It’s sometime in the mid-2000’s. I am a bachelor and grocery shop on weekday evenings. Today’s trip is like any other such trip. First, I walk through the brightly lit aisles to gather my items; this includes produce, staples, and a 12-pack of Coke. Next, I go through the checkout to pay for my items; I often use self-checkout these days. Finally, I simply pack the items into my car and head home. Today that last step ends up occurring a bit differently.
I walk out into the night into a dimly lit parking lot. I shuffle the groceries into the passenger seat of my car and climb inside. As I get situated in my car, I see a man in the distance. This man looks in my general direction and changes his route; he now walks directly to my car with an amused look. There is no one else around the parking lot, so he definitely walks directly towards me. As he closes the distance, I become annoyed that I caught his attention. He then proceeds to walk right next to my car; now I’m downright irritated with him. He stops right outside my window and motions for me to roll the window down; this turn of events honestly confuses me.
I roll down the driver’s side window. He reaches for the 12-pack of Coke that I absentmindedly left on the roof of my car, picks it up, and hands it to me. I am completely embarrassed and thank him.
This could happen to anyone
While I understand that it was a boneheaded move on my part, it ended up working out just fine. Had that man not walked by and handed me my box of Cokes, I would’ve driven off with them that way. It may had done damage to my car when it slipped off. As that man approached, my reaction transitioned from annoyed to irritated to perplexed to embarrassed to grateful. I think this is reasonable; many would react precisely the same way. At no time did it cross my mind that this man may be a threat to my safety.
Now, let’s go back and change one small detail about that event and keep everything else precisely the same. The man who approached my car that evening was Caucasian; what if he had been black? Since it didn’t transpire that way, I can’t tell you how I might’ve reacted. A black man sees me in my car in a parking lot and walks directly towards me; he stops immediately outside my door and motions for me to roll the window down. Can I honestly tell you that I wouldn’t have felt threatened? No, I can’t; I might have. Moreover, is it reasonable to feel threatened in these new circumstances? That’s a question for you, the reader.
The problem with ‘threatened’
The instrumental problem with labels like ‘threatened’ is that they work off our biases. Ideally, we should reflect on what the person does, not who the person happens to be, though that’s rarely the case. If it were something as inconsequential as the best ice cream flavor, then I have few objections about your inheriting biases. However, there are many legal implications that have lifetime (and life and death) repercussions on this particular bias.
George Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon Martin; this fact is beyond contestation. Zimmerman was subsequently acquitted under Florida’s stand-your-ground law. People may use deadly force when they reasonably believe it to be necessary to defend against deadly force (and other threats); emphasis mine. Furthermore, under such a law, people have no duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense.
Let’s reflect back on that grocery store incident and change a few parameters:
- First, move that incident to Florida, where the stand-your-ground law is in effect.
- Next, give me a concealed weapons carry permit and a firearm.
- Then, change the man’s race from white to black.
A black man approaches my car with an amused expression, walks up to my window, and motions for me to roll the window down. Upon my biased assessment of peril (based partially on the person’s race), I wield my weapon and kill him. This is legal and acceptable?
Trayvon Martin was a 17-year-old African American male. Do any of us really believe that had it been instead Tiffany, a Caucasian, blonde 17-year-old female cheerleader, exhibiting the identical behavior there’s any chance that she’d be dead? Are we collectively at peace with the different standard?
Incidentally, studies indicate that even when comparing men of the same size (weight and height), we perceive Caucasian men as less threatening than black men.
The problem with ‘reasonable’
The word seems so innocuous. “Let’s be reasonable”, they say. Though upon reflection, is ‘reasonable’ similarly based on our biases? Is it reasonable to lock your doors as a collection of black teens walks by your car? Was it reasonable for me to feel threatened in my car at the grocery by the man who approached? You may rationalize that you’re simply being cautious, and you shouldn’t be criticized… That you won’t apologize about protecting yourself. George Zimmerman was being cautious too, he ‘protected’ himself, and Trayvon Martin, armed with Skittles, is now dead. Where is the line where our biases about ‘reasonable’ must not leak into our behavior and harm others?
The instrumental problem with ‘reasonable’ is that it relies on a collective agreement of an assumption, which is often not actually true. For example, stipulating photo id’s for voting is a reasonable request since everyone has a driver’s license. Do they? Poor people who live (and work) in the city often don’t have driver’s licenses; they have no need to drive, and it is prohibitively expensive to get one. You can’t even get a job without a driver’s license. Can’t you? Many teenagers these days wait until their 20’s to get their driver’s license although they start to work much earlier. Moreover, a full 25% of black people don’t have a driver’s license (versus only 8% of white people). Want to gain a 17% advantage for the white population on the polls? Simply require a photo id to vote.
They’re not merely words
On the surface they sound like simple words that we may use every day, but they have much larger implications. Here in the United States, the entire legal system is one that hinges upon the presumption of ‘innocence until proven guilty’. Furthermore, guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. There’s that word again: reasonable. How do we fix it when we know that our perception of ‘reasonable’ is biased? We guard against this somewhat by having a jury (of presumably your peers), but bias still leaks through.
Is it reasonable to be alarmed by a black man walking through your neighborhood, but not by a white man? Neighborhood watch websites eventually had to put up a warning or shut down entirely. Black citizens walking through the neighborhood isn’t, in and of itself, suspicious nor cause for alarm.
How far do we take the concept of ‘threatened’?
Doctors are healers. The doctors that bring you into this world are obstetricians. We may sue an obstetrician up to eighteen years after the birth of that child if it can be tied to malpractice. They perform a very important task, but we don’t hesitate to hold them accountable.
What about police officers? Many police officers benefit by a concept called qualified immunity. If they feel threatened, we permit them to use deadly force. We have already established that our sense of safety is incredibly subjective, often skewed by the color of someone’s skin. Do we really believe that police officers are unconditionally unbiased?
Robbie Tolan was a promising black baseball player. Police officers followed him while he drove through his predominantly white Bellaire neighborhood in Texas as they looked up his license plate. Was his suspicious behavior that warrants their attention being black? They entered the incorrect numbers on the license plate as they typed. These officers stopped Robbie on his own driveway for driving a ‘stolen car’ which was, in fact, his own car; his mom wanders out to see the commotion. The police officers shot him on his driveway, while he was unarmed, because he objected to them manhandling his mother. This case was dismissed due to qualified immunity.
We are smart enough to evaluate others’ life or death decisions. Doctors take years of training to develop their craft, and we still hold them accountable. Police officers take maybe weeks of training, and their opinion, their perception of ‘threatened’, is magically beyond contestation? It is time to abolish qualified immunity.