If Only Justin Carter Were Black…Or Muslim…

Justin2

Maybe people would care if he looked like the President’s son, and not mine…

If Justin Carter were black or Muslim….

  • maybe the news media would take an interest in a Texas teenager being imprisoned and charged with a terrorist threat for an obvious joke on Facebook;
  • maybe progressive and civil rights organizations would question whether his prosecution was the result of an abuse of power by prosecutors, and fearful paranoia by the his community;
  • maybe pundit and commentator accusations of official bias against his race or religion would result in authorities questioning the wisdom of their actions and the cruelty of Justin’s persecution;
  • maybe professional activists and race-hucksters would use their influence to focus attention on his plight, the miscarriage of justice, and its dangerous implications for the rest of us;
  • maybe the ACLU would deem his case worthy of its intervention and support;
  • ...maybe Al Sharpton would organize demonstrations protesting law enforcement ruining the life of an innocent young man  because he was insufficient sensitive to irrational public fearfulness, instead of organizing protests against a jury’s just and unimpeachable acquittal of a defendant based on inadequate evidence to convict.
  • maybe the President of the United States would feel that his case was worthy of a lecture to the nation about the importance of free speech, and why fear of guns, violence and terrorism shouldn’t turn the U.S. into a censorious police state.

But unfortunately for Justin Carter and the First Amendment, he isn’t black or Muslim, so the serious criminal charges against him for daring to express himself remain, the news media has been silent on the case for more than a week, the ACLU ignores him, the President’s attentions and priorities remain elsewhere, and most of the public has never heard of him, or doesn’t give a damn.

Please join me in trying to get this terrible injustice noticed and rectified, and by participating in “Quote Justin Carter On Social Media Day,”

August 1, 2013.

Remember, the words that made Justin a criminal are these:

“Oh yeah, I’m real messed up in the head. I think Ima shoot up a kindergarten and watch the blood of the innocent rain down and eat the beating heart of one of them.” lol. jk.”

Post them on Facebook, Twitter, Link’d In, or your own blog, and let’s see if they can arrest all of us.

84 thoughts on “If Only Justin Carter Were Black…Or Muslim…

  1. Jack, I read last week that someone posted the bond for this guy, and he was out of jail.. Or was that some internet hoax?

    Anyways I will post on my twitter and FB feeds on Aug 1 cause this prosecution is insane.

    • It’s not. But since law enforcement efforts involving blacks are presumed, under the current narrative, to be substantially based on racism and bigotry, and since scrutiny of Muslims is presumed be based on profiling and prejudice, I am fairly certain that the outrageous plight of Justin Carter would be sparking the outrage of far more advocates, journalists and elected officials were he a member of either of those groups…or for that matter, female. Do you doubt it?

      I believe that what has happened to Carter is far more indicative of a dangerous trend in the nation than what happened to Trayvon Martin, whose demise was the result of a perfect storm of youth, bad timing, poor communication, fear, foolishness and recklessness by two people, and without any larger societal implications whatsoever. The false introduction of race muddled that story beyond all recognition. The introduction of race in Carter’s situation might have been helpful. Sadly, he’s just a white kid, who happens to be innocent.

        • Agreed. But at this moment, the media, a political party and a civil rights establishment has become determined to prove that the nation is racist and persecuting minorities. If Trayvon Matine was white, we never would have heard of George Zimmerman, to pick a random example out of the air.

          Do I really think race or religious changes would rouse the public and media from its torpor regarding Justin? Probably not.

          • I think the fact that there is institutional racism and persecution of minorities might be why that’s going on. Yes, If Trayvon Martin were light skinned, it’s likely we wouldn’t have heard of George Zimmerman, but a significant part of that likelihood is Martin still being alive.

            Your comment was horrible race-baiting.

            • “Your comment was horrible race-baiting.”

              That’s not true. This is what horrible race-baiting looks like:

              “If Trayvon Martin were light skinned, it’s likely we wouldn’t have heard of George Zimmerman, but a significant part of that likelihood is Martin still being alive.”

              • Yes, I’d say that’s accurate. There is exactly zero evidence that race played a part in Martin,s death, unless tgt is saying that if Martin wasn’t a bigot, maybe he wouldn’t have attacked Zimmerman, whom he assumed was a creepy-ass cracker.

                • There is ample evidence that race played a role in what occurred. Sheesh. That there wasn’t evidence to convict Zimmerman of murder doesn’t mean we pretend nothing occurred.

                    • Let me rephrase. There is definitive evidence that most people unconsciously treat black people differently than they treat white people when it comes to crimes and suspicion there of. There’s definitive evidence that people, in general, fear blacks more than they fear whites. In this situation, Zimmerman’s actions were based on subjective beliefs about what was occurring with a black teenager. It’s not by any means definitive that if Martin were white, he’d still be alive, but it is a significantly likely result.

                    • Rephrase?

                      Nice…

                      “There is evidence that possibly maybe a certain percentage of some people might have a probable amount of some unconscious racial bias that could possibly lead to a certain indeterminate affect on their thought processes that sometimes occasionally leads to possible minor discrimination on occasion. And YOU CAN’T SAY FOR SURE THAT ZIMMERMAN DIDN’T POSSIBLY THINK LIKE THAT, maybe!”

                      An apt analogy:

                      Irresponsible atheist: YOU CAN’T PROVE GOD EXISTS, SO HE DOESN’T!!!!

                      Irresponsible non-atheist: “YOU CAN’T PROVE GOD DOESN’T EXIST, SO HE DOES!!!!!”

                    • Ugh. That’s not what I said. It’s pretty blatantly a strawman. It also denies the realities of the situation.

                    • Yeah, my rephrasing of your rephrasing was clearly hyperbole to demonstrated, how once called on the flaws of your assertion, to keep honest, you had to reword it so abstractly as to not be relevant.

                      But the final analogies are still apt.

              • Zimmerman followed Martin because he was a black kid. That’s fact. We don’t know if Zimmerman would have followed Martin if he were a white kid. I stand by my statement.

                • You’re an idiot.

                  There is a substantive difference between “Zimmerman followed Martin because Martin fit the description of previous recent burglars in the neighborhood, his skin color being part of that identification”

                  AND

                  “Zimmerman followed Martin because Zimmerman believes blackness is an automatic guarantee of criminality”

                  The whole side of the debate that is condemnable and constantly evoked is the narrative that racism motivated Zimmerman’s actions.

                  You’re a fool if you accept that narrative.

                  I don’t doubt that now you will assert that you have meant the first option this entire time n

                  • There is a substantive difference between “Zimmerman followed Martin because Martin fit the description of previous recent burglars in the neighborhood, his skin color being part of that identification”

                    AND

                    “Zimmerman followed Martin because Zimmerman believes blackness is an automatic guarantee of criminality”

                    I didn’t mean to suggest either. What I’m saying is that there is a group bias against blacks that likely affected Zimmerman. It’s possible that he’s the exception to the rule, but the likelihood is that Trayvon’s race affected Zimmerman’s actions unconsciously.

                    The whole side of the debate that is condemnable and constantly evoked is the narrative that racism motivated Zimmerman’s actions.

                    You’re a fool if you accept that narrative.

                    You’re a fool if you pretend that it’s not likely that Zimmerman was affected by race. It’s likely that ANYBODY in that spot would be unintentionally affected by race.

                    I don’t doubt that now you will assert that you have meant the first option this entire time n[ow[?]]

                    Maybe you could give me the benefit of the doubt occasionally.

                    • My formatting got messed up. Below is an attempt to correct it.

                      There is a substantive difference between “Zimmerman followed Martin because Martin fit the description of previous recent burglars in the neighborhood, his skin color being part of that identification”

                      AND

                      “Zimmerman followed Martin because Zimmerman believes blackness is an automatic guarantee of criminality”

                      I didn’t mean to suggest either. What I’m saying is that there is a group bias against blacks that likely affected Zimmerman. It’s possible that he’s the exception to the rule, but the likelihood is that Trayvon’s race affected Zimmerman’s actions unconsciously.

                      The whole side of the debate that is condemnable and constantly evoked is the narrative that racism motivated Zimmerman’s actions.

                      You’re a fool if you accept that narrative.

                      You’re a fool if you pretend that it’s not likely that Zimmerman was affected by race. It’s likely that ANYBODY in that spot would be unintentionally affected by race.

                      I don’t doubt that now you will assert that you have meant the first option this entire time n[ow[?]]

                      Maybe you could give me the benefit of the doubt occasionally.

                    • I think something has changed in how tags are handled in your comments. multiple paragraph citations aren’t working properly.

                    • Then you are Suggesting option 2. That racism (albeit unconscious according to you) did lead Zimmerman just enough to tip his attitude in favor of Martin being criminally oriented.

                    • tex,

                      Then you are Suggesting option 2. That racism (albeit unconscious according to you) did lead Zimmerman just enough to tip his attitude in favor of Martin being criminally oriented.

                      I’m not saying it definitely happened. I’m saying it’s possible. I’m also not saying that any unconscious racism that occurred and created influence would have had an affect on Zimmerman’s early belief that Martin was criminal. It could have also affected how he dealt with a supposed criminal, what he did in the following, any escalation of the fight, how much fear he felt during the fight, or his decision to pull the trigger on his gun.

                      Even tiny changes at each step of the way can create a large difference in the result. It’s not a simple “His unconscious bias did X or didn’t do X”, there are thousands of tiny changes that could be affected.

                    • Yeah ok, it is possible. It’s also possible that a slight abhorrence to whatever song was on the radio might have affected him negatively.

                      Except EVIDENCE from that night and HIS LIFE somewhat negate the impact of even POSSIBLY MINUTE traces of racial bias.

                      But damn it, racism HAD to have something to do with that night. SOMETHING!!!!

                    • The evidence from that night and from his life don’t say a thing about possible unconscious racial bias. I also have still not said that racism had anything to do with what occurred.

                      It’s likely that unconscious racism played some role in the event. What that role is, is unknown. It’s less likely, but still a reasonable possibility, that that unconscious racism may have caused there to be death where their wouldn’t have been otherwise.

                • It’s not a fact. Neither the sequence of events, nor the 911 call, nor Zimmerman’s attitudes shows that. That is pure speculation and confirmation bias. You are officially in the realm of assuming facts to support a pre-determined conclusion. I thought your gig was deconstructing such positions.

                  • Zimmerman thought the black kid was shady and followed him. We don’t know if he would have done the same with a white kid. (We do know that blacks are unconsciously treated differently than whites by most people). I stand by my statement.

                    • Because other black kids had very recently been breaking into homes, so the kid who was casing homes was suspicious.

                      You keep saying “blacks are treated different”. Two things…

                      1) Just because you keep saying that doesn’t make it true and

                      2) Stop trying to lump us in with yourself in order to make you feel less guilty because you cross the street when you walk by black youths.

                      Just because YOU treat them different doesn’t mean WE do.

                    • That you don’t think you treat blacks differently than whites (1) doesn’t actually reflect on how you actually treat them – unconscious bias is unconscious, and (2) doesn’t discredit all the research that shows the unconscious bias is generally present. I’ve referenced some of it elsewhere in this thread.

            • Nonsense. We have a President who comments publicly on imaginary abuses of the justice system to show solidarity with race grievance hucksters/ We have a national media that works overtime to turn a tragic mess into Mississippi Burning, and a victim of self-defense with a legal firearm into an angelic martyr, solely because of his race. The post suggests that the blatant violation of Carter’s rights might matter to these people and institutions if he was the color of the month. And that is a legitimate and accurate observation.

              • Your post suggests that the focus on racial violence is improper. It suggests there isn’t actually a race problem. It’s horrible.

                • I don’t know what post you’re reading, tgt, but if my post suggests that to you, you need to get several body parts checked out. The presumption that all violence between combatants of different races is racially motivated is cynical, illogical and bigoted, since the presumption is typically applied only to the white party. The presumption that this confrontation was based on race is particularly offensive, because Zimmerman has been falsely called white. My post suggests that if the race of a party causes the media to notice a serious rights violation that it would otherwise ignore, even if the violation has nothing to do with race, that can be a good think–i-r-o-n-y. And the opposite of the Martin-Zimmerman fiasco, where race was used to imagine a rights violation that didn’t exist.

                  None of which is commentary on true racial violence.

                  • And the opposite of the Martin-Zimmerman fiasco, where race was used to imagine a rights violation that didn’t exist.

                    This statement shows the issue. It’s very unlikely that race didn’t play a part in the Martin-Zimmerman issue.

                    It might be unintentional, but you’re suggesting in this post that racial minorities get special treatment when their rights are violated. It’s normally the exact opposite.

                    • As long as you are willfully ignoring the evidence your assertion is valid. The evidence is demonstrated time and time and time again that racism had nothing to do with Zimmerman’s decision making process that night.

                      And Jack has asserted that minorities as of late have gotten special treatment *by the media* when their rights are violated. I don’t think you can deny this.

                      When is the last time you hear major reporting of Black on White or Black on Black crime?

                      Crickets…. Crickets…

                    • As long as you are willfully ignoring the evidence your assertion is valid. The evidence is demonstrated time and time and time again that racism had nothing to do with Zimmerman’s decision making process that night.

                      There is no evidence that demonstrates that unconscious racism played no role in what occurred. Ugh. It’s pretty much impossible to show that in most single incidents. You need to look at patterns of incidents to see that there’s a general racism. That racism then has some likelihood to have occurred in any specific incident.

                      And Jack has asserted that minorities as of late have gotten special treatment *by the media* when their rights are violated. I don’t think you can deny this.

                      There have been a couple recently publicized cases of minority rights violations (or thought to be minority rights violations). Considering that (by pretty much everyone’s account) minorities have their rights violated at a much higher clip than whites, this doesn’t seem like special treatment to me.

                      There have also been high profile cases where white people have had possible rights violated. Think Aaron Swartz.

                      When is the last time you hear major reporting of Black on White or Black on Black crime?

                      I thought we were talking about rights violations, not crime. Justin Carter wasn’t a victim of Black on White crime.

                    • “There is no evidence that demonstrates that unconscious racism played a role in what occurred. Ugh. It’s pretty much impossible to show that in most single incidents. You need to look at patterns of incidents to see that there’s not a general racism. That racism then has an extremely tiny and negligible likelihood to have occurred in this specific incident.”

                      Fixed it for you.

                      “I thought we were talking about rights violations, not crime.”

                      Crime isn’t a rights violation? It’s part of the larger statistic. But yes, I began pigeonholing when the larger subject is in debate.

                      Jack’s point is still quite clear and valid. The media has had ample time to discuss the Carter situation. It hasn’t. Why? Not sensational enough and it doesn’t aid the advancing of their narrative. Why? Because the media doesn’t give one good damn about reporting news, but only advancing its approved narrative.

                    • Fixed it for you.

                      That statement’s also true. Since I didn’t say that racism did or didn’t play a role in that night, I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove here.

                      “I thought we were talking about rights violations, not crime.”

                      Crime isn’t a rights violation? It’s part of the larger statistic. But yes, I began pigeonholing when the larger subject is in debate.

                      Yes, crime is very different from rights violations, especially when it comes to reporting of it.

                      Jack’s point is still quite clear and valid. The media has had ample time to discuss the Carter situation. It hasn’t. Why? Not sensational enough and it doesn’t aid the advancing of their narrative. Why? Because the media doesn’t give one good damn about reporting news, but only advancing its approved narrative.

                      The media also ignores stories where the rights of blacks and muslims are violated. The news media picks and chooses what it wants, but, given a random rights violation against a white kid and a random rights violation against a black kid, it’s more likely the news will pick up the violation against the white kid.

                • Race had nothing to do with it. No evidence of such and a life narrative of Zimmerman’s that actually counters the racist accusations.

                  Why do you all continue this narrative?

                  Which, after having been shown all the facts, at this point is either an outright lie on y’all’s part or clear evidence of willful delusion.

                  • Geez. Zimmerman followed Trayvon because he thought a black kid looked out of place. He might have followed a white kid, too, but with the known general bias against blacks, it’s improper to say race definitely had nothing to do with it.

                    • I properly note there’s unconscious bias against blacks. I’m not adding anything in. I’m pointing out that removing race is invalid.

                    • Everyone has unconscious bias against blacks? Bullshit. Many do, too many. The evidence indicates that George Zimmerman isn’t one of the many. yet he is the one being tarred as a racist.

                    • You don’t have to be white to have bias against young black males. You can be any race — including black. Quick anecdote to share. I live in a very racially diverse neighborhood. One of my neighbors is a single black woman raising an adopted black infant. She is going to move because she doesn’t want her son to go to the local schools. She told me that she has to be “especially conscious about raising a black boy” and she would prefer to have him in a whiter, richer neighborhood. (She was raised in a predominantly white neighborhood.) I’ve been thinking about her comment all weekend. Is she being a great mother because she is going to take this action? Is she perpetuating current stereotypes? Are both of these statements true? Racism is a very complicated issue. I think our country has reached the point where we can point to the KKK site that Jack blogged about and say, “that is racism and is disgusting.” But there are subtler forms of racism as well

                    • Jack,

                      Not necessarily everyone, but, yes, most people do. I didn’t believe I had any bias against blacks for the longest time. It took alot of self review for me to realize that I’m not special. I think what pushed me over the top wasthe studies that show that people don’t let facts about how good we are at judging players in sports get in the way of our judgment of players in sports. If a person is told that stat X is twice as reliable as our eyes, we still tend to trust our eyes over stat X.

                      Once I was truly open to the idea that I had unconscious bias, I was able to see it. I try to correct for it, but its impossible to know how well I do, and in emotionally charged situations, I know I fail, too. A pretty blatant example is with my inner city driving. I’ve always been wary when driving through bad Baltimore neighborhoods. I flinch a bit when people are walking towards my car That makes sense, right? Well, I’ve found that I don’t get as wary and flinch when it’s white people in the bad neighborhoods. I likely hadn’t noticed this before as not flinching and not being wary is my default position. When I got wary and flinched, I explained it as the bad neighborhoods, not noticing the other times I was in bad neighborhoods and didn’t react the same.

                      Here are some references:

                      http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/between-the-lines/201204/studies-unconscious-bias-racism-not-always-racists

                      http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/unconscious-racial-bias-shapes-trust-money/story?id=13437350

                      Here’s the money quote for you:

                      “Despite study after study showing that implicit bias exists, it’s still something that a lot of people don’t internalize within their own lives and behavior. There’s a reluctance to admit that in our day-to-day lives, we have this and it matters”

                      Denying that there’s widespread unconscious racial bias is denying reality.

                      —-

                      There isn’t conclusive evidence that Zimmerman has conscious bias against blacks, but I haven’t claimed such. To my knowledge, there’s no evidence that he doesn’t have unconscious bias against blacks. Due to how widespread unconscious bias is, the default position is bias. That might seem uncharitable, but it’s true.

                    • Explain to me what you think is the difference between using black crime statistics to decide that the odds favor the assumption that a black stranger is involved in criminal activity, and using a bias study to assume a George Zimmerman is racially biased. They both seem like profiling to me, and applying attributing group tendencies to specific individuals, which is inherently unfair.

                    • Jack,

                      Explain to me what you think is the difference between using black crime statistics to decide that the odds favor the assumption that a black stranger is involved in criminal activity, and using a bias study to assume a George Zimmerman is racially biased. They both seem like profiling to me, and applying attributing group tendencies to specific individuals, which is inherently unfair.

                      1) the crime statistics are not a valid representation about criminal behavior.
                      2) The racial bias test isn’t a stereotype.This isn’t a 5% do bad, so I think of them as bad (and assume they’re doing bad now). It’s actually: Most people are bad, and it’s most likely that anybody would have been affected in this situation.

                    • eah, if only there had been some other behavior by young Trayvon that could have explained why the black kid had the cops called. Something like walking off-path through lawns, and looking into windows….

                      Oh if only there was some kind of proof that this behavior is something he was likely to engage in, like school records of Trayvon having stolen jewlers and having been in places he wasn’t supposed to be, or text messages suggesting a desire to be “thug”.

                      Oh if only…

                      Oh wait, there IS, you fucking thundertard.

                      And I’m hardly shocked at the three people who think racism is the cause of the whole Zimmerman thing. They are, after all, three of the most fuck-witted people here…

                    • AM,

                      I can’t track what you’re responding to. It looks like most of your comment is a non sequitur.

                      eah, if only there had been some other behavior by young Trayvon that could have explained why the black kid had the cops called. Something like walking off-path through lawns, and looking into windows….

                      That Martin may have been doing some suspicious things does not mean that Zimmerman didn’t treat him differently than he would have treated a white kid.

                      Oh if only there was some kind of proof that this behavior is something he was likely to engage in, like school records of Trayvon having stolen jewlers and having been in places he wasn’t supposed to be, or text messages suggesting a desire to be “thug”.

                      All thinks Zimmerman would have no knowledge of.

                      And I’m hardly shocked at the three people who think racism is the cause of the whole Zimmerman thing. They are, after all, three of the most fuck-witted people here…

                      Are you enjoying your strawmen? Do they keep you warm at night?

                      I didn’t say racism was the cause of the whole thing. I said that it was a likely component in what occurred. I have been explicit in saying that if Martin was white, that does not mean the same general events definitely wouldn’t have played out.

                    • I love AM’s comments — he’s a clever guy but obviously is not wise enough to frame his responses in anything other than gamer-spew-speak. (AM — I’m assuming you’re a gamer, I could be wrong.)
                      AM — No one is saying that there is proof Zimmerman is a racist in this thread. We are talking about the broader issue of racism/bias generally now.

                    • Jack,

                      TGT’s response is like saying:

                      “They’ve done studies that indicate specifically weighted dice tend to fall 83% of the time on the number 5.

                      Now we have a scenario in which this particular die just rolled a “5”. Now, despite evidence from the last hundred rolls of this particular die being equally distributed between all the numbers, because this time it rolled “5”, I KNOW I KNOW I KNOW it has to be one of the weighted dice. Because this study that I googled but didn’t investigate says so.”

                      It is confirmation bias even though TGT pretends to immune to such fallacy.

                    • Beth,

                      Please keep up. We are talking about whether or not Zimmerman was motivated by racism. TGT asserts an unconcious racism. Ablative’s commentary provides examples that imply that Zimmerman’s decisions that night overwhelmingly had nothing to do with racism, therefore even if TGT’s theory is accurate, it would only account for .0000001% of what went on in Zimmerman’s brain (a.k.a. “Didn’t have anything to do with it” considering what TGT asserts were the effects of the disparity in racial un-bias)

                    • TGT,

                      Jack’s beef with your self-allowed statistics and his denied-by-you statistics is valid.

                      Even if your beef with the Crime Statistics is accurate, your beef does not invalidate the data (as your beef really boils down to not liking the sampling method), your beef only increases the error percentage of the data returned by a margin. Instead of saying super-high% of violent crime (+/- 2%) are committed by blacks, it would be super-high% of violent crime (+/- 15%) are committed by blacks. Which subtracting 15% from super-high% still isn’t a very happy picture.

                      And let’s say those stats ARE accurate. That doesn’t make the stats support racist ideology either, it merely points out that something is dreadfully wrong in the *culture* that modern blacks are growing up in. Which Jack has already pointed out in detail and has nothing to do with genetics.

                      Part of your problem is you are unconsciously perpetuating the “Convict Zimmerman for Anything” myth that Martin is a cherubic little boy of pure life and Zimmerman is a predatory monster. Surely if Zimmerman is unconsciously racist (according to you) then Martin certainly has unconscious biases as well.

                    • tex,

                      Again, that test was one example out of many.

                      Now we have a scenario in which this particular die just rolled a “5″. Now, despite evidence from the last hundred rolls of this particular die being equally distributed between all the numbers, because this time it rolled “5″, I KNOW I KNOW I KNOW it has to be one of the weighted dice. Because this study that I googled but didn’t investigate says so.”

                      Do you enjoy your strawman? I didn’t say unconscious racism was definite or any affect from it would definitely changed the outcome of the night.

                      TGT asserts an unconcious racism.

                      No. I assert a likely unconscious racism had a significant chance of affecting the outcome.

                      Ablative’s commentary provides examples that imply that Zimmerman’s decisions that night overwhelmingly had nothing to do with racism, therefore even if TGT’s theory is accurate, it would only account for .0000001% of what went on in Zimmerman’s brain (a.k.a. “Didn’t have anything to do with it” considering what TGT asserts were the effects of the disparity in racial un-bias)

                      Ablative simply justifies what Zimmerman did. We’ve seen that done over and over. That something was possibly justifiable does not mean that bias didn’t play into the events that occurred. It may have been justifiable to shoot a white person in the same situation, but would it have actually occurred? Since there are known general unconscious biases, we don’t know that.

                      Jack’s beef with your self-allowed statistics and his denied-by-you statistics is valid.

                      What?

                      Even if your beef with the Crime Statistics is accurate, your beef does not invalidate the data (as your beef really boils down to not liking the sampling method), your beef only increases the error percentage of the data returned by a margin. Instead of saying super-high% of violent crime (+/- 2%) are committed by blacks, it would be super-high% of violent crime (+/- 15%) are committed by blacks. Which subtracting 15% from super-high% still isn’t a very happy picture.

                      Yes, my problem is with the sample, and no, you can’t just make up your choice of error margin when the sample is known to be biased, but the amount of bias is unknown.

                      And let’s say those stats ARE accurate. That doesn’t make the stats support racist ideology either, it merely points out that something is dreadfully wrong in the *culture* that modern blacks are growing up in. Which Jack has already pointed out in detail and has nothing to do with genetics.

                      That would be true.

                      Part of your problem is you are unconsciously perpetuating the “Convict Zimmerman for Anything” myth that Martin is a cherubic little boy of pure life and Zimmerman is a predatory monster. Surely if Zimmerman is unconsciously racist (according to you) then Martin certainly has unconscious biases as well.

                      I don’t deny that Martin also likely has biases. The studies though, contrary to what’s expected, show that blacks have more biases against blacks than whites.

                      I’m not saying that Martin is an Angel or attempting to perpetuate that stereotype. What I’m doing here is calling out Jack’s idea that our culture is biased towards blacks.

                    • The dice analogy is hardly a strawman. It is a very apt mirror of how you were attributing *unprovable* characteristics to Zimmerman.

                      “It may have been justifiable to shoot a white person in the same situation, but would it have actually occurred?”

                      A white kid beating the living daylights out of Zimmerman? Zimmerman shoots out of reasonable fear for his life?

                      Yes. But please, keep ignoring evidence, testimony, facts, reality and reasonable probabilities in favor of your minute possible and unprovable racial bias theory.

                      “no, you can’t just make up your choice of error margin when the sample is known to be biased, but the amount of bias is unknown.”

                      My choice of the error margin was a hypothetical. “the amount of bias is unknown”. But requires a ridiculous and arbitrary attribution of malice on your part to create a seriously effective adjustment to the data.

                      “The studies though, contrary to what’s expected, show that blacks have more biases against blacks than whites.”

                      I’ve already shown the problems with the study in how it was conducted, conditioned people to answer positively to white associations and negatively to blacks. A fault you no doubt attribute to the crime stats.

                      “What I’m doing here is calling out Jack’s idea that our culture is biased towards blacks.”

                      Jack asserted such?

                    • tex,

                      Dice analogy

                      We don’t have a die that has shown up fairly in the past, and we don’t have me saying that I know the die is unfair.

                      done

                      You know what? I’m not even going to read the rest of your comment. I’m out of this thread. I can’t believe how many times you’ve misrepresented what I’ve said about Zimmerman and unconscious racism. It’s mind boggling. I’m tired of this.

  2. I heard about this case even before reading about it on this site. It’s been featured on CBS news, Huffington Post, and various other media outlets etc. How much more publicity is needed. Carter was released because some anonymous person decided to pay his $500,000 bail money, no doubt because of the publicity.

    What incensed many of the Trayvon protesters was the sense that a minority’s life was not worth very much in the justice system’s eyes. In this case, while Carter may have had his 1st Amendment rights violated, no one has died. It’s pretty impossible to compare the two cases in any way without being flippant that an actual person has died in one, while in the other, the young person will get the chance to speak, and have their day in court. I’m not sure the outrage should be the same, leaving all the race-baiting aside.

    • The outrage shouldn’t be the same. The justice system has nothing to do with measuring the victim’s worth, and while the death of Martin is tragic, the trial result was just in every way. The “outrage” is manufactured and ignorant. Carter, on the other hand, is a victim of totalitarian-style censorship and the gross punishment of free expression. That deserves outrage, and far more concern than a trumped up race story. So no one has died. Is that your standard for when government infringement of core individual rights matter?

      The outrage over Zimmerman’s acquittal is based on ignorance, and the failure to give Carter’s fate sufficient attention is based on ignorance as well.

      • But Carter’s case has been getting plenty of attention in the media. But as it still has yet to play out, and he is out of jail for the moment, it probably won’t get the same sort of play as a dramatic life and death struggle at night, with an unarmed highly photogenic kid on his way home, and a police who declined to make much of an inquiry into the whole matter. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, the stakes are just a lot lower for Carter. If people can’t be bothered by the whole PRISM thing, it’s hardly a surprise that this case doesn’t capture the popular imagination either.

        • I have a pretty astute group of associates. All of them have heard about PRISM, all have heard about Martin-Zimmerman. If they know about Carter, it’s only because I’ve told them. I still haven’t seen it in the print version of the post.

          PRISM is too hard to understand, especially with so many tools in both parties defending it. If the public can’t understand what’s wrong with sentencing a kid to prison for a joke, 1984 has arrived.

  3. John… I read today that if you pay the TSA 85 bucks, they wont molest you. This is a real program expected to really bring the TSA 100s of millions in revenue…. Legalized extortion. I say this to assure you we live in the post 1984 era. Carter is free on bond, but the tyrants that jailed him remain at larger and continue to terrorize this town. The same people that want to nail Carter REFUSE to investigate the scooter store. In fact judge Jack Robbinson is one of four judges that recused themselves from the case… Because he along with the other all took money from the scooter store. They are all thugs and criminals occupying our civil offices.
    And we need all the help we can get throwing them out, from the sheriff, to the DA to the judge, the oppresion is rank down here…. obviously.

  4. I believe it was the esteemed Jesse Jackson (Sr) who once admitted that if he were walking down the street and saw a bunch of black teenagers wending their way toward him, HE WOULD CROSS THE STREET?

    Jackson had to retract that statement.

    Wasn’t it Bill Cosby who was booed off the stage at an NAACP convention when he stated that it was the responsibility of the black community to “make families,” ” teach ethics,” and ‘stop blaming the white race for everything that has happened since the 1600s?” Cosby was right: the “blame game” is too old, too stale, and too anachronistic to hold any water today.

    The fact that the public schools don’t prepare kids for a life of achievement, civic responsibility, and kindness has been left out of the picture. Does one really wonder why American kids — of any race or creed — are far behind those of other countries? Is this not food for thought?

    And does anyone really believe that the majority of prison inmates are not there because they are black, but because they committed crimes, and not that the court system is “racist?” The Justice Department is under fire, yes, but the courts are really not. The question that should be asked is NOT “aren’t we still racist?” but “WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THIS GROUP’ that leads to crime?

    I don’t think the answer is easy. “Head Start” has been in place for more than 40 years. Can anyone show a statistical analysis of how it has helped the black and impoverished population succeed? Don’t think so.

    And similarly, when Cosby talks about “family,” he’s right on. Something like 70% of black children are born without a father to support them — monetarily, physically or emotionally,– and would any psychologist/sociologist refute the negative impact of this fact?

    Get off it. Barack Obama is about as black as I am (Welsh/Russian), and for him to insert himself into this issue as a “black” man — even though he looks like one — is nonsense. And while the world is burning (literally) he takes THIS on as public issue? Shame, shame. Pure politics. As luck would have it, he can’t run again. Because, I’m sorry to say, we’re all such morons that he’d probably be re-elected.

    • And does anyone really believe that the majority of prison inmates are not there because they are black, but because they committed crimes, and not that the court system is “racist?”

      Can’t it be both? Can we say that many of them committed crimes that wouldn’t have been prosecuted, or ever come to law enforcement’s notice, if the perpetrators were white?

      Get off it. Barack Obama is about as black as I am (Welsh/Russian), and for him to insert himself into this issue as a “black” man — even though he looks like one — is nonsense.

      So…people didn’t respond to him like any other black man for 40 years of his life?

      • My husband is half Mexican but looks like the German half of his family. He has never checked any “box” identifying himself as Hispanic — I wonder if he’d feel differently if people had thought he was Mexican his whole life?

  5. TGT,

    Your link to the Implicit Association Test is disappointing. 70%? Great. The test report doesn’t bother breaking down the data into useful information. Like most distributions, it is likely that 70% of people who are affected by unconscious racial preference probably looks like a bell curve. The bell curve describing likelihood that severity of unconscious racial preference is enough to actually effect serious decision making.

    I bet if the study were studied more deeply the effects of unconscious racial bias (and I have my beefs with the study itself) you would see that 70% of people with unconscious bias get broken down into a bell curve in which most people fall into a category that could be described as “has exceedingly minor unconscious racial bias so insignificant as to not really affect most impactful interactions”.

    But unfortunately the report doesn’t discuss this. By the way, have you ever actually seen the test in action? Of the few I found, you are asked to press one of two keys: one key is for “yes the images presented match the criteria” a TRUE key and “no the images presented do not match the criteria” a FALSE key.

    The test then proceeds through a series of categories. The first of which is “Press the TRUE key if the following image has a white female AND/OR a positive word”, the next category is “Press the TRUE key if the following image has a white male AND/OR a positive word”, the next category was “Press the TRUE key if the following image is a black female AND/OR a negative word”, followed by a category “Press the TRUE key if the following image is a black male AND/OR a negative word”.

    SERIOUSLY? what kind of conditioning within the test is that?

    After you are subconsciously conditioned, then they proceed to the categories associating WHITE/NEGATIVE, BLACK/POSITIVE.

    With your brain thoroughly conditioned/confused, your results are analyzed by response time. No kidding that results say “70% of people are unconsciously biased about race”.

    Again, I would still submit that even if that 70% is accurate (I don’t trust that it is), the bell curve would show that the majority of the 70% affected by unconscious racial bias affected so MINUTELY that it does not affect their decision making to the level necessary to affect a scenario like George Zimmerman’s.

    George Zimmerman’s attitude is further minitgated by a life demonstrating non-racist decision making, and within the specific setting of that night you now have to make the GIGANTIC LEAP that an exceedingly minute unconscious bias is enough to lead the man to seek out a confrontational situation. That doesn’t follow.

    The evidence and LOGIC continue to demonstrate precisely what happened:

    The neighborhood saw a series of burglaries with the perpetrators fitting a certain description.

    That evening Zimmerman witnessed an unknown individual engaging in suspicious behavior at night, who further concealed his identity, who fit the description of the previous burglars.

    RACISM HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

    • that is until race-baiters (arguably racist in their own right) saw a chance to perpetuate and justify their income within the race-grievance/distrust-maintenance industry

    • It isn’t just this test. The bias has been found in study after study. That was just one example.

      What’s an actual GIGANTIC LEAP is claiming that Zimmerman had an exceedingly minute unconscious bias. We don’t know what bias he had, if any. It’s likely he had some. Any bias is also likely to flow through the entire situation. It may have been complete neutral that Zimmerman followed Martin, but the intricacies of the interaction may have been touched slightly, and repeatedly, with any bias. A slightly different posture in confrontation. Slightly more fear in the fight. A lessened level before he responded with deadly violence.

      We can’t know what happened either way. Based on our knowledge of the existence of racial bias, it’s reasonable to think that race could have played a role in what happened.

      • “What’s an actual GIGANTIC LEAP is claiming that Zimmerman had an exceedingly minute unconscious bias. We don’t know what bias he had, if any.”

        Sure we do, and evidence from his life indicates anything but racist proclivities.

        When you wish to start tying minute proclivities (in this case un-provable on your part, only attributed because you want it to be so) then you can tie ANYTHING you want to the scenario EVERYTHING impacted that night. The whole fact that Martin was even visiting his father in Florida helped lead to his death, so FUCK! an unconscious proclivity on Martin’s part for feeling a paternal bond helped lead to his death.

        The fact that you think even a minute (un-proven and wholly speculative) UNCONSCIOUS bias is *possibly* a major factor in this outcome is really grasping for straws.

        *possible (but pretty much negligible given Zimmerman’s life)* *unconscious* *minute* racial bias helping lead to Martin’s death = .00000001% (and only if it existed).

        Martin beating the ever living shit out of Zimmerman helping lead to Martin’s death = 100%.

        Evidence supports one of those analysis, by the way, it doesn’t matter one bit the fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of an *unprovable* unconscious bias in this scenario.

        That you are beating this point home indicates that you are definitely with the Zimmerman is completely at fault crowd but you know you can’t logically argue that.

        Yeah, you are the one making the gigantic leap. On faith no less.

        • “What’s an actual GIGANTIC LEAP is claiming that Zimmerman had an exceedingly minute unconscious bias. We don’t know what bias he had, if any.”

          Sure we do, and evidence from his life indicates anything but racist proclivities.

          The evidence of my life would suggest anything but racist proclivities as well. I had a black roomate for a year, I’m just as close with my black cousins as my white cousins. I absolutely adore my cousin’s kid Junior. I frequently write on Ethics Alarms about the existence and horribleness of racism. I fight the good fight.

          What does any of that have to do with unconscious bias?

          When you wish to start tying minute proclivities (in this case un-provable on your part, only attributed because you want it to be so) then you can tie ANYTHING you want to the scenario EVERYTHING impacted that night. The whole fact that Martin was even visiting his father in Florida helped lead to his death, so FUCK! an unconscious proclivity on Martin’s part for feeling a paternal bond helped lead to his death.

          This is just stupid. I’m talking about unconscious biases that could have directly affected the events of that night. That’s very different from saying that it’s Zimmerman’s fault for looking out for his neighborhood or Martin’s fault for going to that neighborhood.

          The fact that you think even a minute (un-proven and wholly speculative) UNCONSCIOUS bias is *possibly* a major factor in this outcome is really grasping for straws.

          When a majority of people exhibit unconscious bias, and when we have the stop and frisk stats to show us how much bias can affect outcomes, thinking the bias isn’t possibly a major factor would be insane. We don’t need proof of bias to suggest it MIGHT have been a factor.

          *possible (but pretty much negligible given Zimmerman’s life)* *unconscious* *minute* racial bias helping lead to Martin’s death = .00000001% (and only if it existed).

          Your numbers are pulled out of your ass. Your evidence based on Zimmerman’s life is, again, worthless.

          Martin beating the ever living shit out of Zimmerman helping lead to Martin’s death = 100%.

          Yes, but would Zimmerman have reacted the same if Martin were white? Would we have even reached that point? Ugh.

          Evidence supports one of those analysis, by the way, it doesn’t matter one bit the fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of an *unprovable* unconscious bias in this scenario.

          And this is why discrimination claims are so difficult to prove. People say “well, these actions justified this response”, but they don’t see how those actions don’t lead to that response when the actions were done by people who are a different race (sex, nationality, etc…)

          That you are beating this point home indicates that you are definitely with the Zimmerman is completely at fault crowd but you know you can’t logically argue that.

          I am absolutely not with “the Zimmerman is completely at fault” crowd. I think neither Martin nor Zimmerman behaved properly that night. Mostly, I think this was a tragedy of circumstances and the people involved. From what I have seen, I don’t think there was evidence to convict Zimmerman. If Martin had killed Zimmerman, I doubt there would have been evidence to convict Martin. That you don’t like the reality of unconscious bias is no reason to shoot the messenger.

          • TGT,

            I know you are arguing against the Universal Negation we’ve been asserting. But to what purpose? None. It could be argued that Zimmerman or Martin’s unconscious bias towards rain led to heightened tensions. An unconscious bias towards night time could have led to heightened tensions. When you start arguing exceedingly small contributions to situations, when much larger ones clearly outweigh those considerations, you can argue ANY situation into ANY hypothetical cause.

            It frees no one from the conscious decisions they did make that were wrong, nor does it make wrong any of the right decisions than a person makes.

          • TGT,

            I know you’ve given up discourse on this topic, but here is some more food for thought in regards to why we are comfortable with using the universal negation phraseology that has you so flustered.

            That evening, Mr. Zimmerman chose to act based on suspicion of an individual. The act he chose was to maintain observation (with all the implied tasks, including – follow if necessary to maintain observation). So, we can layout a scale based on “level of suspicion” and somewhere on that line we can place a point that says “observe this individual” and somewhere after that point we can place another point that says “call 9-1-1”.

            I contend that both of those points lie very close to each other, based on the fact that his decision to call to 9-1-1 occurred very shortly after his decision to start of observation. I also contend that the point describing his decision to observe the suspect individual is very low on that continuum, based on just how often he made calls to 9-1-1 in regards to his neighborhood and that his neighborhood had already had multiple robberies and burglaries.

            Now, what factors ratcheted up his own level of suspicion on that scale of suspicion to the point that he reached those decisions?

            Zimmerman reported and testified that Martin was looking into other people’s houses, we additionally know from Jeantel that Martin concealed his identity after he saw Zimmerman, we know that Martin was out walking in the rain late at night, we know that Martin wasn’t using well lit open pathways, we know that Martin fit the description of those who committed recent burglaries.

            On the scale of suspicion, which we can arbitrarily rate from 0 to 100, we can comfortably place Zimmerman’s decision to observe and subsequent decision to call 9-1-1 relatively low, maybe around 40 or so. Each of those conditions listed above may each ratchet Zimmerman’s suspicion up by 8 or 9 notches, putting Zimmerman’s heightened suspicion above the mark necessary to decide to observe Martin and call 9-1-1.

            Now you contend that subconscious racial bias possibly played a role, I can comfortably place an SMALL arbitrary value to that, like 1 or a fraction of 1 because of Zimmerman’s life experiences. Now, given these descriptive values, you can see that with all but one of the conditions above + the subconscious racial bias, you still don’t trigger the decision to observe and call 9-1-1, likewise, with ALL the conditions above, the decision to observe and call 9-1-1 is reached without racial bias anyway.

            This is why we are comfortable with saying “racial bias” OR “racism” had NOTHING to do with Zimmerman’s decisions that night.

            Now of course the numbers I assigned were arbitrary in order to describe the model, but I am confident they related to each other the way I described regardless of the values assigned. In order to effectively contend that racial bias did play a role that evening, one would have to make the argument that the value ascribed to racial bias be much larger so that it could have pushed the aggregate suspicion to the point Zimmerman making his decision to observe and call 9-1-1; but that would require ignoring his life experiences that indicate an extremely low level of racial bias. Or the argument would have to be made that the Zimmerman’s suspicion level needed to be much higher and that a small amount of racial bias was just enough to push it over; but assigning a higher level of suspicion ‘tolerance’ to Zimmerman requires ignoring just how often he called 9-1-1 on suspected individuals.

            This is why we are comfortable with using the universal negation wording of “racism had nothing to do with it”.

  6. “What’s an actual GIGANTIC LEAP is claiming that Zimmerman had an exceedingly minute unconscious bias. We don’t know what bias he had, if any.”

    Sure we do, and evidence from his life indicates anything but racist proclivities.

    When you wish to start tying minute proclivities (in this case un-provable on your part, only attributed because you want it to be so) then you can tie ANYTHING you want to the scenario EVERYTHING impacted that night. The whole fact that Martin was even visiting his father in Florida helped lead to his death, so FUCK! an unconscious proclivity on Martin’s part for feeling a paternal bond helped lead to his death.

    The fact that you think even a minute (un-proven and wholly speculative) UNCONSCIOUS bias is *possibly* a major factor in this outcome is really grasping for straws.

    *possible (but pretty much negligible given Zimmerman’s life)* *unconscious* *minute* racial bias helping lead to Martin’s death = .00000001% (and only if it existed).

    Martin beating the ever living shit out of Zimmerman helping lead to Martin’s death = 100%.

    Evidence supports one of those analysis, by the way, it doesn’t matter one bit the fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of an *unprovable* unconscious bias in this scenario.

    That you are beating this point home indicates that you are definitely with the Zimmerman is completely at fault crowd but you know you can’t logically argue that.

    Yeah, you are the one making the gigantic leap. On faith no less.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.