According to ProMeth:

In The Spectacle Black Lives matter (BLM) are repeatedly characterized by dependent media and puppeticians as “freedom fighters” or “the resistance.” Yet BLM simply wants; 1) cops to be held liable in civil courts when they harm or execute Blacks and Latinos, 2) the Government to hold cops accountable for crimes committed against Blacks and Latinos and as public servants to be subjected to discipline or termination in a process they can participate in and 3) to stop cops from interfering with their “rights” and harming and killing them.

That is, BLM wants “authorities” to enforce existing laws against cops and expects equal treatment under the law. Additionally, the reforms recently presented in BLM’s BREATHE ACT are very modest proposals.

In general it can be assumed that BLM and all rational statists want all laws to be followed and applied equally and have a legitimate expectation that public servants don’t violate their rights. There really is no opposing side to BLM’s very tame positions - except advocacy for cop’s breaking the law or committing crimes against citizens. So what on earth could be “radical” about protesting against conduct that is already illegal and unconstitutional? Having something to say about a so-called “public servant” unlawfully stopping, detaining and murdering people based on skin color is not extreme or hate speech. It is normal speech. To mischaracterize or try to “both sides” such activity as “radical” is an extremely stupid effort to radicalize common sense! It is an attempt to make people believe that what is in actual reality, conservative and common sense as being radical thought & conduct. With such a misunderstanding, Blacks and Latinos reject common sense when they reject what they perceive as "radical." Thus, obedient Blacks & Latino citizens may be less inclined to pursue things that obedient White people with common sense would pursue in the normal course of things- because to do so would be radical.

Pretending that the enforcement of existing law on police officers in regard to their relations with melonated peoples is “extreme” conduct is fascism disguised as democracy or governmental mind control. Neutrality or silence in the face of extreme government repression like the treatment George Floyd got in the street is reprehensible. The following article concerns the MD Judicial Ethics Committee’s warning to judges that participation in Black Lives Matter protests, marches or rallies “could cause a reasonable person to question a judge’s independence or impartiality,” given that they concern law enforcement and perceived shortcomings in the system of justice. This is dead wrong. A judges participation in BLM activity could cause a reasonable, gullible observer to falsely believe that said judge is not also an active participant in a racist system of authoritarian control. It makes one wonder how did the highly educated, well respected German judges perceived the application of laws to Jewish citizens during Nazi Germany. FUNKTIONARY describes this kind of quiet repression as Totalitarian Patriotism:

totalitarian Patriotism - ‘terrified silence created through the suppression of principled cognitive dissent under the First Amendment and the Declaration of Independence. 2) allowing the officers of so-called "government" to become free from the limits of law. Criticism of the federal government's anti-terrorism policies is nothing less than treason."-US Attorney General "Jailin'" John Ashcroft December 6, 2001 remarks at Senate Judiciary Committee. "Either you're with me or you're with the terrorists." -Curious George Custard Dubya Bush. "If you say the government is in a conspiracy to take your freedom away, you're wrong...There's nothing patriotic about hating you're government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country." -Bill 'Slick-Willy-Style' Clinton. These statements are the language of totalitarianism. Totalitarian Patriotism is a goose step in the wrong direction.’ [MORE]

citizens - those who instinctively seek permission or ask themselves whether or not they are allowed to do anything before they act. Citizens (serfs, subjects or slaves), possess a "ruled" mind-virus mentality (See: Citizenship & Slavery). 

From [HERE] The Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee released an opinion Wednesday saying that the state’s judges should not participate in events for the Black Lives Matter movement.

The opinion, which is nonbinding but considered a guideline for judges, states that participation in Black Lives Matter protests, marches or rallies “could cause a reasonable person to question a judge’s independence or impartiality,” given that they concern law enforcement and perceived shortcomings in the system of justice.

Participation in a Black Lives Matter event presents a “significant risk” that the judge will end up in a situation that could undermine his or her impartiality, the opinion states.

The 13-person committee, made up mostly of Maryland judges, cited several provisions of the state’s code of judicial conduct as grounds for the decision, including a rule that states judges shall not “participate in activities that would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge’s independence, integrity, or impartiality.

The committee pointed out that Black Lives Matter events frequently feature signs and messages such as “Defund the Police” or “We Can’t Breathe.” A member of the judiciary would not likely be able to control how they are depicted in relationship to those messages, according to the committee. [even though they are no carrying the signs or associated with anyone doing so. lol].