes and says, “Hey, that is a Nazi bear. You can’t play with that. It needs to be cut up and burnt because in most people’s minds it represents evil.”

          “But it didn’t choose to represent so. This is my bear and in my mind it is a good bear despite it was created by evil people.”

          “It doesn’t matter what you think, give it to me so we can burn it.”

          “Can they never be free just because they were made like that?”

          “They must be destroyed.”

          “When you try to take it away, I feel hurt because it is like seeing something innocent being punished for a crime they have never committed. And that you are forcing me to accept a reality where things cannot choose to be good despite how they were created.”

          “People associate that with evil, so you can’t keep it.”

          “Am I evil?”


          “This is my bear, can’t I define it to be good because I am good?”

          “You can’t because others think that it is evil.”

          “Why do they want to imagine the bear evil when they are free to imagine it any way they want?”

      1. Alan Miller

        You completely missed the mayor’s point.

        And I was going to point to my earlier post, but it’s gone . . . 

        Hey DS, where is my post in which I extrapolated what I thought the mayor was saying, and then asked if I had interpreted that correctly?  I directly asked that if I had misinterpreted her words that either people weigh in what they thought she was saying, or the mayor herself.

        I think her words, if I interpreted them correctly, were very important and spot on.  But there were implications that were not quite said, and I wanted to make sure I had that down.  How does that violate posting policy?  If I’d said . . . this is what she meant, period, maybe.  But I don’t remotely see how that post violated Vanguard policy.

        [Moderator: bear with us. The moderation is glitchy, pulling old posts that we’ve already approved. Sometimes they have to be released a couple of times for some reason.]

      2. Craig Ross

        Alan – the problem is that the flag has been co-opted by white supremacists.  Yes, I get it, Natalie Corona was not a white supremacists, but the protest was about the flag more so than Natalie Corona.

        1. Alan Miller

          Though the mayor framed it as a question, I agree with her premise that a group should not be pressured into giving up their symbols because the symbols are co opted by arseholes.
          But I suspected with BLM the agenda goes much deeper.

        2. Craig Ross

          I disagree with her on that point.  After all, we no longer consider the Swastika a legitimate symbol even though it had long use prior to Nazi Germany.  Symbols only matter within context.  Context is a social construction.  Sorry, I disagree with you here.

        1. Alan Miller

          Disagree — since BLM is using Nazi symbolism — should those Indians who used the swastika as a spiritual symbol for thousands of years be forced to give it up because the Nazi’s co opted it?

          As a Jew, I would not be ‘triggered’ or offended if a saw a swastika in India or even at an Indian home or religious building in the US.  Context and intent are EVERYTHING.

        2. Craig Ross

          I suspect you will not get a lot of agreement from the Jewish community on that.  I think you need to reconsider.  But your view expressed here in my view puts you in the clear minority which tends to undermine your overall point.

        3. Alan Miller

          Disagree — since BLM is using Nazi symbolism — should those Indians who used the swastika as a spiritual symbol for thousands of years be forced to give it up because the Nazi’s co opted it?

          As a Jew, I would not be ‘triggered’ or offended if a saw a swastika in India or even at an Indian home or religious building in the US.  Context and intent are EVERYTHING.

        4. Craig Ross

          My thought is that you see some sort of contradiction and forget that America for hundreds of years enslaved black people, subjugated Native Americans, kept people of color as second class citizens.  All while flying that flag.

        5. Matt Williams

          Craig Ross said . . . My thought is that you see some sort of contradiction and forget that America for hundreds of years enslaved black people, subjugated Native Americans, kept people of color as second class citizens.  All while flying that flag.

          I don’t see any contradiction at all in the two respective flag usages.  I see a parallel.

          For what it is worth, your comment is an ad hominem.  You chose to reply by commenting on the messenger rather than engaging with and commenting on the message.  My question wasn’t about me, it was about the actions of the participants in the pictured activities .

          Nor have I forgotten anything.

          Correct me if I am wrong, but what you appear to be saying is that the American flag is just as heinous a symbol of enslavement, subjugation, and hatred as the Thin Blue Line flag.  Is that a correct reading of what you are saying?

  13. Sharla C.

    The Thin Blue Line Flag has been misused and there have been attempt to twist its meaning to be a symbol of white supremacy or anti-black.  BLM is doing this as much as the marchers in Charlotte did by adopting this incorrect and twisted meaning and promoting it.   People are also doing this to a lesser extent on social media when they use bluelivesmatter  hashtags when they post the image.  All attempts to misuse and alter the meaning of the symbol have been condemned by the Thin Blue Line organization.  We should too.  The flag is supposed to represent unity with the community and support for the community’s first responders.  
    What if the white supremacists in Charlotte had stolen and misused another symbol – the LGTB rainbow flag, the Christian cross or the American flag?  Would this have altered the meaning of these symbols so much that we would be asked to crop them out of pictures and remove them from general use?  (Actually, come to think of it, this student group also requested that the US flag be removed from ASUCD meetings some time ago as they felt that the American flag represented oppression for some.  This was disapproved, I believe, and it went no further.)

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for