Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
I agree with your second point.
To your first though, you’re not really looking at the entire picture, and I think that’s what Walcott is referring to. When Walcott says we need to transform our systems, do you think he’s talking about transforming the act of shooting someone charging with a knife? Of course not. He’s talking about mental health, crisis response, everything. Race plays a factor just on the basis that people of colour are more likely to end up in these situations and more likely to meet these ends.
Anti-racist isn’t just “not being racist.” He’s not accusing the police of that. It goes well beyond it. Just as it would be unfair and possibly wrong to call the cops racist, it would be unfair and possibly wrong to say the man’s race had nothing to do with this.
|
My main issue with Walcott is that he's grandstanding, and not being careful with his wording. He piggy-backed on an article titled "Black man shot by police" and used the term anti-racist. Sure he may be referring to the bigger picture, but he doesn't know the whole picture. We don't know this man's history or what set him off, it's all speculation at this point. And the cops sure as hell didn't have any background information when they had to decide to use lethal force. Walcott is coming across as an attention whore more than a concerned councilor, if mental health is truly his concern then push for reform during council meetings where it might actually make a difference. Don't tag an inflammatory headlined article on Twitter just to grab some likes