Better yet, if racism definitions 2a or 2b are invoked, demand that they offer concrete proof of it. And not just some random collection of alleged micro aggressions here and there but tangible evidence of real premeditated systematic implementation. The people currently chortling over this new revised definition of racism will soon come to hate it because using it requires the production of evidence.
Some will point to militarization of the police. But rerunning the process would produce quite a bit of action and reaction dynamics that have been going on since the Civil Rights era. I recall a time when the typical officer was not wearing Kevlar body armor and the duty weapon was a 6-shot .38 caliber Smith & Wesson revolver.
I have no doubt that there is racism behind the actions and words of a small minority of officers. Of course there is! You’ve got human beings involved and if you eat often enough at the criminal behavior buffet, you shouldn’t be surprised that some of the diners develop pretty severe heartburn.
My personal opinion is that a lot of the perceived and actual police hostility comes from this steady diet of negative interactions. In other words, officers eventually become fed up when served up yet another fresh, hot serving of the SOS. So far, not a single word is being said about citizen responsibility to act in ways that lower tension and reduce the potential for violence.
It’s a two way street.
And no, it isn’t a failure of “professionalism” to react to and refuse to put up with abusive citizen behavior no matter how justified they feel.
And if Joe ever comes to a debate, and brings up 2a or 2b, Trump should ask if those meanings should be appied to China or Japan instead of our system.