In an article by Gillian Flaccus and Mike Balsamo of The Associated Press, they stated that, “Many demonstrators are peaceful, but smaller numbers have thrown fireworks, flares and rocks at federal agents, used lasers to blind them and sprayed graffiti across the downtown.” This was given as the reason the police need to stand down.

While that is technically true, one could reasonably substitute other descriptions. For example, many citizens are law abiding, but smaller numbers have raped, murdered and committed theft, used social media to lure children into sexual slavery and spread counterfeit money across the downtown. Should the police stand down from this as well?

Another example, three policemen are standing and watching, but one used an improper hold and refused to listen to the victim. My understanding is that all four policemen are being prosecuted. The police force stood down to allow justice to be served, but in this case the entire police force has been disabused.

These are three examples of the same thing — small elements of a larger group misbehaving. Shouldn’t the reaction be similar — to prevent the small element from running roughshod over all others?

The different standards are confusing. The bias is obvious. What if we had substituted other words for demonstrators such as Starbuck’s employees, whites, Blacks, immigrants, Russians or children? What if we had substituted other words for federal agents such as McDonald’s employees, whites, Blacks, immigrants, Russians or children? Example: Many immigrants are peaceful, but smaller numbers have thrown fireworks, flares and rocks at Starbuck’s employees, used lasers to blind them and sprayed graffiti across the downtown. Or many Starbuck’s employees are peaceful, but smaller numbers have thrown fireworks, flares and rocks at immigrants, used lasers to blind them and sprayed graffiti across the downtown. What would the response have been? If you say, “It depends,” then you are showing bias.

Load comments