Oregon bill aims to crack down on racially motivated 911 calls

[Sparagmos]

Did you watch the video? He's threatening the guard with a PR problem.

I don't get to stroll into businesses and threaten them with PR issues if they don't allow me to behave however I want.

He didn’t stroll in and make a threat. You’re completely misrepresenting what happened. I’ve also given first hand accounts on this thread of what is normal accepted behavior from hotel guests and hotel management. Take it or leave it as you wish.

 

[Ana the Ist]

He didn’t stroll in and make a threat. You’re completely misrepresenting what happened.

I never said that he "strolled in and made a threat".

You're completely misrepresenting me.

I’ve also given first hand accounts on this thread of what is normal accepted behavior from hotel guests and hotel management. Take it or leave it as you wish.

I'm leaving it....clearly. Your firsthand accounts are as valid as everyone else's...which is to say they aren't. Claims are easy to make when no one can verify them.

 

[SummerMadness]

He didn’t stroll in and make a threat. You’re completely misrepresenting what happened. I’ve also given first hand accounts on this thread of what is normal accepted behavior from hotel guests and hotel management. Take it or leave it as you wish.

Misrepresentation is the only way you can continue to attack people simply living while black while portraying the populace as hapless victims to the undeserved minority onslaught. Because the real victim here are the employees just doing their jobs. We need to return to a society where they are protected once again instead of promoting a society where blackness is not a crime.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Because the real victim here are the employees just doing their jobs.

True. The employees lost their jobs. The guy who got kicked out lost a couple of hours of time.

 

[Aldebaran]

Misrepresentation is the only way you can continue to attack people simply living while black while portraying the populace as hapless victims to the undeserved minority onslaught. Because the real victim here are the employees just doing their jobs. We need to return to a society where they are protected once again instead of promoting a society where blackness is not a crime.

Now there's the most obvious representation we've seen in this entire thread, and it reflects perfectly the basis of the thread itself. Misrepresentation of situations to portray them as being race-based has been the problem.

 

[variant]

I worked for the same hotel chain for 11 years. In the same city. You are correct. It is NOT hotel policy to inquire as to whether people in the lobby are guests unless they are being seriously disruptive (say, starting a fight or yelling,) or they look homeless. Period. Any guest who would be questioned would be offended and that’s the last thing the hotel wants. Guests are also NEVER removed from the hotel without a very serious altercation. Guests get mad and throw little temper tantrums all the time. They aren’t asked to leave. It’s also quite normal for guests to forget their room number. I can find NO OTHER explanation for the security guard’s behavior than racial profiling.

Right. Everyone already knows how a hotel treats you. The answer is with the usual deference and respect of paying customers.

Everyone also knows that when hotel employees cross that line you are going to get arguing and hostility.

For him to be kicked out he would have had to have caused some sort of major disturbance and there is simply no evidence of that.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Right. Everyone already knows how a hotel treats you.

Everyone knows what security guards do too...they ask security questions like "are you a guest here".

It's not hard to avoid a conflict with them if you don't assume they're racist.

 

[Kaon]

We don't have to read peoples minds to make informed judgements on why they did what they did.

In this case the poor customer service was the kind where you call the cops on the black guy for no real reason.

"Plausible deniability" is the last weapon left.

It used to be much nore powerful - one's word against "them" - when there weren't cameras everywhere.

Since the children of those people have been taught the same tactics, they have no choice but to continue trying the plausible deniability angle - even though what made it work has vanished (lack of visual proof).

That is why when unarmed black people were getting shot in the street by cops, some people always demanded to see "what happened before the tape". It was a psychological trigger (unconscious) meant to undermine evidence, and make plausible deniability work. This is also why some of the same people don't understand how they are considered ignorant, because some genuinely believe they are doing what is supposed to be done.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"Plausible deniability" is the last weapon left.

You're using that phrase wrong.

It used to be much nore powerful - one's word against "them" - when there weren't cameras everywhere.

You can't catch someone engaging in plausible deniability on camera. When you say someone is hiding behind plausible deniability, you're saying there's no record of wrongdoing and those responsible are hiding behind someone else's actions. In this case, it would involve the owner or someone higher up.

Since the children of those people have been taught the same tactics, they have no choice but to continue trying the plausible deniability angle - even though what made it work has vanished (lack of visual proof).

There's no reason to accuse his children of anything.

That is why when unarmed black people were getting shot in the street by cops, some people always demanded to see "what happened before the tape".

Being unarmed doesn't mean there's no valid reason to shoot.

It was a psychological trigger (unconscious) meant to undermine evidence, and make plausible deniability work.

People asking for evidence before jumping to conclusions about something isn't a tactic for denying evidence.

This is also why some of the same people don't understand how they are considered ignorant, because some genuinely believe they are doing what is supposed to be done.

Reviewing evidence before jumping to conclusions about racism is what should be done.

Had that happened in this thread....it would have ended several pages ago.

 

[SummerMadness]

That is why when unarmed black people were getting shot in the street by cops, some people always demanded to see "what happened before the tape". It was a psychological trigger (unconscious) meant to undermine evidence, and make plausible deniability work. This is also why some of the same people don't understand how they are considered ignorant, because some genuinely believe they are doing what is supposed to be done.

I think they also have bought into the idea that people are pretending to be victims, like they've gone out of their way to record police or people harassing them because they want Twitter fame. Most people want to go about their day without being bothered, that's just a simple fact. However, we have a society that over-polices black and brown citizens, it's the status quo for many; and when the status quo is attacked, the defenders come out and attack the victims of racism because whether they're doing it knowingly or not, maintaining the current racial hierarchy makes them feel comfortable and they don't want that system threatened. The simple fact is none of them have actually read things like the DOJ reports on police misconduct because more data and knowledge destroys their plausible deniability.

 

[Sparagmos]

Everyone knows what security guards do too...they ask security questions like "are you a guest here".

It's not hard to avoid a conflict with them if you don't assume they're racist.

You’re just wrong. Security guards don’t go around asking people if they are guests, that’s the point.

 

[Aldebaran]

I think they also have bought into the idea that people are pretending to be victims, like they've gone out of their way to record police or people harassing them because they want Twitter fame.

If you do a Youtube search using the right search terms, you'll find plenty of videos of people doing exactly what you're suggesting they don't do. They seek out the police and attempt to get a reaction out of them, all the while recording the encounter. Naturally, if something violent ends up happening, the video ends up being shown on the six o'clock news with only the violent part being shown.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You’re just wrong. Security guards don’t go around asking people if they are guests, that’s the point.

Listen to what you're saying...

"Security guards don't ask people if they're guests."

Of course they do...why wouldn't they? If someone is hanging around the common area, using the phone, why wouldn't they ask someone if they're a guest? It's a ridiculous thing to say.

I was in Walmart the other night and when I went through the self checkout, the young man attendant asked if he could look inside my cart. I had bought a few assorted items and a small portable cooler.

I said "Of course."...he opened the cooler, looked inside, said thanks and walked away.

I assumed that he was just trying to check inside to see if I was stealing anything....but I guess I should have assumed that he's a raging racist looking to hassle any white guy in sweatpants he can find. After all, I was the only customer he checked (there was maybe 3-4 other customers) and he was a different race than me (he appeared to be latino, I don't know a lot of white guys named Angel). When you think about it, the self checkout has weight sensors...so it had to be racism.

I suppose that the appropriate response was to tell him "No! Stop harassing me!" and if he continued, I should have pulled out my phone and started recording while accusing him of racial profiling and threatening him with bad press. That's the appropriate response, right?

I mean, I might not be able to hire a lawyer and try to get paid for my phony accusations....but I bet at the very least I would have gotten an apology from Walmart and I would have gotten that awful racist teenager fired from his job where he gets off by bullying people who are paying customers.

Right?

 

[Ana the Ist]

If you do a Youtube search using the right search terms, you'll find plenty of videos of people doing exactly what you're suggesting they don't do. They seek out the police and attempt to get a reaction out of them, all the while recording the encounter. Naturally, if something violent ends up happening, the video ends up being shown on the six o'clock news with only the violent part being shown.

This reminds me of an incident that went viral maybe a couple of years ago. A black teenager walked into Old Navy, wearing a jacket from Old Navy that he got for Christmas that still had the tags on it.

When an employee asks if he purchased the jacket....he whips out his phone and accused them of racial profiling. You'd think people would have some common sense, but that's not the case. People decided that the employees must be racist...and Old Navy fired them.

It's like no one stops to think about how common this sort of thing has to be before someone as famous and successful as Jussie Smollett tries it. A lot of people know that these days, there's a ton gullible people willing to believe any accusations of racism as long as you have the right skin color.

 

[Sparagmos]

Listen to what you're saying...

"Security guards don't ask people if they're guests."

Of course they do...why wouldn't they? If someone is hanging around the common area, using the phone, why wouldn't they ask someone if they're a guest? It's a ridiculous thing to say.

I was in Walmart the other night and when I went through the self checkout, the young man attendant asked if he could look inside my cart. I had bought a few assorted items and a small portable cooler.

I said "Of course."...he opened the cooler, looked inside, said thanks and walked away.

I assumed that he was just trying to check inside to see if I was stealing anything....but I guess I should have assumed that he's a raging racist looking to hassle any white guy in sweatpants he can find. After all, I was the only customer he checked (there was maybe 3-4 other customers) and he was a different race than me (he appeared to be latino, I don't know a lot of white guys named Angel). When you think about it, the self checkout has weight sensors...so it had to be racism.

I suppose that the appropriate response was to tell him "No! Stop harassing me!" and if he continued, I should have pulled out my phone and started recording while accusing him of racial profiling and threatening him with bad press. That's the appropriate response, right?

I mean, I might not be able to hire a lawyer and try to get paid for my phony accusations....but I bet at the very least I would have gotten an apology from Walmart and I would have gotten that awful racist teenager fired from his job where he gets off by bullying people who are paying customers.

Right?

Lol, you’re comparing way-mart to a high end hotel where people pay over $300/ night for a room. Hotels are my industry, I worked at one for 11 years and security guards don’t do that. I’d say about half of the people in the lobby aren’t even staying there, they are waiting for friends or colleagues who are staying there, dining at the restaurant, or they are attending a convention there. I sit on the phone in lobby hotels that I’m not staying at all the time, never been questioned before.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Lol, you’re comparing way-mart to a high end hotel where people pay over $300/ night for a room.

Then you agree what happened to me at Walmart was definitely racism?

Also, you must be confused....the Doubletree in Portland is listing rooms at 129$ a night. I suppose if he got a really big room he might have spent over 200$ after taxes...but that's it.

 

[SummerMadness]

Oregon gets it right regarding racially motivated 911 calls

Policy makers in Oregon voted to approve a measure that would crack down on those who call the police on a person doing everyday activities such as napping or barbecuing.

Under House Bill 3216, individuals can not file criminal charges against callers but victims would be able to sue the caller for up to $250 in small claims court. State legislators said the bill is a way to hold callers responsible.