Then remember the fuss Greta Christina made, the article Questlove wrote, and the response Rebecca watson wrote?
Also recall the provocative statements made by Geraldo, wherein he states that the women of the jury would have made the same decision in the same circumstances.
Now this history is fresh in your mind, fast forward to to September 14 of this year.
Early that Saturday morning, a young black male college student was in a car accident in North Carolina.
The man allegedly knock/kicked door of nearby house. This was likely an attempt to get help.
The woman inside the house trips an alarm, calls 911 and tells them something about the event (it's not clear yet precisely how she described the situation to authorities).
Three cops show up, one of them shoots the man multiple times.
The story has made the rounds to Skepchick, in a post titled "When Stereotypes Kill".
It contains a long story in which Rebecca Watson makes the same choices. A young male college student kicked her door, Watson called the cops. Cops then sorted the situation out.
The article admits fault for all parties, but then continues on some very specific policy suggestions:
I can say without a doubt in my mind that both the homeowner and the cop in Ferrell’s case were very, very, tragically wrong.
These are only two data points: black man gunned down by a cop for knocking on a door in the middle of the night; white man handcuffed and talked to by cops for kicking a door in the middle of the night. They’re different cities, different people, slightly different circumstances. But I do think we need to recognize that there are clearly ways to solve these problems without guns.
If, as “AtheistGorilla” and others suggest, it’s understandable that a cop would shoot a black man for being suspicious, then cops shouldn’t have guns. End of story. Remember that this isn’t a ridiculous idea: cops in Great Britain don’t (by and large) carry firearms, and surveys show that they like it that way.
The research at this point is very clear: stereotypes are intensely powerful ideas that directly impact our behavior. We clearly need to take some drastic steps to be sure that the people most affected by stereotype threat are protected from the authority figures who we allow to carry lethal weapons.
Of course, one stops short of calling the police racist in this situation as going as far as to say that would also call into question the reaction of white women everywhere pulling alarms and calling 911 every time a black person is at the door.
But then it ends with this demand that cops stop carrying guns.
It's interesting cops receive the longest lecture about how they should have handled the situation. They should have showed up unarmed, gave the man a stern talking to, and then everything would be great.
And every other day of the week, social justice warriors are telling cops to go fuck themselves.
Instead of cops not using guns, perhaps "progressive" white women everywhere can stop using cops. It just so happens that strangers trying to rob, murder or rape might not typically loudly announce their presence at one's front door.
Not using cops. It's the only foolproof way to protect people most affected by stereotype threat from authority figures.
More seriously however, perhaps the most effective weapon the cops had that night was numbers.
It's conceivable that fewer police officers would need to carry guns if there were other means of force always at their disposal. Perhaps public safety did not need three armed individuals at the scene.
More boots on the ground. Guns only in the hands of experienced officers. It's a workable idea, but it costs money.
Time to start complying with tax law!