Search Results: new attitude

Yesterday, the Washington Post published an article based on a statistical analysis of police shootings and race. It reported that police kill more white people than black people per year, but because black people are a minority of the population, they have a higher chance of being killed by police than does a white person.

If a a white person is killed under questionable circumstances, it does not gain the same media attention as does the shooting of a black person. Why should race make a difference if the issue is the arbitrary use of force by police? The obvious answer is that shootings that are potentially racially motivated appeal to the emotions of the public and the media is feeding off of that energy. But one might also ask whether the media is, in fact, fueling the emotions of the public and, if so, whether that is the proper role of the media in reporting news events.

The article has an implicit suggestion that black people are shot disproportionately by police because of the perception that black people represent a greater threat of violence than do white people. Of course, each person should be accountable for their own attitudes but responsibility for this problem need not be seen as an indivisible monolith of prejudice. Do black people do things that promote an image of violence?

Everyone who is concerned about this issue says that we need to engage in dialogue and that is what I am attempting to do with this post. These are not rhetorical questions and I would like to read serious replies. By asking these questions, I am not suggesting that police officers should be absolved of responsibility for unjustified shootings; however, holding police officers accountable does not mean that we should not ask whether there are others who have contributed to the toxic atmosphere. If you want to reply to call me names, you have the freedom to do so, but if you are serious about wanting to promote change, you will not choose such a childish tactic.