04-18-2018, 11:01 AM
(04-18-2018, 10:54 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I understand that principal, I just feel like it get's extrapolated and applied into too many areas in society. By that same logic, should we condemn laws against dealing drugs on the street because they unfairly target black males? Should we condemn laws against prostitution because they unfairly target drug addicted females?
What is funny is that you focus on drug enforcement, which is absolutely something we should be looking at. White people are just as likely, if not more likely, to be drug users and/or dealers, yet the rate at which people of color are arrested, charged, and imprisoned for drug crimes is multiple times higher than for white people. They also receive stiffer sentences when they are found guilty. We should look at our drug laws, especially things like how we treat crack differently than cocaine which means black people are punished in much harsher ways than white people for the same sort of crimes.
Prostitution gets into some other issues that veer away from this discussion.
(04-18-2018, 10:54 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Rules and policies are designed with the intent of protecting people's rights from offenders. In our situation here, Starbucks' right to efficiently conduct business. Instead of a racial overtone to the Starbucks story, the headline should have been more like "Starbucks cracking down on loitering at busy Metro locations".
This is what they should be designed for. This is not what they are usually designed for.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
