Ferguson

Malvad

TNPer
A grand jury has decided to not indict officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of Michael Brown. Protests have been sparked across the country.

I want to see everyone's opinion on this situation from the racial tensions to police brutality. What is your opinion on the situation in Ferguson, Missouri?
 
If the Grand Jury has made it's decision, a riot is not going to undo that decision. The riots are only going to damage/fracture the community even more.

If it can be appealed, efforts should be focused on trying to do that.
 
I agree with McM. Furthermore, if it were a black cop that shot a white kid, nobody would be rioting. Frankly in instances like this, the racial aspect is always blown out of proportion and takes precedence over the real crime, the murder. I am always disappointed by the protesters and rioters of these incidents.
 
I think its all crazyness really. I have some police training what I got in high school going to a career technical school for Criminal Justice. We were taught officer safety and safety of other bystanders was #1 priority. Obviously Officer Wilson reacted in the way he did. No one can change history and no one really knows what happened except wilson and Brown. I read reports early on that Brown tried to take wilsons fire arm and they were fighting (officer safety - I was taught that if you were scuffiling with someone and you are to the point of tiring and you reasonably believe someone can take your weapon you are free to use force deadly or otherwise to stop the agression) so if it is true Mr. Brown tried to take Wilsons firearm. Then the officer acted correctly in trying to stop the agression. But then I heard those reports were false. Then no they were true. So the media has already tried this case in the court of public opinion. Obviously the Grand Jury heard enough Testimony and saw enough evidence to make the decision that they did. And no amount of rioting and looting is going to change it or bring Mr. Brown back. Its unfortunate. (There has been a similar incident in cleveland - apparently cops shot a 12 year old kid brandishing a BB gun) I may need to check my privledge, but making this issue about race I dont think helps matters either. Everyone has made a fuss about officer wilson being white and Mr. Brown being black. When I first heard of this incident. It didnt matter to me what color anyone was. It was two people in an altercation who made the decisions they did. People are shot and killed every day by police, military, and authority figures and we do not hear about it. I feel the only reason it has gotten the national and international attention it has is because the mainstream news media from the getgo made it about race and has used it as a talking point to increase news ratings.
 
The massive crackdown by police with armored jeeps armed with noise cannons, tear gas, flares, and a ridiculous degree of gear, is a bit concerning however.
 
We saw major police militarization around the time of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Perth a few years back, this has continued with the G20 in Brisbane.... I agree that it is quite concerning.
 
The case itself was blown out proportion with cries of racism on social media when the evidence suggests that what happened was justified, even if it was extreme.
 
mcmasterdonia:
If the Grand Jury has made it's decision, a riot is not going to undo that decision. The riots are only going to damage/fracture the community even more.

If it can be appealed, efforts should be focused on trying to do that.
:agree:
 
Americans remain near totally ignorant of how government functions. The people who are arguing it should have at least gone to trial are saying so because they believe the outcome would be different than the grand jury.

As someone who sees systemic problems in the world and volunteers time with organizations to combat those problems I am absolutely tired of people being outraged but not doing anything substantive about it.

I am also tired of how poorly people conduct themselves when confronting social change. Consensus cannot be built when people who don't 100% share their view of the world are automatically considered as an enemy.
 
Double jeopardy does not attach to indictments in the United States. An indictment by a grand jury is merely a finding based on probable cause that a crime likely has been committed, which then permits the prosecuting attorney to bring a defendant up on charges in a criminal trial.

In this instance five (5) potential indictments were sought (first degree murder, second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, and armed criminal conduct, if I recall correctly), and the grand jury returned a no true bill on each. This means that the minimum of nine (9) jurors to vote affirmative for indictment was not achieved for any of the five charges.

Probable cause is a very low standard to achieve, and what makes this instance so unusual is the preponderance of evidence and testimony presented to a grand jury. Usually a bare bones case is presented, and the standard of probable cause is low enough that an indictment is often readily obtained. But the high profile of this case warranted a fuller presentation to the grand jury. It would seem that the physical evidence, and the inconsistencies in witness testimony, was sufficient to demonstrate that there was insufficient probable cause for any of the five potential charges. And that says a lot.

If a prosecutor can't get an indictment on the first go-around, it is highly unlikely that they will try for a second. Another try at the grand jury usually only happens when additional evidence is discovered; that is unlikely here since the matter has been very thoroughly investigated.

It is possible that the officer Darren Wilson could be tried for federal civil rights violations in a United States Court. And he will likely face a civil lawsuit filed by Lesley McSpadden and Michael Brown, Sr. It will likely be difficult to obtain a conviction or a judgement if either should go to trial, if the physical evidence (as it seems) corroborates the officer's account of the incident. But it will cost Wilson dearly to defend himself, barring significant contributions to his defense fund.

The key concept here: Never reach for a police officer's weapon.

The real problem is that this is likely a justified use of deadly force, and the community is rioting over it. While it is symptomatic of long-standing grievances between the community and the police, burning down other (local) people's businesses isn't a solution. And although redlining isn't legal, what's legal and what is practiced aren't always aligned. Commercial insurers and lenders are risk averse. So Ferguson will be paying for this for a long time to come no matter what.

As for those observers concerned about the militarization of the police, it is useful to remember that the police in the United States face a greater caliber of threats to life and limb than police elsewhere. (And yes, this is of our own making, due to our gun-obsessed subculture.)
 
Eluvatar:
The massive crackdown by police with armored jeeps armed with noise cannons, tear gas, flares, and a ridiculous degree of gear, is a bit concerning however.
They didn't do that this time. They simply waited for the first round of riots to burn itself out (no pun intended) before sending in the enforcement. Of course they will catch hell for not doing what they did the first time. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If someone grabbed for my gun and beat me in the face and nearly blinded me, I'd shoot them dead where they stood (mainly because if they go for my gun, I can be pretty sure that if they get it they will shoot me with it).

The policeman in this instant was obligated to try to apprehend the suspect. The suspect clearly charged at him - and anyone who charges at you while you are pointing a gun at them is going to try to kill you (or is effed up on drugs and will try to kill you). The officer clearly felt that his life was in danger and he shot to stop the threat. The grand jury in this instance unanimously agreed.
 
I'm a black man living in America. I am a black man working in a predominantly white field where very few managers look like me. I fear for myself and my sons that if we find ourselves at the wrong place at the wrong time, we could end up like Michael Brown.

I have been disturbed by Wilson's comments since the non-indictment has come down. He call wrestling with brown like a 5 year old wrestling Superman and yet he was able to wrestle Superman and win firing off two shots of his gun. Further, Wilson stated he went after Brown after - repeat after - Brown ran from the shots. This makes sense from the sense that the officer was going to at least arrest Brown, but subduing Brown didn't appear to be in the officer's mindset and instead he only saw a 6' 4" black kid who was more likely than not being disrespectful to the officer. What gets me most is that Brown put his hands out, which Wilson interpreted as an aggressive sign. Witness #40 also saw it that way. Witness #40 also wrote how she needs to see black people as not just nig--rs.

And that might be what the problem is. If the kid is white perhaps Wilson doesn't feel as threatened perhaps he sees when he puts his hands up he sees surrender and not aggression. Those are split second decisions and when we may never know what was going on in Brown's head. I don't disagree that Wilson was afraid, but I'm not sure if he had such cause to be afraid at the time he shot his weapon 10 times after the initial altercation.
 
This is gonna be really politically incorrect. Michael Brown ROBBED a store minutes earlier, its not because he's black. The officer did the right thing by stopping him. The only problem is the excessive use of force, he couldve just tazed him.
 
Honestly, I can understand calling in the National Guard to help contain and disperse the riots (that is part of their job after all). I don't agree with the militarization of the police force. The riots are against the justified/unjustified (depending on your viewpoint) killing of a black young adult by a white cop. Having the police involved in riot dispersion doesn't help matters at all.
 
This whole ordeal has been a sad tragedy.

However, I believe that liberal media has blown this up, and literally became the cause of these riots. Had the media not reported false facts and inconsistencies, it would not have sparked an outrage this big. Take the new interview with Wilson after the ruling. Stephanopoulos repeatedly tried to get Wilson to admit his guilt, and promoted the image of Brown as an "innocent teenager" - a "gentle giant". (Take a look at the surveillance camera video from the store he robbed.)
Wilson failed to give in to Stephanopoulos' accusations and responded with clear, honest answers that match the autopsy reports and evidence found at the crime scene.
Furthermore, only the grand jury has seen all of the evidence, and they're the ones who decided not to indict him. Don't make false claims when you haven't!
 
JhonsJoe:
This is gonna be really politically incorrect. Michael Brown ROBBED a store minutes earlier, its not because he's black. The officer did the right thing by stopping him. The only problem is the excessive use of force, he couldve just tazed him.
What I've been frustrated by is that Michael Brown's family has never acknowledged that Michael violated the law several times in that hour before he was fatally shot.

The theft of the expensive cigars from the convenience store was one. Hitting the sales clerk (or store manager or owner, whichever it was) on the face was a second (assault and battery)

Ignoring Officer Wilson's order to get out of the middle of the street (a main thoroughfare in Ferguson, btw) and get onto the sidewalk a third.

The fact that Michael was wearing two specific (unusual colored items) reported to 911 by a caller from the store which gave Office Wilson a reasonable suspicion to stop and detain Brown, even after Brown and his friend ignored the directive to get out of the street.

Michael Brown's assault on Officer Wilson while the officer was still sitting in his police SUV (offense number four).

I'd had a lot more empathy for the Brown family if they were honest about Michael's conduct that led to this sad chain of events. However, Leslie (the stepfather) had absolutely no business trying to incite a riot or arson standing in the middle of a crowd. It is this lack of self responsibility, and acknowledgement of accountability that really bothers me. I cannot judge whether Officer Wilson actually reacted with unreasonable force under the set of circumstances and events that took place in that preceding hour or half hour, but this case is not as clear cut as others have been in the recent past, and for that, Michael Brown and his family have to accept at lease some of the responsibility,
 
JhonsJoe:
This is gonna be really politically incorrect. Michael Brown ROBBED a store minutes earlier, its not because he's black. The officer did the right thing by stopping him. The only problem is the excessive use of force, he couldve just tazed him.
Actually, Stuzem, Wilson was not required to carry a tazer, and he has stated that he has never carried one in his five year career.

As detailed in his interview with ABC, a tazer is extremely bulky to carry and not many officers in his force regularly carry one. Wilson also explained his options with dealing with Brown before taking out his firearm.

Very briefly:

Mace would've incapacitated both of them, given the proximity between the two struggling.
The expandable baton would've been impractical, given the compactness of the car inside (no room to expand).
 
punk d:
I'm a black man living in America. I am a black man working in a predominantly white field where very few managers look like me. I fear for myself and my sons that if we find ourselves at the wrong place at the wrong time, we could end up like Michael Brown.

I have been disturbed by Wilson's comments since the non-indictment has come down. He call wrestling with brown like a 5 year old wrestling Superman and yet he was able to wrestle Superman and win firing off two shots of his gun. Further, Wilson stated he went after Brown after - repeat after - Brown ran from the shots. This makes sense from the sense that the officer was going to at least arrest Brown, but subduing Brown didn't appear to be in the officer's mindset and instead he only saw a 6' 4" black kid who was more likely than not being disrespectful to the officer. What gets me most is that Brown put his hands out, which Wilson interpreted as an aggressive sign. Witness #40 also saw it that way. Witness #40 also wrote how she needs to see black people as not just nig--rs.

And that might be what the problem is. If the kid is white perhaps Wilson doesn't feel as threatened perhaps he sees when he puts his hands up he sees surrender and not aggression. Those are split second decisions and when we may never know what was going on in Brown's head. I don't disagree that Wilson was afraid, but I'm not sure if he had such cause to be afraid at the time he shot his weapon 10 times after the initial altercation.
A friend of mine who is a talk show host on the radio station WORD in Greenville, SC, Vince Coakley (who happens to be a black man) had an entirely different take of the situation. First, I have to note, that according to the Grand Jury witness testimony, no witness testified that Brown ever put his hands up in surrender. Witness # 40 was injected opinion 'as she saw it' which means she interpreted the incident rather than made a factual statement that corroborated anything forensically determined or supported by witness testimony.

Keeping that in mind, witnesses nearly unanimously gave testimony entirely supporting Wilson's account.

That said, I called into the show and spoke with Vince on the air to ask him, as a a black man, his interpretation of the whole matter. He had a very interesting interpretation that no one on either side of this issue has taken into account. In a nutshell:

The only reason this incident even made the news was because it could be distorted by the bias of fitting perfectly into a Liberal/Progressive media template that involves stereotypes and could be exploited for sensationalist purposes.

To wit: White Cop shoots Black Kid, ergo, must be racially motivate. Fits the template perfectly.

If the races had been reversed and a Black Cop shot a White Kid and it was contended that the Black Cop shot the White Kid because of racist motives, it would not fit the Liberal/Progressive media template. In fact, it would not even have been in the news regardless of any bias of any news organisation, right or left.

I am familiar with Ferguson, MO and I know exactly where this shooting occurred. Here is a town that is largely African American. Yet, the Black community complains that there aren't enough Black cops on the police force. Then they claim white cops are out to kill black kids. Why aren't there more black policemen? Because of the belief by the community that the system is corrupt and they don't like the police and refuse to support the 'corrupt' system by becoming policemen. It's a circular argument. If you want change, then you must participate instead of burning down your own neighbours' property in protest.

The race issue is a political expedient and tool into pulling the wool over the eyes of everyone to hid the real problem. The real problem is that in the US, everyone, be they black, white, purple or green, do not take responsibility for their own lives and instead expect someone else to do everything for them. People in America today blame all their problems on someone else, do nothing constructive about it, and then complain when nothing happens as they sit on their collective arse or riot senselessly in a vein hope of getting someone else to do something for them.

I see too much of the divisive issue of race being played up by all too many people on every end of the spectrum of political behaviour. White people complain they didn't get a job because of Affirmative Action; black people complain they didn't get the job because they weren't the right skin colour. The race issue is an illusion inflicted upon us by people who want to keep everyone down regardless of skin colour and this is evidenced by the fact that no one is getting the job.

Sure, there are A-holes out there that will make decisions according to skin colour, but those A-holes need to be beat senseless with a big stick. This all points out the big scam being pulled on everyone regardless of race: the mass media, politicians, do-gooders and not so good-doers like to pigeon-hole people into categories because it is all to easy to tread people as members of a group rather than treat them as individuals. Lumping all whites and all blacks into to manageable groups is easier than dealing the millions of individuals. It is a dirty political trick that has been pulled on all of us since the beginning of time.

The sad thing is that a person of one race will never be able to look at a person of another race without the cultural baggage of ugly and unjust stereotypes coming to mind. It's even sadder that there are people who try to exploit this fact for one reason or another. It's up to us as individuals to think before we act rather than to just blindly react. We, as the Human Race need to think instead of react. This means we have to act as individuals and not members of a group, or in other words, don't let the bastards trick us into thinking we are only members of a collective group.

The objective reasoning is that we all should have the goal of protecting the rights and dignity of all minorities and also remember that the world's smallest minority is the individual. We need to thumb our noses at the race-baters and say that we aren't going to play that game any more.
 
Roman, it was definitely not near unanimous. The only consistent thing about the witness testimony, was that it was not consistent.

Grosse points out that the Brown family has not acknowledged what Brown (allegedly) did leading up to his death. Stealing $40 cigars does not usually result in getting shot by an officer. That's usually not the punishment for that particular crime or the punishment for (allegedly) assaulting a store clerk.

And that's the point, the crimes Brown allegedly committed don't fit with the result. And that's a problem. The "liberal" media is not the cause of the riots. The cause of the riots is the fact that people are frustrated by a system they feel disproportionately targets them and gives them no justice when they are "victims". This is just another example of their frustrated feeling. The death of a 12 year old who was shot about 2 seconds after being engaged by police would be another example of the concern that black folk have that police will shoot first and ask later.
 
I think it is also true that when protests happen there are many people who genuinely want to protest. Then there is the group of peoe who use the protest as an excuse to commit violence, to destroy and to loot property. The London riots a few years back were similar in that regard (though not about race).

It is unfortunate that the protests have turned into violent and destructive rioting. It does nothing to advance the right arguments.

Punk D: you say it was no way near unanimous, do you know what the split was for the Grand Jury's decision? It is horrible to hear that you worrying for your own safety and that of your sons. Nobody deserves to live in fear.
 
punk d:
Roman, it was definitely not near unanimous. The only consistent thing about the witness testimony, was that it was not consistent.

Grosse points out that the Brown family has not acknowledged what Brown (allegedly) did leading up to his death. Stealing $40 cigars does not usually result in getting shot by an officer. That's usually not the punishment for that particular crime or the punishment for (allegedly) assaulting a store clerk.

And that's the point, the crimes Brown allegedly committed don't fit with the result. And that's a problem. The "liberal" media is not the cause of the riots. The cause of the riots is the fact that people are frustrated by a system they feel disproportionately targets them and gives them no justice when they are "victims". This is just another example of their frustrated feeling. The death of a 12 year old who was shot about 2 seconds after being engaged by police would be another example of the concern that black folk have that police will shoot first and ask later.
I'm not so sure you should be saying "allegedly" at this point. There is security camera video, and the reason the office confronted Brown in the first place is because he robbed the place and assaulted the clerk.
 
Robbery and assault in of itself may not get police force (deadly or otherwise used against you) though per use of force officer prescense in of itaelf is considered the first use of force followed by Verbal and Physical commands and it escalates from there.

But certainly by (allegedly) slamming the officers police vehicle door back in the officers face and trying to physically prevent the officer from exiting the vehicle will ramp up the use of force required pretty quickly. Futher being combative with an officer and trying to take their weapon bumps it up more. At that point the inital reason for an investigative stop goes out the window. It could be for $40 cigars or a $2 pop or a $2,000 diamond -- doesnt matter --- at that point the officer is fighting for their life and if someone tries to wrestle their service sidearm away and the officer feels threathened and the possibility it can be used against him or her then the use of force is going to escalate even further towards deadly force area.

Like I said previously though -- none of us were there so we can play the what if guessing games all we want -- doesnt change anything. But perhaps it should show people when confronted by officers (there is youtube videos all the time of law abiding citizens being acausted by officers and keeping their cool and holding the officer accountable and diffuse situations) and if youve actually maybe done something allegedly or otherwise if the officers commands are lawful comply with them and get your day in court to explain yourself. Maybe your defense can get you off? But never ever be combative towards an officer or try to reach for their weapon (allegedly) or otherwise. If you put the officers life in danger and especially try to take their weapon, no matter who you are -- what pigment you are --' what background you come from --- reaching for an officers weapon will never end good. It will most likely end up badly for all involved.
 
PaulWallLibertarian42:
Interresting thoughts Roman, though I am beginning to wonder if you know everybody? :fish:

You're THE NSA aren't you? :P

;)

punk d:
Roman, it was definitely not near unanimous. The only consistent thing about the witness testimony, was that it was not consistent.

Grosse points out that the Brown family has not acknowledged what Brown (allegedly) did leading up to his death. Stealing $40 cigars does not usually result in getting shot by an officer. That's usually not the punishment for that particular crime or the punishment for (allegedly) assaulting a store clerk.

And that's the point, the crimes Brown allegedly committed don't fit with the result. And that's a problem. The "liberal" media is not the cause of the riots. The cause of the riots is the fact that people are frustrated by a system they feel disproportionately targets them and gives them no justice when they are "victims". This is just another example of their frustrated feeling. The death of a 12 year old who was shot about 2 seconds after being engaged by police would be another example of the concern that black folk have that police will shoot first and ask later.

The Grand Jury decision was unanimous.

Stealing $40 dollars in cigars usually doesn't fit with the result. But trying to grab a policeman's gun after nearly bashing his eye out generally does not engender love on the part of the policeman. You try to grab a policeman's and you can be assured you will get shot one way or another.

To be honest, I don't think the shooting had any racial overtones on the part of Wilson. It was purely a matter of self defence. It was a case of a smartass kid who didn't think a policeman would shoot him for charging at him after having tried to take his gun. Part of the evidence that the news media never mentioned (see my bias comments) was the dash cam and audio evidence from the police cruiser.

I don't think that the police in Ferguson, MO are targeting blacks. Now, if this was New Jersey or NYC (Bastions of Liberalism), then I would have my doubts.



mcmasterdonia:
Roman is the President of the United States :P

If I were, I'd resign immediately and save America. :fish:
 
What do you guys think of Charles Barkley's comments?

Former NBA star Charles Barkley recently called Ferguson looters "scumbags," praised police officers who work in black neighborhoods, and said he supports the decision made by the grand jury not to indict officer Darren Wilson in the Michael Brown shooting.

During an interview on 97.5 The Fanatic in Philadelphia on Tuesday, the day after the Ferguson decision was announced, host Mike Missanelli asked Barkley about it and why "black America" doesn't trust the ruling.

His response surprised some listeners.

Recommended: Race equality in America: How far have we come?

"The true story came out from the grand jury testimony," Barkley said, adding that he was made aware of "key forensic evidence, and several black witnesses that supported Officer Darren Wilson’s story..." He continued, "I can’t believe anything I hear on television anymore. And, that’s why I don’t like talking about race issues with the media anymore, because they (the media) love this stuff, and lead people to jump to conclusions. The media shouldn’t do that. They never do that when black people kill each other. "

He also called those who rioted after the decision was announced "scumbags," and said "There is no excuse for people to be out there burning down people's businesses, burning down police cars."

And in a marked departure from other prominent black leaders who have questioned tactics used by officers and, in some cases, accused officers of racial profiling and outright racism, Barkley supported police officers, especially those who work in black neighborhoods.

“[W]e have to be really careful with the cops, because if it wasn’t for the cops we would be living in the Wild, Wild West in our neighborhoods," he said. "We can’t pick out certain incidentals that don’t go our way and act like the cops are all bad.... Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn't for the cops?”

His comments are in sharp contrast with those made by other black leaders on the Ferguson case. Rev. Al Sharpton and civil rights activist Jesse Jackson have both criticized the Ferguson decision and racial profiling by police. President Obama is scheduled to hold meetings with civil rights groups Monday on law enforcement and how to rebuild trust in black communities.

Other black athletes have also reacted to the Ferguson decision. Prior to Sunday’s kickoff against the Oakland Raiders, St. Louis Rams football players Stedman Bailey, Tavon Austin, Jared Cook, Chris Givens and Kenny Britt entered the field with their hands up, referring to the "hands up, don't shoot," rallying cry of Michael Brown supporters.

This PBS Newshour chart shows that a majority of grand jury witnesses agreed that Michael Brown reached into Officer Wilson's police car, but a majority also testified that Michael Brown had his hands up when he was fatally shot.

Barkley immediately drew praise from conservative media and bloggers. "Charles Barkley speaks the truth about Ferguson, calls out the media, and it’s EPIC," wrote Young Conservatives. "Former NBA star Charles Barkley slams Ferguson rioters, leftstream media and Obama," said the Tea Party News Network.

While Barkley's comments are a departure from that of some of his black colleagues, they shouldn't be surprising to those who know Barkley.

In 2013, Barkley famously said he agreed with the George Zimmerman acquittal in the shooting of Trayvon Martin. In July of last year, a Florida jury found that neighborhood watch leader Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, was not guilty in the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin.

"That’s probably not a popular opinion among most people. But just looking at the evidence, I agreed with the verdict," he told CNBC host Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell about the Zimmerman verdict.

Twitter lit up with reaction to Barkley's comments, both angry and supportive.

The article quotes some of the tweets:

Yahoo News Charles Barkey Supports Ferguson Grand Jury Decision
 
The problem with supporting the police and authorities is that they've done nothing to earn or warrant it. Are the people of Ferguson supposed to respect an overwhelmingly white, male police force and government when instead of addressing concerns they institute mass punishments in the form of curfews and heavy handed tactics that are directly the fault of police militarisation (which I know some of the conservative commenters in this topic also oppose).

It's stuff like this that just reinforces the 'us and them' way the authorities have approached Ferguson at every turn. You do not need to be in camouflage, you do not carry around assault rifles like you're two seconds away from turning someone into mush (and indeed, you should only carry weapons around like the police in that picture are if you're going to use them) and there are better ways of dealing with the problems in Ferguson than the kind of curfews and crackdowns you used to see in Soviet satellite states rather than American cities and townships.
 
In the same way that sexism goes both ways, guess which way the majority of it goes and is therefore the bigger problem?
 
fc,220x200,red.u1.jpg
 
Racism going both ways would mean that for 300+ years people who have less melanin than others would have been enslaved. That's not factually accurate.

Racism is about power. It's one thing for my son to think someone is a jerk because they were red shoes. It's quite another for an authority figure to put all the little boys and girls in a corner b/c they wear blue shoes.

Same mentality but far different real life implications.
 
Syrixia:
Have you seen the current map yet?
Omg who made it jpg :(
punk d:
Racism going both ways would mean that for 300+ years people who have less melanin than others would have been enslaved. That's not factually accurate.

Racism is about power. It's one thing for my son to think someone is a jerk because they were red shoes. It's quite another for an authority figure to put all the little boys and girls in a corner b/c they wear blue shoes.

Same mentality but far different real life implications.

Exactly this.
 
NIERR: Alunya probably did. She's the new cartographer. Though she has added many new countries!

PUNK: And that's why we must stop it. Problem is people have the right to their own opinion. I think that's why racism still lingers. People have been using that excuse.
 
I have a friend whom other friends of mine consider a straight up racist. This friend in fact said to me "your people perpetuate" the images that flash across the screen.

His problem - imo - is he can't see outside himself. We all have biases but we need to be willing to first recognize them and then second mentally allow ourselves the possibility that we're wrong.

I actually wrote about how we can end racism. [Shameless Plug] - you can read about it here:

http://www.golocalprov.com/news/don-roach-were-still-ignorant-on-race
 
Back
Top