It's now racist for a store owner to stop thieves and violent behavior

[Lomadeaux]

Now there are people that are boycotting because they feel blacks are profiled. Why do you have an issue with this boycott?

He profiled 3 kids who stole.... So he was right.... but somehow it's racist?

[The Big Dunn]

Oh, they did play the race card when they were caught at first.



It's only after pleading guilty that they rescinded the slander.

And yeah, I have a problem with the boycott, because it was based on a lie.

From the article you posted:

Many believe the timing was right for the conflict to boil over; the arrests came the day after Donald Trump won the presidential election, electrifying students who had long heard suspicions of racial profiling at Gibson's.

So what is clear is the students are misguided and mad (typical) but this clearly wasn't the 1st time the issue of racial profiling at this establishment was an issue. Perhaps you missed this part of the article in your eagerness to forward your anti liberal agenda.

They rescinded as part of the plea deal.

The boycott isn't based on a lie. it's based on how some people felt about the store. those feelings only came out in the mish mash of BS this incident sparked according to your article.

So I agree with you it was right for the people that attempted to steal got caught, charged, and then pled guilty and were punished.

However, prior to this, according to the article you posted, there was racial tension within the black community relative to this store.

So, how exactly did you read this and think it is now racist for a store owner to stop thieves and violent behavior?

[Theodore]

From the article you posted:

Many believe the timing was right for the conflict to boil over; the arrests came the day after Donald Trump won the presidential election, electrifying students who had long heard suspicions of racial profiling at Gibson's.

So what is clear is the students are misguided and mad (typical) but this clearly wasn't the 1st time the issue of racial profiling at this establishment was an issue. Perhaps you missed this part of the article in your eagerness to forward your anti liberal agenda.

They rescinded as part of the plea deal.

The boycott isn't based on a lie. it's based on how some people felt about the store. those feelings only came out in the mish mash of BS this incident sparked according to your article.

So I agree with you it was right for the people that attempted to steal got caught, charged, and then pled guilty and were punished.

However, prior to this, according to the article you posted, there was racial tension within the black community relative to this store.

So, how exactly did you read this and think it is now racist for a store owner to stop thieves and violent behavior?

They were asked to prove that the store was racist, but cannot prove it, the black community. Instead it was something about "being watched."

Pressed by a reporter to provide evidence or examples of profiling, they said only that when black students enter the store, they feel as though they're being watched.

Store owners tend to watch everyone. That's part of being a small store owner.

Even a retired professor and other residents defended the store owners against these slanders.

Copeland and other residents say the accusations of racism are unfounded.

"I've never seen evidence; it's always hearsay," Copeland said. "When your fellow student is shutting down a conversation because he or she is made uncomfortable, it leads to a hive mentality."

Some just use the race card on everything. Like those 3 perpetrators when they were caught. They stole and attacked the owner, then used it, then the school and students piled on the store owner. So it's not a stretch to say that stopping thieves and violent behavior is considered "racist" to liberals. After all this is considered to be a very liberal school.

[The Big Dunn]

They were asked to prove that the store was racist, but cannot prove it, the black community. Instead it was something about "being watched."

Store owners tend to watch everyone. That's part of being a small store owner.

Even a retired professor and other residents defended the store owners against these slanders.


Some just use the race card on everything. Like those 3 perpetrators when they were caught. They stole and attacked the owner, then used it, then the school and students piled on the store owner. So it's not a stretch to say that stopping thieves and violent behavior is considered "racist" to liberals. After all this is considered to be a very liberal school.

Ok. It comes down to whether you think those feelings of being profiled are real and valid or if they were just made up. Seems clear to me there is validity to this because this had been discussed long before the shoplifting incident.

I get the sense you think profiling is just something that occurs regardless of the skin color or ethnicity of store customers. I wouldn't agree with that in general but don't know about this store specifically. I am sure the owner had people that defended him. doesn't mean those that felt profiled are wrong nor does it mean those defending him are lying.

Some use the race card on everything just the same as others treat people of different races differently all the time.

Again, according to the article the feelings were discussed well in advance of this incident. This incident, and the Trump win, awakened anger and those feelings.

It is silly and disingenuous to say that stopping thieves and violent behavior is considered "racist" to liberals. The clear motivation behind the continued boycott is the perception that existed well before this incident. it seems you are just ignoring this.

The kid with the podcast IMO has the right idea because there has been no real discussion between the community and the store owner about the perceived profiling.

[Lomadeaux]

From the article you posted:

Many believe the timing was right for the conflict to boil over; the arrests came the day after Donald Trump won the presidential election, electrifying students who had long heard suspicions of racial profiling at Gibson's.

So what is clear is the students are misguided and mad (typical) but this clearly wasn't the 1st time the issue of racial profiling at this establishment was an issue. Perhaps you missed this part of the article in your eagerness to forward your anti liberal agenda.

They rescinded as part of the plea deal.

The boycott isn't based on a lie. it's based on how some people felt about the store. those feelings only came out in the mish mash of BS this incident sparked according to your article.

So I agree with you it was right for the people that attempted to steal got caught, charged, and then pled guilty and were punished.

However, prior to this, according to the article you posted, there was racial tension within the black community relative to this store.

So, how exactly did you read this and think it is now racist for a store owner to stop thieves and violent behavior?

Why do you defend people who rob and steal?

[Theodore]

Ok. It comes down to whether you think those feelings of being profiled are real and valid or if they were just made up. Seems clear to me there is validity to this because this had been discussed long before the shoplifting incident.

I get the sense you think profiling is just something that occurs regardless of the skin color or ethnicity of store customers. I wouldn't agree with that in general but don't know about this store specifically. I am sure the owner had people that defended him. doesn't mean those that felt profiled are wrong nor does it mean those defending him are lying.

Some use the race card on everything just the same as others treat people of different races differently all the time.

Again, according to the article the feelings were discussed well in advance of this incident. This incident, and the Trump win, awakened anger and those feelings.

It is silly and disingenuous to say that stopping thieves and violent behavior is considered "racist" to liberals. The clear motivation behind the continued boycott is the perception that existed well before this incident. it seems you are just ignoring this.

The kid with the podcast IMO has the right idea because there has been no real discussion between the community and the store owner about the perceived profiling.

Look, I'm not saying that ethnic and racial profiling does not occur, but you have 1 side where 3 perpetrators that committed the shoplifting and physical attack claims it, versus a retired professor of the same college and other residents say that it's hearsay.

Now, there was a mentioned in the article that black residents said they were being watched, well small store owners tend to do that to everyone. How do we know that black people were being watched more than other residents and it's just because of racial/ethnic bias? We don't.

Plus, there was this little tidbit in the article:

Gibson's loses thousands of dollars to theft, the lawsuit said. It rejects any accusations of racial bias, pointing to police figures in the past five years that show only six out of 40 adults arrested for shoplifting at the bakery were black.

If there was racial bias, wouldn't this number be much higher than 6 out of 40? Plus, I have mentioned that many residents say there was no evidence of racial bias but just hearsay.

[The Big Dunn]

Look, I'm not saying that ethnic and racial profiling does not occur, but you have 1 side where 3 perpetrators that committed the shoplifting and physical attack claims it, versus a retired professor of the same college and other residents say that it's hearsay.

Now, there was a mentioned in the article that black residents said they were being watched, well small store owners tend to do that to everyone. How do we know that black people were being watched more than other residents and it's just because of racial/ethnic bias? We don't.

Plus, there was this little tidbit in the article:


If there was racial bias, wouldn't this number be much higher than 6 out of 40? Plus, I have mentioned that many residents say there was no evidence of racial bias but just hearsay.

To your 1st paragraph, the article clearly states that well before this incident there was a feeling of profiling by the owner within a certain segment of the university community. Now the professor didn't agree and that is fine. However, his feeling doesn't make the other feelings wrong or incorrect.

to your 2nd paragraph:

1) I worked in 4 different small businesses before and during college and while putting myself through graduate school. Owners do not treat people like this. I've found that owners of small businesses are more friendly and respectful.

2) if we don't know what the owner's motivation was then we just can't say it wasn't because of racial/ethnic bias, right?. Since there was no conversation people were left to make up their own mind when interpreting the owner's actions. They could be wrong, but they could be right.

If it isn't right for them to jump to a conclusion, it isn't right for you to either. My guess is it's somewhere in the middle-the owner treats customers, minority or not, one way if he knows them and another way if he doesn't.

No, that number in and of itself doesn't refute the perception people had of racial bias.

Obviously different segments of the community will feel differently about what is happening. Again, it comes back to how the individual feels and if you give credence to those feelings.

You have to really be able to understand how each group feels.once the owner was robbed, you and I understand why he would profile certain people. Now try to understand how a black person that never stole anything would feel if the owner watched them the 1st time they wen to that store?

Now if they go and ask the professor-he is going to tell them "the owner got robbed, he's changed since then, he isn't a bigot". But, if they ask a fellow student they might get "yeah, he always watches me funny and follows me when I come in."

Neither perception is wrong IMO.

[The Big Dunn]

I appreciate the willingness to discuss this Bygeorge. While I thought it was complete BS to title the thread the way you did, I more than appreciate the willingness to engage in a meaningful way.

I have a problem with what I believe is your anti liberal agenda, but at least you stand up for those beliefs.

[Sidney Powell]

The only racist part is that I can't use the N word when I flash my shotgun to shoo out suspicious looking peeps from my store

[JimRaynor]

I would really love to see a united country where all of its citizens are doing well and are living harmoniously....

It's becoming increasingly difficult when you literally have cases like this where the man who got beat up by 3 black kids for catching them stealing and using a fake ID is considered the offender and the kids the victims.

This isn't an isolated case, there are laws now being enacted like the one in California that decriminalized having HIV and not reporting it to their partner, or the law presented in Philly about shopkeepers having to take down their protective glass because it's racist to their customers. Laws that are literally turning right and wrong on its head.